![]() | 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 moved the hastelloy and stellite links from "high speed steel" to "superalloy" since neither are steels. Stellite is cobalt-based and hastelloy is primarily nickel. I also removed tool steel from the superalloy line since it is not a superalloy and rarely contains tungsten. Tungsten's added heat-resistance is what differentiates high speed steel from plain tool steel. Ryanrs 08:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
On other wiki's the melting temp is mentioned to be 3407, also searching on G00gle for wolfraam 3407 shows me enough resources to believe that 3407 is correct. Do we use the wrong temp on the en:wiki ?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 57.67.146.66 ( talk • contribs) .
Does anyone know anything about this substance, and would it be a good addition to the article? Someone please answer. I heard that it is just like depleted uranium in that it is self-sharpening and pyrophoric, but not radioactive. DebateKid 20:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
The history section needs some work, and has some contradictory information. The first paragraph (which shouldn't be the first paragraph) gives the etymology of the name "Wolfram", with a 1747 date for Wallerius' denomination thereof. But then the next paragraph says it was first hypothesized to exist in 1779. I imagine there's something about it existing as an element in 1779, but I'm unsure just what's being said there. We probably need something more along the lines of Niobium#History, since they have similar naming issues. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 16:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Hoping to find how much Tungsten Carbide weighs relative to gold or platinum. Figure others would also be interested when evaluating for jewlery purposes. DE 66.104.16.162 16:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Given that the half life is so long and that decay is therefore a very rare even I would like to ask how it is possible to accurately measure its half life? For example if a reasonable mass of Tungsten only has one theoretical atomic decay a year there is a real statistical chance (by random variation) that none or more may occur and so one would surelyneed to measure over an unfeasable period of time? Also such a low rate would surely be masked by contamination and background radiation?
[ManInStone]
Thanks for the refernces, I followed them up, but they just seemed to contain tables of values rather than an explanation of the method. Perhaps this method should be covered by the "half life" page. I gather Bismuth has an even lower decay rate.-- ManInStone 14:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Mark Hubbard here: at least two sections have extensive text that appears to have been copied verbatim from http://www.chemistrydaily.com/chemistry/Tungsten. If this text is being used with permission, then I assume there should be a linked attribution. 71.128.36.112 22:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
At some stage during extensive edits of Tungsten by User:Ziggy Sawdust on 2nd May, the following section has been removed. That appears to have done that without explanation or discussion, and the result is that the Chemical properties and Compounds sections of the article are badly degraded.
"Aqueous polyoxoanions
Aqueous tungstate solutions are noted for the formation of heteropoly acids and polyoxometalate anions under neutral and acidic conditions. As tungstate is progressively treated with acid, it first yields the soluble, metastable "paratungstate A" anion, W7O246−, which over hours or days converts to the less soluble "paratungstate B" anion, H2W12O4210−. Further acidification produces the very soluble metatungstate anion, H2W12O406−, after equilibrium is reached. The metatungstate ion exists as a symmetric cluster of twelve tungsten-oxygen octahedra known as the "Keggin" anion. Many other polyoxometalate anions exist as metastable species. The inclusion of a different atom such as phosphorus in place of the two central hydrogens in metatungstate produces a wide variety of heteropoly acids, such as phosphotungstic acid H3P W12O40 in this example."
Your changes to the Applications section are also unhelpful. They have degraded the information content of the section, and again the changes appear to have been made without discussion with the article's editors. Plantsurfer ( talk) 07:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I have archived the first GA review and the second GA review. Dr. Cash ( talk) 03:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The page discusses how the half lives are "so long they can be considered stable" - thus stating they're not actually stable. Yet the infobox states them as stable.
Shouldn't it display the actual length, rather than falsely claiming "stable"? Or if it should say stable - why shouldn't Bismuth, which also has a half life long enough to be considered stable?
