![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 25 March 2014, Perovskite was linked from Slashdot, a high-traffic website. ( Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
Calcium titanate is the more common name, calcium titanium oxide should be a redirect. -- Axiosaurus ( talk) 11:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the above plus the following: perovskite (mineral) should be a separate mineral article and not redirected to Calcium titanate, and the current perovskite article be renamed to perovskite (mineral class). Garybrennan ( talk) 03:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Seems like there was a move to break this tiny article into two even-smaller pieces, one for the chemical CaTiO3 and one for the mineral CaTiO3. This seems pretty silly to me. CaTiO3 is CaTiO3. If it were two articles, they would have overwhelming overlap--i.e., practically everything there is to say about CaTiO3 would be relevant to both articles. So I put the article back together. Any thoughts?
Of course, the mineralbox and chembox should be combined, but I don't know the syntax for either. -- Steve ( talk) 16:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Prepared by M.M.Alam for the course GEOL 3370, Dr. Jonathan Snow University of Houston 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Houstonians ( talk • contribs) 22:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
The perovskite solar claims are misleading. Although the referenced material is of a high calibre the way the results have been portrayed in this article are misleading. The PCE efficiency of 15% quoted for perovskite solar is a peak research cell PCE not an average commercial module PCE as quoted for silicon and is an as yet uncertified result (i.e. by NREL or other certification body) for 101mW/cm2 rather than the standard 100. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PVeff%28rev130923%29a.jpg for comparison of various PCEs measured at standard conditions. This section of the article "because perovskites can achieve 15 per cent efficiencies (as opposed to 10 for typical commercial silicon solar cells)" should be dropped and the "can be produced" changed to a "could be". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.138.53.221 ( talk) 13:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
The photovoltaic material is a lead methyl halide compound that has the perovskite structure. It is not CaTiO3 and therefore I believe any references to this material should either be on the Perovskite (crystal structure) page or a new perovskite (photovoltaic) page. 184.100.140.188 ( talk) 00:35, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not able to follow the reference and a quick web search didn't come up with any non-wiki references. I'm thinking this is a simple misspelling, but of what, I'm not clear. -- Wcoole ( talk) 20:23, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Right -- 'atindite' is a misspelling of 'etindite':
( Epikoros ( talk) 19:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)).
I made this change in our mantle article. Is Calcium Perovskite the same as Perovskite? I would like to see the wikilink bring readers to the right place. It wasn't easy to answer from a simple google. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 18:27, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
There is no aɪ in Russian language and stress is on i [3]. Elk Salmon ( talk) 17:46, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
This article reads fine until the section "Physical Properties". The last two sections talk about minerals with the general perovskite structure, and not about Perovskite itself. These sections should be moved. IgnacioPickering ( talk) 16:03, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
In the present version of the article, the first description of the perovskite is attributed to Victor Goldschmidt and cites his work "Die Gesetze der Krystallochemie" (1926). [1] Here, Goldschmidt writes "Diese Struktur wurde zuerst von T. Barth bei Perowskit, Natruim-niobat, und Dysanalyt [Mischkristall] beschrieben." That is, Goldschmidt attributes the description of the perovskite crystal structure to T. Barth, but does not present a citation.
A memorial to Thomas F.W. Barth was written in the Geological Society of America [2] including a detailed bibliographic timeline of Barth's work which gives "Die Kristallstruktur von Perowskit und Verwandten Verbindungen: Norsk Geol. Tidsskr. 8, p. 201-216." and can be found here. [3] Barth traces the development as late as 1912 to O.B. Boggild, [4] who examined periovskite crystals using optical crystallography, but cites no X-ray crystallography in the intervening years.
