![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I am the perverse character who wrote fairly lengthy articles on things like praseodymium(III) chloride, but I wanted to seek people's opinions on other compounds. I wrote a set of articles on most LnCl3 from Ce to Dy, and I still plan to do a couple of other chlorides, as well as some oxides such as Tb4O7. For major compounds like oxides & chlorides this seems worthwhile. However it would seem to be a big waste of time to write a separate page on each one of the 14 sulfates, each of the 14 nitrates, etc. I was thinking of writing a general page on lanthanide sulfates, one on lanthanide nitrates, etc. What do people think of this idea? What should such pages be called? And yes, I would include both La and Lu! Walkerma 16:35, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
what are you talking about?! -- feline1 11:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Why not move this page to Lanthanoid and redirect Lanthanide there instead?
There is an innaccurate statement in the section terminology. The article states that lanthanides are sometimes known as rare-earth (except for Promethium). However, Promethium is sometimes known as a rare earth as in webelements: [ [1]], in Brittanica [ [2]] and just about every other webpage found by conducting a google search. The problem here is in the definition of rare earth which is disputable, however this does not mean the article should be biased towards one particular definition as is currently the case in the article rare earth element. Polyamorph ( talk) 22:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
IUPAC proposed a Periodic Table
http://www.iupac.org/reports/periodic_table/index.html
why not using this convention?
Boy, I thought I'd been around the block, but I've never heard the word "trication" and it has no Wikipedia entry, so I think it'll have to be defined or avoided here. You could use a simple expression and put (trication) in parentheses after it, to teach us newBs what the absolutely precise term is. Links between physics (atomic orbitals) and chemistry (triple bonds) might be fun to make, and would surely be helpful to others.
Lanthanoid/Actinoid Periodic Table Placement
"a Xenon-core electronic configuration with the addition of n 4f electrons, with n varying from 0 [for La(III)] to 14 [for Lu(III)]. This 4fn sub-shell lies inside the ion, shielded by the 5s2 and 5p6 closed sub-shells. " and,
"Useful comparison can also be made with the actinoids, where the 5f shell is partially filled."
As any of us who have had scientific careers in basic research know full well, there's a world of difference between the expertise and correctness needed to survive professionally (to do well in peer review for grants and papers) and the conceptual and cognitive skills needed to teach the intro course or create a successful textbook chapter. Speaking for myself, I come to the Lanthanoid page wanting to be reminded which shell gets filled and which is the shield(s) for the lanthanides and actinides. I need a compare-and-contrast: to what extent are we proceeding as in other periods of the periodic table, and in what ways do we see the effects of that shield? For a NewB, of course, the first question about the "series" in the phrase "lanthanide / actinide series" is why they are always presented specially in either conventional (short) or wide periodic tables. IMHO, at least a brief cruise past all of this belongs in the opening paragraph.
Guys, I hate to do this, but can I be excused on the grounds that my Ph.D. is in psychology? This page is already up to a "B"rating, and I'd rather see the community take it to "A" than me drag it down. It is hardest of all to be simple but also correct.
Life goes on, got to mow the lawn.
--jerry P.S. Thanks for those (groan) mnemonics.
