Hey, I'll take this one. The article looks to be in good shape. I'll be comparing its structure to rare-earth GAs
lanthanum and
europium, and FA
thorium. I'll be a little picky because of the article's high visibility. Any edits I make to the article will be minor (and not something I'll be a stickler on). Cheers,
Ovinus (
talk)
22:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Initial comments
Citations needed:
"Some neodymium compounds have colors that vary based upon the type of lighting."
"the demand for NdFeB magnets is expected to increase significantly in the future." Also, citing the Paris agreement directly probably isn't helpful; a third party source is needed
"but changes with the type of lighting, because of the interaction of the sharp light absorption bands of neodymium with ambient light enriched with the sharp visible emission bands of mercury, trivalent europium or terbium" Er... Emission bands of europium or terbium are commonly present in lights?
Ovinus (
talk)
02:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC)reply
"high-performance hobby DC electric motors" Nd magnets used in hobby motors, but not in industry or commercial applications?
Ovinus (
talk)
02:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC)reply
"Like most other metals in the lanthanide series, neodymium usually only uses three electrons as valence electrons, as after the remaining 4f electrons are strongly bound" I don't understand this sentence.
The list of compounds should not include their full names (just wikilink their formulae), and relatively uncommon ones should be excluded.
Which compounds are relatively common compared to the others (I would put the halides, oxide, hydroxide, carbonate and acetate)?
Bli231957 (
talk)
08:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)reply
"7*10^18 years, approximately" Why approximately? If there's a huge error bar I'd say "on the order of 7*10^18 years" and then put the error in the isotope box
Comment: The article is stable and there has not been an edit war, so I think that could be put as a pass. So far neodymium also passes some other criteria (e.g. NPOV), although I do agree that minor tweaks are needed.
InterstellarGamer12321 (
talk)
18:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I really don't think there should be such an expansive list of neodymium compounds; it distracts. Why not list the most important ones, and then hatnote to Category:Neodymium_compounds?
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't know; all I know is that there are too many in the article right now. They shouldn't be in list form, in any case.
Ovinus (
talk)
17:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I think they should be judged by the quality of the actual article on whether they should be included. If there is no article, they definitely should be removed, as we do not even know they exist. I did this with neodymium carbide. Stubs must be removed as well as they are barely notable and not imporantant. Most Start-Class compounds should be removed, but keep the most important 2-3. Anything C-Class or better should be on the list.
InterstellarGamer12321 (
talk)
17:34, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
For example, I removed the sulfides section, as one is without an article and probably does not exist and the other is an unimportant stub. However, neodymium acetate should be kept as it is B-Class and a relatively important compound.
InterstellarGamer12321 (
talk)
17:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I've also removed the non-existent article neodymium(IV) fluoride, and changed the hydride to the nitride (more notable)
Bli231957 (
talk)
15:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"Neodymium isotopes are used in various scientific applications." Well, sure... probably specify radioactive isotopes
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"Several neodymium isotopes have been used for the production of other promethium isotopes." Extremely vague; either specify which isotopes (of promethium, at least) or remove
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"didymos (διδύμος), twin.[8][26]..." Do we need six sources for an etymology? I'm assuming some of the sources are for previous sentences; I'd move them closer if possible
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"Because of its role ... for expanded production." Is this one source enough to include this sentence? (Do any other important sources make similar claims)
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Broader comment:
This article still seems pretty far from GA, sorry. You're welcome to renominate it; here are some concerns for others to evaluate:
I agree with the
WP:TECHNICAL tag on Physical properties. Also, much of that section isn't even about physical properties—the lead sentence Neodymium is the fourth member of the lanthanide series. is not really a physical property. That stuff should go in Chemical properties. "Metallic neodymium has a bright, silvery metallic luster." should probably be first. See
Caesium#Physical properties for a good example. What about other general properties, like conductivity, spectrum, density, melting point?
Solubility of neodymium salts in water is not discussed. Would be good to say that Nd+3 is generally soluble.
Strange language sprinkled throughout: "can access the midpoints of pressure and temperature regions"; "has been rapidly increasing owing to the growing population and industrial development" (growing human population? seems a bit obvious)
"due to the release of radioactive substances during the mining process" – Apparently a bit more description on the mining process is in order; why are there radioactive compounds being released?
Listing of the various neodymium compounds needs to be done in prose form, grouping them by various qualities (coloredness? solubility? etc). Otherwise it's a fairly useless collection
Why is "R. J. Callow, The Industrial Chemistry of the Lanthanons, Yttrium, Thorium, and Uranium, Pergamon Press, 1967." in further reading?
