Talk:Nihonium/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 23:35, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have not reviewed a element article before, so please bear with me if I ask any silly questions.

Why do the second steps of the two Dubna–Livermore collaboration decay chains not balance? (eg mass numbers 288 + 3*1 → 284 + 4 doesn't balance). Is this just how decay chains are written, ignoring "side" products?
- It's how they're written. Once some particles are emitted, they're ignored. See also the alpha decay chain in the "RIKEN" section. This way, we don't have to keep writing the emitted particles in each step of the decay chain. Double sharp (talk) 17:00, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
" measuring SF activities" - SF should be written in full, but can be abbreviated the second time (RIKEN section)
- Done Double sharp (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a reason for the unexpectedly high electronegativity of Uut?
- Done Good catch! Double sharp (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"This is because it is estimated to have an atomic radius of about 170 pm" - has this been measured, or predicted?
- Done Predicted. Double sharp (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(On my laptop, at least) the note is broken into three. Since there is only one note, why not simply leave in the default formatting, so that it appears unbroken?
- Hmm – it works OK on my computer. I used the default "<ref group="note">" formatting, so I'm not sure what could be done to make it display properly on your laptop. Double sharp (talk) 16:59, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While not part of GA criteria, I suggest you take a look at the formatting of references. For example, #2 publisher could be wikilinked to, #3 lacks an access date, and #10 could use {{cite press release}} (which would also remove the incorrect italicisation and capitalisation of "press release".

Very good article, I'd just like a few questions answered before I pass. —Andrew_stalk 00:14, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Passing now. Good work. —Andrew_stalk 05:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]