Jerry-va (
talk)
15:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I propose moving the page Lanthanide to Lanthanoid in keeping with the recent move of Actinide to Actinoid Polyamorph ( talk) 17:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not convinced "Lanthanoid" is actually the preponderant common usage. "Lanthanide" is still used in a great deal of literature. -- JWB ( talk) 19:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Rare earth element#Topic duplication II on harmonizing these two articles. Please discuss there. - 2/0 ( cont.) 18:10, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Is lanthanum or cerium the first member of this series?? Georgia guy ( talk) 19:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
If you use the (2 + 4 + 4 + 4) = 14 rule on this series you'll note immediately that the lopped off 71Lu Lutetium element doesn't fit into the series with it's physical properties as compared with the others. WFPM ( talk) 16:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC) The Magnetic properties seem to be concentrated in the first 2 sets 0f 4, with the 5th element being unstable, the same as in the yttrium series. WFPM ( talk) 19:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
In the introduction, the text below the table just seems to be a re-phrasing of the text above the table. I'm not sure a description of the different presentations of the periodic table is needed either, there is after-all a picture of it in the top right of the page - if needs be just have pictures of both versions. Project Osprey ( talk) 12:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Do we really need a mnemonic device in the article, it doesn't really seem to have anything to do with the actual information of lanthanides. And IMO, its not that good of a mnemoic to begin with.-- 24.180.19.26 16:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
2 = 2 2 = 2 2 + 4 + 2 = 8 2 + 4 + 2 = 8 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 18 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 18 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 32 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 32
For a total sequential element count of 120 elements! Which defines the number of elements in each group and makes it much easier to memorize the series of element names in sequences of 2 and 4 per group subsection. WFPM ( talk) 03:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)See Talk:Charles Janet. WFPM ( talk) 03:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Explaining Ln chemistry in terms of their electron configuration. Double sharp ( talk) 11:01, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
A colour cart of the various hexa-aqua complexes was added today and it made me wonder: Why is Ce4+ orange? It's electron configuration is basically a xenon shell, so there's no possibility of conventional phosphorescence. All I can think of is ligand-to-metal charge transfer... is that right? It's been nagging at me all day. Project Osprey ( talk) 19:46, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I have added a short secion on the hydrides. I have other sections I am working on- albeit slowly. I will be adding these when complete. Axiosaurus ( talk) 09:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Couple of quick queries: Do the hydrides form under ambient conditions? Do they have any notable uses?
Should this sentence be removed: "Another name for the lanthanides and actinides is the f-block, and in the case of the lanthanides it is the 4f orbitals that are being filled." F-block has 14 elements in one period, where lanthanides have 15 (per description on the page). Also, Lu has a full 4f orbital (as Yb), and adds one electron to 5d orbital (as such not really filling the 4f orbital, but rather starts filling 5d orbital). -- 67.164.60.31 ( talk) 06:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Some time ago I started table {{
Periodic table (electron configuration lanthanides)}}
to show the shell filling of Ln and especially the jumping numbers (Madelung rule breaches). To me at elast it looked more clarifying than the more textual
table. Would this table improve the article? Information can be added or improved of course. If this setup is acceptable,
actinides can get one too. -
DePiep (
talk)
10:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I removed from article: "Similarly complexes of cyclopentadienyl anion (Cp−), e.g. [Ln(C5H5)3], are far less common than the corresponding pentamethylcyclopentadienyl, e.g. [Ln(C5Me5)3Cl]." This makes little sense. CP3LN were some of the first metallocene creates (only 4 years after ferrocene p112) They have been widely studied. I think the intention may have been to indicate that it is easier to make compounds with ligands larger than Cp, like Cp* and a previously mentioned Si version, because of the f-orbitals. However there is no source for the claim and Cp* compounds of transition metals (d-orbitals) are not rare. Rmhermen ( talk) 05:33, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
It is actually rather common in inorganic chemistry texts (e.g. Greenwood, Holleman) to say that there are only fourteen lanthanides (Ce to Lu) and to include La, like Sc and Y, only for comparison. Part of it is semantics (it is argued that 'lanthanide' means 'lanthanum-like' and thus must exclude La itself) and part of it is a desire to categorise La as the third member of group 3 and thus a transition metal, if a rather equivocal one. Does it go against IUPAC? Oh yes, certainly. But I think it is worth mentioning. (I have not seen the analogous Lu-excluding definition from Sc/Y/Lu/Lr proponents, so I would not mention that one.) Double sharp ( talk) 08:56, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lanthanide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/DOE_CMS_2011.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:41, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Alkali metal which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 06:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I am the perverse character who wrote fairly lengthy articles on things like praseodymium(III) chloride, but I wanted to seek people's opinions on other compounds. I wrote a set of articles on most LnCl3 from Ce to Dy, and I still plan to do a couple of other chlorides, as well as some oxides such as Tb4O7. For major compounds like oxides & chlorides this seems worthwhile. However it would seem to be a big waste of time to write a separate page on each one of the 14 sulfates, each of the 14 nitrates, etc. I was thinking of writing a general page on lanthanide sulfates, one on lanthanide nitrates, etc. What do people think of this idea? What should such pages be called? And yes, I would include both La and Lu! Walkerma 16:35, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
what are you talking about?! -- feline1 11:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Why not move this page to Lanthanoid and redirect Lanthanide there instead?
There is an innaccurate statement in the section terminology. The article states that lanthanides are sometimes known as rare-earth (except for Promethium). However, Promethium is sometimes known as a rare earth as in webelements: [ [1]], in Brittanica [ [2]] and just about every other webpage found by conducting a google search. The problem here is in the definition of rare earth which is disputable, however this does not mean the article should be biased towards one particular definition as is currently the case in the article rare earth element. Polyamorph ( talk) 22:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
IUPAC proposed a Periodic Table
http://www.iupac.org/reports/periodic_table/index.html
why not using this convention?
Boy, I thought I'd been around the block, but I've never heard the word "trication" and it has no Wikipedia entry, so I think it'll have to be defined or avoided here. You could use a simple expression and put (trication) in parentheses after it, to teach us newBs what the absolutely precise term is. Links between physics (atomic orbitals) and chemistry (triple bonds) might be fun to make, and would surely be helpful to others.
Lanthanoid/Actinoid Periodic Table Placement
"a Xenon-core electronic configuration with the addition of n 4f electrons, with n varying from 0 [for La(III)] to 14 [for Lu(III)]. This 4fn sub-shell lies inside the ion, shielded by the 5s2 and 5p6 closed sub-shells. " and,
"Useful comparison can also be made with the actinoids, where the 5f shell is partially filled."
As any of us who have had scientific careers in basic research know full well, there's a world of difference between the expertise and correctness needed to survive professionally (to do well in peer review for grants and papers) and the conceptual and cognitive skills needed to teach the intro course or create a successful textbook chapter. Speaking for myself, I come to the Lanthanoid page wanting to be reminded which shell gets filled and which is the shield(s) for the lanthanides and actinides. I need a compare-and-contrast: to what extent are we proceeding as in other periods of the periodic table, and in what ways do we see the effects of that shield? For a NewB, of course, the first question about the "series" in the phrase "lanthanide / actinide series" is why they are always presented specially in either conventional (short) or wide periodic tables. IMHO, at least a brief cruise past all of this belongs in the opening paragraph.
Guys, I hate to do this, but can I be excused on the grounds that my Ph.D. is in psychology? This page is already up to a "B"rating, and I'd rather see the community take it to "A" than me drag it down. It is hardest of all to be simple but also correct.
Life goes on, got to mow the lawn.
--jerry P.S. Thanks for those (groan) mnemonics.
Jerry-va (
talk)
15:20, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I propose moving the page Lanthanide to Lanthanoid in keeping with the recent move of Actinide to Actinoid Polyamorph ( talk) 17:44, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
I'm not convinced "Lanthanoid" is actually the preponderant common usage. "Lanthanide" is still used in a great deal of literature. -- JWB ( talk) 19:46, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Discussion at Talk:Rare earth element#Topic duplication II on harmonizing these two articles. Please discuss there. - 2/0 ( cont.) 18:10, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Is lanthanum or cerium the first member of this series?? Georgia guy ( talk) 19:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
If you use the (2 + 4 + 4 + 4) = 14 rule on this series you'll note immediately that the lopped off 71Lu Lutetium element doesn't fit into the series with it's physical properties as compared with the others. WFPM ( talk) 16:58, 19 February 2012 (UTC) The Magnetic properties seem to be concentrated in the first 2 sets 0f 4, with the 5th element being unstable, the same as in the yttrium series. WFPM ( talk) 19:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
In the introduction, the text below the table just seems to be a re-phrasing of the text above the table. I'm not sure a description of the different presentations of the periodic table is needed either, there is after-all a picture of it in the top right of the page - if needs be just have pictures of both versions. Project Osprey ( talk) 12:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Do we really need a mnemonic device in the article, it doesn't really seem to have anything to do with the actual information of lanthanides. And IMO, its not that good of a mnemoic to begin with.-- 24.180.19.26 16:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
2 = 2 2 = 2 2 + 4 + 2 = 8 2 + 4 + 2 = 8 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 18 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 18 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 32 2 + 4 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 4 + 2 + 4 + 2 = 32
For a total sequential element count of 120 elements! Which defines the number of elements in each group and makes it much easier to memorize the series of element names in sequences of 2 and 4 per group subsection. WFPM ( talk) 03:31, 4 February 2013 (UTC)See Talk:Charles Janet. WFPM ( talk) 03:35, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Explaining Ln chemistry in terms of their electron configuration. Double sharp ( talk) 11:01, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
A colour cart of the various hexa-aqua complexes was added today and it made me wonder: Why is Ce4+ orange? It's electron configuration is basically a xenon shell, so there's no possibility of conventional phosphorescence. All I can think of is ligand-to-metal charge transfer... is that right? It's been nagging at me all day. Project Osprey ( talk) 19:46, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I have added a short secion on the hydrides. I have other sections I am working on- albeit slowly. I will be adding these when complete. Axiosaurus ( talk) 09:36, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Couple of quick queries: Do the hydrides form under ambient conditions? Do they have any notable uses?
Should this sentence be removed: "Another name for the lanthanides and actinides is the f-block, and in the case of the lanthanides it is the 4f orbitals that are being filled." F-block has 14 elements in one period, where lanthanides have 15 (per description on the page). Also, Lu has a full 4f orbital (as Yb), and adds one electron to 5d orbital (as such not really filling the 4f orbital, but rather starts filling 5d orbital). -- 67.164.60.31 ( talk) 06:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Some time ago I started table {{
Periodic table (electron configuration lanthanides)}}
to show the shell filling of Ln and especially the jumping numbers (Madelung rule breaches). To me at elast it looked more clarifying than the more textual
table. Would this table improve the article? Information can be added or improved of course. If this setup is acceptable,
actinides can get one too. -
DePiep (
talk)
10:50, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
I removed from article: "Similarly complexes of cyclopentadienyl anion (Cp−), e.g. [Ln(C5H5)3], are far less common than the corresponding pentamethylcyclopentadienyl, e.g. [Ln(C5Me5)3Cl]." This makes little sense. CP3LN were some of the first metallocene creates (only 4 years after ferrocene p112) They have been widely studied. I think the intention may have been to indicate that it is easier to make compounds with ligands larger than Cp, like Cp* and a previously mentioned Si version, because of the f-orbitals. However there is no source for the claim and Cp* compounds of transition metals (d-orbitals) are not rare. Rmhermen ( talk) 05:33, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
It is actually rather common in inorganic chemistry texts (e.g. Greenwood, Holleman) to say that there are only fourteen lanthanides (Ce to Lu) and to include La, like Sc and Y, only for comparison. Part of it is semantics (it is argued that 'lanthanide' means 'lanthanum-like' and thus must exclude La itself) and part of it is a desire to categorise La as the third member of group 3 and thus a transition metal, if a rather equivocal one. Does it go against IUPAC? Oh yes, certainly. But I think it is worth mentioning. (I have not seen the analogous Lu-excluding definition from Sc/Y/Lu/Lr proponents, so I would not mention that one.) Double sharp ( talk) 08:56, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lanthanide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/DOE_CMS_2011.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:41, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Alkali metal which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 06:14, 28 February 2019 (UTC)