Ovinus (
talk)
17:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Hey, I'll take this one. The article looks to be in good shape. I'll be comparing its structure to rare-earth GAs
lanthanum and
europium, and FA
thorium. I'll be a little picky because of the article's high visibility. Any edits I make to the article will be minor (and not something I'll be a stickler on). Cheers,
Ovinus (
talk)
22:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)reply
Initial comments
Citations needed:
"Some neodymium compounds have colors that vary based upon the type of lighting."
"the demand for NdFeB magnets is expected to increase significantly in the future." Also, citing the Paris agreement directly probably isn't helpful; a third party source is needed
"but changes with the type of lighting, because of the interaction of the sharp light absorption bands of neodymium with ambient light enriched with the sharp visible emission bands of mercury, trivalent europium or terbium" Er... Emission bands of europium or terbium are commonly present in lights?
Ovinus (
talk)
02:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC)reply
"high-performance hobby DC electric motors" Nd magnets used in hobby motors, but not in industry or commercial applications?
Ovinus (
talk)
02:14, 18 April 2022 (UTC)reply
"Like most other metals in the lanthanide series, neodymium usually only uses three electrons as valence electrons, as after the remaining 4f electrons are strongly bound" I don't understand this sentence.
The list of compounds should not include their full names (just wikilink their formulae), and relatively uncommon ones should be excluded.
Which compounds are relatively common compared to the others (I would put the halides, oxide, hydroxide, carbonate and acetate)?
Bli231957 (
talk)
08:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)reply
"7*10^18 years, approximately" Why approximately? If there's a huge error bar I'd say "on the order of 7*10^18 years" and then put the error in the isotope box
Comment: The article is stable and there has not been an edit war, so I think that could be put as a pass. So far neodymium also passes some other criteria (e.g. NPOV), although I do agree that minor tweaks are needed.
InterstellarGamer12321 (
talk)
18:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)reply
I really don't think there should be such an expansive list of neodymium compounds; it distracts. Why not list the most important ones, and then hatnote to Category:Neodymium_compounds?
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I don't know; all I know is that there are too many in the article right now. They shouldn't be in list form, in any case.
Ovinus (
talk)
17:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I think they should be judged by the quality of the actual article on whether they should be included. If there is no article, they definitely should be removed, as we do not even know they exist. I did this with neodymium carbide. Stubs must be removed as well as they are barely notable and not imporantant. Most Start-Class compounds should be removed, but keep the most important 2-3. Anything C-Class or better should be on the list.
InterstellarGamer12321 (
talk)
17:34, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
For example, I removed the sulfides section, as one is without an article and probably does not exist and the other is an unimportant stub. However, neodymium acetate should be kept as it is B-Class and a relatively important compound.
InterstellarGamer12321 (
talk)
17:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
I've also removed the non-existent article neodymium(IV) fluoride, and changed the hydride to the nitride (more notable)
Bli231957 (
talk)
15:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"Neodymium isotopes are used in various scientific applications." Well, sure... probably specify radioactive isotopes
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"Several neodymium isotopes have been used for the production of other promethium isotopes." Extremely vague; either specify which isotopes (of promethium, at least) or remove
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"didymos (διδύμος), twin.[8][26]..." Do we need six sources for an etymology? I'm assuming some of the sources are for previous sentences; I'd move them closer if possible
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
"Because of its role ... for expanded production." Is this one source enough to include this sentence? (Do any other important sources make similar claims)
Ovinus (
talk)
06:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Broader comment:
This article still seems pretty far from GA, sorry. You're welcome to renominate it; here are some concerns for others to evaluate:
I agree with the
WP:TECHNICAL tag on Physical properties. Also, much of that section isn't even about physical properties—the lead sentence Neodymium is the fourth member of the lanthanide series. is not really a physical property. That stuff should go in Chemical properties. "Metallic neodymium has a bright, silvery metallic luster." should probably be first. See
Caesium#Physical properties for a good example. What about other general properties, like conductivity, spectrum, density, melting point?
Solubility of neodymium salts in water is not discussed. Would be good to say that Nd+3 is generally soluble.
Strange language sprinkled throughout: "can access the midpoints of pressure and temperature regions"; "has been rapidly increasing owing to the growing population and industrial development" (growing human population? seems a bit obvious)
"due to the release of radioactive substances during the mining process" – Apparently a bit more description on the mining process is in order; why are there radioactive compounds being released?
Listing of the various neodymium compounds needs to be done in prose form, grouping them by various qualities (coloredness? solubility? etc). Otherwise it's a fairly useless collection
Why is "R. J. Callow, The Industrial Chemistry of the Lanthanons, Yttrium, Thorium, and Uranium, Pergamon Press, 1967." in further reading?
Ovinus (
talk)
17:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply