Talk:Noble gas configuration

Notation and configuration

This article now redirects to "Noble gas notation" but notation is something very different from configuration. I don't think the redirect is useful at all, even misleading. CodeCat (talk) 17:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

O K friend I would prepare this article and provide useful information related to the topic. Skr15081997 (talk) 10:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please Don't delete this article.

Dears admins please don't delete this article .This article is extremely important for users concerned with chemistry. I have put a stub tag in this article because it needs further expansion but this article need not be deleted.Skr15081997 (talk) 11:33, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reason missing

The article doesn't explain why these configurations are the noble gas configurations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.86.190 (talk) 23:55, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Noble gas configuration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131125222947/http://osulibrary.oregonstate.edu:80/specialcollections/coll/pauling/bond/papers/corr216.3-lewispub-19160400.html to http://osulibrary.oregonstate.edu/specialcollections/coll/pauling/bond/papers/corr216.3-lewispub-19160400.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:52, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Convert to disambig

I have converted this page to a disambiguation following the discussion at talk:octet rule#Merger_proposal.--Officer781 (talk) 02:59, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have now converted this to a redirect to electron configuration.--Officer781 (talk) 14:12, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned in my edit summary, I agree that this is the best solution. Dab pages with only two entries are often a little bit pointless, and for this title one of the two entries was only marginally relevant while one of them gave a nice summary of the subject. Could perhaps add a "with possibilities" cat although I don't know if it would be notable as a standalone article. Could always discuss a split at the redirect target if that section is ever developed enough. Lithopsian (talk) 18:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]