I just lost teh game (
talk) 06:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Tung sten comes from Danish and not Swedish as mentioned in the article, how ever it means the same "heavy stone". Main parts of the Swedish language derives from Danish. And the word Tung sten (tungsten) derives from Danish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.17.100.113 ( talk) 11:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to correct that tungsten is used to interconnect metals and metals to transistors and not between dielectrics to transistors as stated in the older text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.217.112.246 ( talk) 19:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't Tungsten be in Category:Biology and pharmacology of chemical elements ? Eldin raigmore ( talk) 20:50, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
It would be informative to state the reason why tungsten (and tantalum etc.) has such a high melting point. Is it because it forms covalent bonds (like carbon/diamond) in addition to its metallic bonding? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.232.196.151 ( talk) 08:45, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
can somebody fix the formula template? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CheesyBiscuit ( talk • contribs) 15:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
I would edit this minor point but I don't have a Wikipedia account and this page is semi-locked. A sentence from the first paragraph reads: "The pure form is used mainly in electrical applications, but its many compounds and alloys are used in many applications, most notably in incandescent light bulb filaments, X-ray tubes (as both the filament and target), and superalloys." The gripe is that the word "used" is in the same sentence twice.
Suggested improvements: "The pure form is used mainly in electrical applications, but its many compounds and alloys are widely applied, most notably in incandescent light bulb filaments, X-ray tubes (as both the filament and target), and superalloys."
or
"The pure form is used mainly in electrical applications, but its many compounds and alloys have many applications, most notably in incandescent light bulb filaments, X-ray tubes (as both the filament and target), and superalloys."
Tungsten nickel alloys are commonly used in high quality darts because of their high density. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.96.212.101 ( talk) 01:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I would add this myself but the article is protected. Tungsten is used to fabricate gold bars. Gold plated tungsten bars are made as counterfeits. The density of tungsten is that of real gold to three decimal places. Only expensive laboratory tests can verify real gold from gold plated tungsten bars. Counterfeit gold in small sizes like 1 ounce coins are not common as the costs of manufacturing a counterfeit of such a small quantity is not cost effective. Special:Contributions/gelato ( talk) 07:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
There are also two large mines in Peru and Canada. The Peruvian produces a special quality http://www.malaga.ca/ The Canadian mine is temporarily closed http://www.northamericantungsten.com/s/Cantung.asp —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caravanseray ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Why is called "Heavy Stone" in english? isnt that ilogical when the sign for it is W, and that the one who discovered it called it wolfram?
Because tung sten (Swedish) means heavy stone in English.
See my own changes of a week or so ago (early October 2008). "Tung" means, heavy, yes, but translates better as "hard", and though tungsten is not particularly heavy, it IS particularly hard, which is why the Swedes and Danes used the word "tung", NOT because of its weight! KDS4444 KDS4444 04:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KDS4444 ( talk • contribs)
The article mentions that tungsten has an LD50 of 500mg/kg to 5g/kg. This needs clarification; is this a reference to the pure metal, or to tungstate ion? The former is chemically so inert that it can't be particularly hazardous, so I assume it's a reference to the latter. Stonemason89 ( talk) 18:12, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
This page says that the electrical resistivity of Tungsten equals to 52.8 nΩ·m while the Electrical resistivity page says it is 56.0 nΩ·m. Both at 20°C. Which one is true so we can at least have consistency across these two pages. 194.105.120.80 ( talk) 10:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Please remove (The page is protected)
"Early epidemiologic association with cancer
On 20 August 2002, officials representing the U.S.-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that urine tests on leukemia patient families and control group families in the Fallon, Nevada area had shown elevated levels of tungsten in the bodies of both groups.[27] Sixteen recent cases of cancer in children were discovered in the Fallon area, which has now been identified as a cancer cluster; although the majority of the cancer victims are not longtime residents of Fallon. However, there is not enough data to support a link between tungsten and leukemia at this time.[28]"
Removed. This is speculation, and seems to be consistent with a growing use of tungsten carbon and jewelry. Many organizations (Scott Kay) have been involved in discrete the material to increase sales of precious metals. This is akin to mentioning that elevated levels of Iron are also present in people who have elevated levels of Tungsten.
When empirical data has been obtained then this may become a valid addition to the post. However, until such time, assuming that a stable metal is somehow poisonous seems fishy. The fact that this page is also semi-protected makes me wonder if some jewelers are in active disaccredit of this material in Jewelery. In addition Tungsten Carbin (which is used in Jewelery) is not mentioned at all.
What better way to prevent people from selling a wedding band then by spreading any notion that wedding band may cause cancer!
I Big_green_jelly_bean am not a jeweler nor do I ever wish to be. I run a website for quilters http://www.allourquilts.com, and request this change to produce accurate and fair information.
