This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Tin was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Cassiterite is never purple. This is an evident error. It may however be brown. Eudialytos ( talk) 22:25, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Double sharp ( talk · contribs) 08:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
I'll take a look at this and work on it while I'm here; while I don't feel that it meets the GA criteria now, I think it could be pushed up there without requiring as much time as if you had to work from scratch.
Double sharp (
talk) 08:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Before I start the review proper, I would suggest looking at germanium and lead for inspiration. Both of them are tin's neighbours in group 14, and are FAs, which goes beyond our goal here. A comparison may reveal some things covered for those elements that are not covered in the Sn article that you might consider adding. Double sharp ( talk) 14:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Double sharp: If you work on the article, I can review it. Feel free to close this and renominate, pinging me. Kees08 (Talk) 04:47, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Does anybody have info on the etymological links between tin and the Norwegian town of Tinn, which has a significant decorative pewter industry? Neither article mentions anything, and I can't find any info by googling. -- Ef80 ( talk) 10:42, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
What is the chemical properties of tin 197.156.118.254 ( talk) 03:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the Isotopes section talks about 100Sn having a doubly magic nucleus, then in the next phrase it says that it has a "very uneven neutron-proton ratio" which is obviously incorrect; since tin is element 50 it would have 50 protons in its nucleus, and an isotope at 100 amu would thus also have 50 neutrons, making the ratio 1:1 (which is about as even as you can get). The other isotope referenced, 132Sn, would certainly have an uneven ratio, and the following portion of the sentence states that 100 and 132 are the endpoints above/below which isotopes are much more unstable, but I'm not sure how to reword this to keep the relevant information and get rid of the contradictory information. Lumberjane Lilly ( talk) 17:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Above. 2001:EE0:4BC9:4070:C19F:C86:76EB:92C7 ( talk) 12:45, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
This
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Tin was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Cassiterite is never purple. This is an evident error. It may however be brown. Eudialytos ( talk) 22:25, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Double sharp ( talk · contribs) 08:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
I'll take a look at this and work on it while I'm here; while I don't feel that it meets the GA criteria now, I think it could be pushed up there without requiring as much time as if you had to work from scratch.
Double sharp (
talk) 08:27, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Before I start the review proper, I would suggest looking at germanium and lead for inspiration. Both of them are tin's neighbours in group 14, and are FAs, which goes beyond our goal here. A comparison may reveal some things covered for those elements that are not covered in the Sn article that you might consider adding. Double sharp ( talk) 14:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
@ Double sharp: If you work on the article, I can review it. Feel free to close this and renominate, pinging me. Kees08 (Talk) 04:47, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Does anybody have info on the etymological links between tin and the Norwegian town of Tinn, which has a significant decorative pewter industry? Neither article mentions anything, and I can't find any info by googling. -- Ef80 ( talk) 10:42, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
What is the chemical properties of tin 197.156.118.254 ( talk) 03:09, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
The second paragraph of the Isotopes section talks about 100Sn having a doubly magic nucleus, then in the next phrase it says that it has a "very uneven neutron-proton ratio" which is obviously incorrect; since tin is element 50 it would have 50 protons in its nucleus, and an isotope at 100 amu would thus also have 50 neutrons, making the ratio 1:1 (which is about as even as you can get). The other isotope referenced, 132Sn, would certainly have an uneven ratio, and the following portion of the sentence states that 100 and 132 are the endpoints above/below which isotopes are much more unstable, but I'm not sure how to reword this to keep the relevant information and get rid of the contradictory information. Lumberjane Lilly ( talk) 17:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
Above. 2001:EE0:4BC9:4070:C19F:C86:76EB:92C7 ( talk) 12:45, 17 November 2023 (UTC)