Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Iridium

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 02:58, 21 October 2008 [1].

---

Iridium

Nominator(s): Itub, Nergaal, Stone, WikiProject Elements

Comments are very welcome, and also, please write your opinion weather the article should use primarily SI units or ounces. Thanks, and you probably want to put your savings into this! Nergaal (talk) 02:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• As a dinosaur nut and writer of Chicxulub Crater, I approve of this article! :P Images:
  • Image:Fountain-pen-nib.jpg - source of the image/author?
  • All the other images have source/license/author and other relevant information. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:58, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• I left a question at the talk page of the user who originally uploaded the image. --Itub (talk) 13:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• Status on the image? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:36, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Didn't reply. I've tried to find an alternate free image with no sucess. --Itub (talk) 06:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

And? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:28, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

this? Nergaal (talk) 05:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Contacted BenFrantzDale, the uploader back in 2005, waiting for respose!--Stone (talk) 05:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

The image linked to by Nergaal is nice, but not free (the page with the copyright info is [2]). I suggest removing the image and if the uploader ever replies we can add it again. --Itub (talk) 06:08, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Update: the original uploader has updated the information box stating that he is the author.[3],[4] --Itub (talk) 14:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

• Support Very good article; great coverage and an interesting read. COI - I brought this article from stub to start class just under 6 years ago but others have brought it through B class. Itub and Nergaal along with other members of WikiProject Elements started to expand and improve this article to A-class starting in mid-September. By the time I came in, there was very little to add so I submitted this to A-class review and it passed. Since then, the article has further improved and I now think it meets FA criteria. --mav (talk) 03:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Comments -

• Current ref 58 (Organic Light Emitting Diodes) is lacking a last access date. Also this looks to be a reprint of an article in a publication, could we list what publication it is?
• Please spell out lesser known abbreviations such as NIST in the references

Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

done Nergaal (talk) 07:41, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Support Very well written, with many complicated topics explained in simple terms yet accurately. One suggestion though: introduce complex paragraphs with a topic sentence, as in this diff. --Una Smith (talk) 16:37, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

SupportComments :

1) Please, explain what siderophilic character mentioned in the lead (and further in the text) means—readers may not know this;

2) Abundance of Iridium is by mass or by atom numbers ?

3) In the Occurance section I read "the large copper–nickel deposits near Norilsk in Russia, and the Sudbury Basin, Canada with its large ore deposits are the two other large deposits". Sorry, I do not understand the last part of this sentence;

4) "Total world reserve amounts have not been estimated."—the date should be included here;

5) "All the platinum group metals end up as alloys with raw nickel or raw copper." There is a tag after this sentence. I agree it should be clarified.

6) In the Production section I read "After ruthenium and osmium have been removed, iridium is separated by precipitating". Please, explain how ruthenium and osmium are removed.

7) The irridium coatings are used not only in astronomy, but generally in grazing incidence X-ray optics. This should be mentioned.

8) "enantioselectively" should be explained.

9) Returning to the lead. The first sentence reads "Iridium (pronounced /ɪˈrɪdiəm/) is a chemical element that has the symbol Ir...". It is a bit strange to define a chemical element as one that has a particular symbol.

I am inclined to support this article, as do not see any serious problems except those I mentioned above. Ruslik (talk) 09:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I have attempted to address (3) and (5). Can someone check to make sure what I wrote is accurate? I don't have access to the Xiao article. Also, I'm not sure why (9) is an issue. The first one or two sentences of an element article always describe the symbol and the atomic mass. See hydrogen, xenon, yttrium, francium, all of which are currently featured. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 16:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I have attempted to address 1, 2, and 9. Can you suggest a good reference for 7 (grazing incidence X-ray optics)? --Itub (talk) 16:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

ref for 7? Ziegler,, E. (2001). "High-efficiency tunable X-ray focusing optics using mirrors and laterally-graded multilayers". Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment. 467–468: 954–957. doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(01)00533-2. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)CS1 maint: extra punctuation (link)

You can also cite this, this and this. Ruslik (talk) 19:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

(5) and (8) are done Nergaal (talk) 04:09, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

(4) Changed Total world reserve to By 2003 the total world reserve--Stone (talk) 20:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

(6) There are several methods possible, if starting from aqua regina solution, iridosmium or zinc preciptate of the platinum, paladium separation. The exact methods used by the companies are secret, so old methods or text book answers are possible. I try to find a good one.--Stone (talk) 11:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

(7) Changed to Another use concerns X-ray optics, especially X-ray telescopes. with the ref given above.--Stone (talk) 11:19, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, you probably forgot to change it actually? Ruslik (talk) 13:15, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The Save did not work sorry!--Stone (talk) 14:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the phrase "After ruthenium and osmium have been removed". After looking in more detail at the references (especially Ullmann's) I found that it is not always true; as the order of removal of each elements varies from process to process. --Itub (talk) 16:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The ref I used is not the newest, but it states that ruthenium and osmium are removed by destilling of the volotile tetroxide. Hunt, L. B. (1969). "Availability of the Platinum Metals". Platinum Metals Review. 13 (4): 126–138. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help) .--Stone (talk) 16:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

They usually are, although ruthenium can also be separated as K2RuO4 in at least one process. What varies a lot is the order of separation, which depends largely on the composition of the mixture. For example, in one of the six processes described in Ullmann's, RuO4 is separated first when the source has high ruthenium content, but last when it has low ruthenium content. All this makes for very interesting reading, but I think it would detract from the focus of the iridium article. I think it is better to add all these details to the platinum group article where the entire process(es) can be discussed. --Itub (talk) 16:49, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I suggest adding this information as a note to this article too. Nergaal (talk) 18:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Question are accessdates for stuff that is not in a journal (i.e. has no doi but has a link) but is some sort of review by a governmental authority (such as USGS) necessary, and as such can they use a journal-type reference? Nergaal (talk) 03:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Support otherwise tight and crisp, the prose is repetitive in places but by necessity as it is information-dense (i.e. very hard to remove any without introducing ambiguity). I managed a couple tweaks and there may be a couple more but no deal-breakers. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 18:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Support I've been keeping this article on my watchlist and continually reviewing it, and I haven't found anything to fix for a while. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 20:09, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.