![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Dubnium is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | Dubnium is part of the Group 5 elements series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 3, 2018. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 730 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
@ R8R Gtrs: Just a note that a significant number of chemical studies, both theoretical and experimental, were done on element 105 in the West during the antagonistic period; as a result you should also probably search for "hahnium", or else articles like this one would get quite difficult to find. ^_^ Double sharp ( talk) 04:42, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Double sharp ( talk · contribs) 14:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Since R8R has told me on my talk page that active work on Pb is finished for now, I feel that it's safe to start the review soon; so I'm reserving it a little in advance! ^_^
Double sharp (
talk) 14:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Double sharp ( talk) 14:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Congratulations, all the discovered transactinides are GAs now! Double sharp ( talk) 15:37, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
FA candidate: here. - DePiep ( talk) 22:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
This rv ("rv error") reinstalled "with the symbol Db". Does " the" belong there? IIRC, we rarely write it with element symbols (and today's TFA blurb does not have it either). Since "Db" is not a universal symbol (like e.g., ♂ is), the definite article is incorrect. - DePiep ( talk) 12:07, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dubnadium. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
See this (1999). And this (2001), where the author P. A. Wilk wrote 'For consistency with previous work, as well as to honor Otto Hahn and respect the wishes of Glenn Seaborg, I will continue to use the name “hahnium” for element 105'. And even here (2014 on Twitter). This sort of thing was mentioned in this 2014 article "Berkeley partisans still call it hahnium").
Peter Armbruster and Gottfried Münzenberg from GSI nicely described what happened after 1997 in the linked paper: 'This is almost the end of the naming story, however Berkeley did not accept dubnium, they still used hahnium. The solution to that problem was pragmatic: J.V. Kratz, editor of “Radiochimica Acta” only accepted papers with the nomenclature as proposed by IUPAC.' Double sharp ( talk) 14:14, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Dubnium is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | Dubnium is part of the Group 5 elements series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||
![]() | This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 3, 2018. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 730 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
@ R8R Gtrs: Just a note that a significant number of chemical studies, both theoretical and experimental, were done on element 105 in the West during the antagonistic period; as a result you should also probably search for "hahnium", or else articles like this one would get quite difficult to find. ^_^ Double sharp ( talk) 04:42, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Double sharp ( talk · contribs) 14:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Since R8R has told me on my talk page that active work on Pb is finished for now, I feel that it's safe to start the review soon; so I'm reserving it a little in advance! ^_^
Double sharp (
talk) 14:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Double sharp ( talk) 14:41, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Congratulations, all the discovered transactinides are GAs now! Double sharp ( talk) 15:37, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
FA candidate: here. - DePiep ( talk) 22:33, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
This rv ("rv error") reinstalled "with the symbol Db". Does " the" belong there? IIRC, we rarely write it with element symbols (and today's TFA blurb does not have it either). Since "Db" is not a universal symbol (like e.g., ♂ is), the definite article is incorrect. - DePiep ( talk) 12:07, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dubnadium. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
See this (1999). And this (2001), where the author P. A. Wilk wrote 'For consistency with previous work, as well as to honor Otto Hahn and respect the wishes of Glenn Seaborg, I will continue to use the name “hahnium” for element 105'. And even here (2014 on Twitter). This sort of thing was mentioned in this 2014 article "Berkeley partisans still call it hahnium").
Peter Armbruster and Gottfried Münzenberg from GSI nicely described what happened after 1997 in the linked paper: 'This is almost the end of the naming story, however Berkeley did not accept dubnium, they still used hahnium. The solution to that problem was pragmatic: J.V. Kratz, editor of “Radiochimica Acta” only accepted papers with the nomenclature as proposed by IUPAC.' Double sharp ( talk) 14:14, 21 April 2021 (UTC)