Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
This article deserves GA status. It is well written, both for beginners and specialists; it is neutral, stable and well referenced (thus verifiable). The topic is clearly of top importance. There were minor problems with style, references and a few statements, but they were fixed in the review process. Some of the old comments are listed below. NIMSoffice ( talk) 00:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
A proper citation is needed here (beware that most web pages are simply copying wikipedia content and thus are not a good reference). There is no question that Cr borides are conductive, but, I'm not sure they are actually used as high-temperature conductors, and CrB is relatively rare compared to CrB2.
"Chromium(III) chloride, the common commercial form of the hydrate is the dark green complex [CrCl2(H2O)4]Cl,"
"It does suffer from nitrogen embrittlement and hence no straight chromium alloy has ever been developed."
and suspect they are wrong. Would someone fix them.
- temperature value is required here.
Please check. The discussion is about chromium(VI) and thus chromium(V) and chromium(IV) seem suspicious, and I can't access the reference given there.
The headers in the infobox template are very misleading. For example, item "Crystal structure" is by no means atomic property and belongs to "Physical properties", as well as most items of "Miscellaneous".
I have put the GA nomination on hold. NIMSoffice ( talk) 01:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I will try to work my way through it. -- Stone ( talk) 09:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
This article deserves GA status. It is well written, both for beginners and specialists; it is neutral, stable and well referenced (thus verifiable). The topic is clearly of top importance. There were minor problems with style, references and a few statements, but they were fixed in the review process. Some of the old comments are listed below. NIMSoffice ( talk) 00:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
A proper citation is needed here (beware that most web pages are simply copying wikipedia content and thus are not a good reference). There is no question that Cr borides are conductive, but, I'm not sure they are actually used as high-temperature conductors, and CrB is relatively rare compared to CrB2.
"Chromium(III) chloride, the common commercial form of the hydrate is the dark green complex [CrCl2(H2O)4]Cl,"
"It does suffer from nitrogen embrittlement and hence no straight chromium alloy has ever been developed."
and suspect they are wrong. Would someone fix them.
- temperature value is required here.
Please check. The discussion is about chromium(VI) and thus chromium(V) and chromium(IV) seem suspicious, and I can't access the reference given there.
The headers in the infobox template are very misleading. For example, item "Crystal structure" is by no means atomic property and belongs to "Physical properties", as well as most items of "Miscellaneous".
I have put the GA nomination on hold. NIMSoffice ( talk) 01:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. I will try to work my way through it. -- Stone ( talk) 09:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)