Clearly Barth and Goldschmidt were close collaborators for some time, yet it seems the attribution of the first X-ray structure determination of perovskite belongs to Barth, not Goldschmidt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PendulousPangolin ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | On 25 March 2014, Perovskite was linked from Slashdot, a high-traffic website. ( Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
Calcium titanate is the more common name, calcium titanium oxide should be a redirect. -- Axiosaurus ( talk) 11:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree with the above plus the following: perovskite (mineral) should be a separate mineral article and not redirected to Calcium titanate, and the current perovskite article be renamed to perovskite (mineral class). Garybrennan ( talk) 03:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Seems like there was a move to break this tiny article into two even-smaller pieces, one for the chemical CaTiO3 and one for the mineral CaTiO3. This seems pretty silly to me. CaTiO3 is CaTiO3. If it were two articles, they would have overwhelming overlap--i.e., practically everything there is to say about CaTiO3 would be relevant to both articles. So I put the article back together. Any thoughts?
Of course, the mineralbox and chembox should be combined, but I don't know the syntax for either. -- Steve ( talk) 16:59, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Prepared by M.M.Alam for the course GEOL 3370, Dr. Jonathan Snow University of Houston 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Houstonians ( talk • contribs) 22:17, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
The perovskite solar claims are misleading. Although the referenced material is of a high calibre the way the results have been portrayed in this article are misleading. The PCE efficiency of 15% quoted for perovskite solar is a peak research cell PCE not an average commercial module PCE as quoted for silicon and is an as yet uncertified result (i.e. by NREL or other certification body) for 101mW/cm2 rather than the standard 100. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PVeff%28rev130923%29a.jpg for comparison of various PCEs measured at standard conditions. This section of the article "because perovskites can achieve 15 per cent efficiencies (as opposed to 10 for typical commercial silicon solar cells)" should be dropped and the "can be produced" changed to a "could be". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.138.53.221 ( talk) 13:29, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
The photovoltaic material is a lead methyl halide compound that has the perovskite structure. It is not CaTiO3 and therefore I believe any references to this material should either be on the Perovskite (crystal structure) page or a new perovskite (photovoltaic) page. 184.100.140.188 ( talk) 00:35, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not able to follow the reference and a quick web search didn't come up with any non-wiki references. I'm thinking this is a simple misspelling, but of what, I'm not clear. -- Wcoole ( talk) 20:23, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Right -- 'atindite' is a misspelling of 'etindite':
( Epikoros ( talk) 19:26, 8 November 2016 (UTC)).
I made this change in our mantle article. Is Calcium Perovskite the same as Perovskite? I would like to see the wikilink bring readers to the right place. It wasn't easy to answer from a simple google. -- David Tornheim ( talk) 18:27, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
There is no aɪ in Russian language and stress is on i [3]. Elk Salmon ( talk) 17:46, 27 January 2019 (UTC)
This article reads fine until the section "Physical Properties". The last two sections talk about minerals with the general perovskite structure, and not about Perovskite itself. These sections should be moved. IgnacioPickering ( talk) 16:03, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
In the present version of the article, the first description of the perovskite is attributed to Victor Goldschmidt and cites his work "Die Gesetze der Krystallochemie" (1926). [1] Here, Goldschmidt writes "Diese Struktur wurde zuerst von T. Barth bei Perowskit, Natruim-niobat, und Dysanalyt [Mischkristall] beschrieben." That is, Goldschmidt attributes the description of the perovskite crystal structure to T. Barth, but does not present a citation.
A memorial to Thomas F.W. Barth was written in the Geological Society of America [2] including a detailed bibliographic timeline of Barth's work which gives "Die Kristallstruktur von Perowskit und Verwandten Verbindungen: Norsk Geol. Tidsskr. 8, p. 201-216." and can be found here. [3] Barth traces the development as late as 1912 to O.B. Boggild, [4] who examined periovskite crystals using optical crystallography, but cites no X-ray crystallography in the intervening years.
Clearly Barth and Goldschmidt were close collaborators for some time, yet it seems the attribution of the first X-ray structure determination of perovskite belongs to Barth, not Goldschmidt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PendulousPangolin ( talk • contribs) 18:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)