As I recall it there was previously information on very high rates of a rare and rather nasty type of cancer being associated with tungsten particles or fragments trapped inside tissues. Someone suggested that it was not from pure tungsten but from nickel or cobolt in alloys (I thought i had been found for pure W too). I think these finding were well verified and not speculations (which those mentioned above may be). This needs to be investigated and if the information has been removed unproperly it should be replaced and more editing restrictions applied! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.227.15.253 ( talk) 11:01, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
This article says tungsten's enthalpy of fusion is 52.31 kJ/mol.
According to http://www.chemicool.com/elements/tungsten.html, http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/periodic/W.html, and http://www.americanelements.com/ww.html, the Lf value is 35.4 kJ/mol (americanelements.com says 35.2).
I don't see how to change it. 168.156.112.103 ( talk) 20:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Removed from Occurrence:
"Wolframite is also considered to be a conflict mineral due to the unethical mining practices observed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.[citation needed]"
As the political climate in certain countries has no relevance to the abundance of minerals and where they can be found. 60.241.162.143 ( talk) 10:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC) 11-December 2010
You haven't touched the hot topic of counterfeiting gold by either coating tungsten with gold,or embedding a tungsten core into a gold ingot. Noting that tungsten is very much in demand suggests that a lot of counterfeiting is going on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.207.221.99 ( talk) 19:55, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Wednesday 9-27-06 Portland, OR 3:31pm Pacific Coast Time
Who on the discussion page would be the expert on pure tungsten metal? Considering my extremely low income level, What is the best, lowest price, retail source of this metal? There are plenty of websites that sell both scrap tungsten and new tungsten; but unfortunately the purity of these various forms can vary from website to website. The purist form that I found on one particular website is 99.95% in foil form(apparently pure tungsten is quite difficult to extract.). (It's unfortunate that no one has ever experimented with more cost effective "Sci-Fi" methods of producing tungsten - such as attempting to artificially produce tungsten from simpler metals - similar to how artificially produced diamonds are manufactured. But artificial tungsten is another story and for a PHd - which I'm not!) Does anyone in the discussion page have any physical work experience with tungsten? Is the metal compatible with common workshop tools such as tin-snips, powerdrills, saws, etc. ? I wish to design my own storage/ holding container for "Dry Ice"; This is for a personal, experimental science project that I'm cogitating; Is tungsten tough and strong enough to tolerate physical contact with "Dry Ice" for an indefinite duration of time, or does tungsten undergo any adverse chemical reaction with "dry ice"?
From: MyPresentCPUisTooSlow, registered User (I know, I need to shorten my user name - eventually)
Mark Hubbard here: REMBAR, a New York company that fabricates tungsten parts, discusses briefly the difficulties of working with tungsten under the heading, "Physical Properties of Tungsten": http://www.rembar.com/Tungsten.htm
Mark Hubbard here: A better storage/holding container for dry ice is ordinary styrofoam, the thicker the better. You can start with an inexpensive cooler and build additional insulation around the sides, bottom and top using whatever is at hand, sealing the seams with duct tape. It works surprisingly well.
Tungsten currently retails for $3 to $8 an ounce. One seller on eBay is currently selling high purity tungsten rod for $4.89 an ounce.
Tungsten is alloyed with other metals to improve its workability and to reduce its brittleness. These alloys commonly have a range of densities from 17 (90% tungsten - Class 1 Heavy Metal) to 18.5 (Class 4 Heavy Metal), although copper/tungsten alloys are sometimes as low as 50/50 or less. As mentioned above, because of its extremely high melting point, W is usually not melted and cast like other metals. Instead, it is powdered and sintered (heated and put under intense pressure) to form a solid metal product. See the article on powder metallurgy if you are interested in this aspect. 71.128.36.112 04:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I am a metallurgist and have some indirect contact with tungsten. First, it is used in diamond drill bits used in drilling wells. A Graphite mold is first shaped and industrial diamonds are embedded in the wall of the mold. Molten tungsten is then poured into the mold and the metal bonds to the diamonds in a way no other metal does providing strength to the drill bit and and tightly fused diamonds to cut rock with.
A second use of tungsten is as tungsten carbide. About 25% carbon makes an alloy that can be used for drill bits and cutting tools. Your local Home Depot sells them for cutting harden steel. Of course they are also the most expensive drill bits you will find at that store (haven't seen diamond drill bits there yet).
The third use of tungsten which is becoming very popular is in counterfeiting gold coins and gold ingots. At 4 dollars an ounce vs 1400 dollars a troy ounce, there is a lot of money to be made. A gold plated tungsten coin or a gold ingot with a core of tungsten is a real temptation to the criminal minded. Gold has a specific gravity of 19.30 and tungsten of 19.25. The difference of 3 parts per thousand or 0.3% is not easily detected by the casual observer. Obviously hardness testing will uncover the coins, and ultrasonic testing will uncover the ingots. But is that really done? Does a company that is making so much money selling the product really want to rock the boat? 65.207.221.99 ( talk) 20:17, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
"Tungsten metal forms a protective oxide when exposed to air but can be oxidized at high temperature."
From what I read in a research paper a while ago (in which they heat tungsten by induction in still air), the oxide has a lower melting point than the tungsten metal, which allows it to be ablated away by a hot enough flame, and the layers of tungsten underneath oxidized and ablated away and so on. But what temperature, exactly?
Which of these forms under a hot flame? All of them? What's the minimum temperature flame required to turn a piece of tungsten into smoke (rather than just heat it up)? Would a pure oxygen atmosphere make a difference? — Omegatron 18:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
what is the price for Tungsten
The term decomposes means it moves to another form (oxide in this case. If it behaves like Iron, FeO, Fe2O3, Fe3O4, where Fe2O3 is a mixture of the other two, then I would expect a change in the amount of oxygen. Which way, I don't know. 65.207.221.99 ( talk) 20:28, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I question the sentence "Tungsten [...] is commonly accepted as the name of the material, although some chemists [...] refer to it as wolfram" What does "commonly accepted" mean? Are there any verifications for this statement? Maybe the material is commonly accepted to be called tungsten in the english-speaking world, in case that is what is meant. But if you consider other languages, I would say that wolfram, wolframio, wolfraam, Βολφράμιο etc. appear at least as often (cp the names of this article in other languages, for example). Please consider redrafting the sentence. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.94.57.157 ( talk) 16:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Tungsten (Swedish, "heavy stone") is actually the mineral itself and Wolfram (German, "eats tin like wolf") is the actual metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.183.132.2 ( talk) 09:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
It is thought to be one of the hardest metals of all by the majority, so it does seem like a good example. Robo37 ( talk) 21:35, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Wolfram evaporated crystals and 1cm3 cube.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 5, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-03-05. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng { chat} 20:59, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
The times for the "stable" isotopes given in the table and in the text are inconsistent. -- Maxus96 ( talk) 02:33, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
This article looks like it could easily be a Featured article. I'm not a significant contributor or I'd do it myself, but somebody needs to come along and nominate this as a Featured article candidate. — Kierkkadon talk/ contribs 21:18, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Vickers hardness is not measured in MPa, nor is Brinell hardness. I don't know what the values should be, but 3430 and 2570 look reasonable without the pressure units. Reference the Wikipedia links to Vickers hardness and Brinell hardness on the page. Udokre ( talk) 21:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I thought Wolfram was a German word, and so the "W" symbol was the only chemical element symbol to come from a language other than Latin. But the article claims a Latin form. Isn't it more likely that the Latin form is modern, taken from the German?
It's not latin: don't be misled by the "ium" in "Wolframium" My understanding of the naming is:
Malcolm Farmer 23:06, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Here are some references and suggestions. Somebody else may put it into a useful edit of the article.
This [2] includes the etymology of Wolframite \Wol"fram*ite\, n. [G., wolframit, wolfram; wolf wolf + rahm cream, soot; cf. G. wolfsruss wolfram, lit., wolf's soot.] (Min.)
[3] (also contains other reference data): Tungsten - (Swedish, tung sten, heavy stone); also known as wolfram (from wolframite, said to be named from wolf rahm or spumi lupi, because the ore interfered with the smelting of tin and was supposed to devour the tin)
http://www.tungsten.com/tunghist.html however gives a more detailed etymology than most dictionaries and it appears that the origin of the word wolfram is more or less obscure.
The name "wolframium" seems to be only of historical interest (but definitely label it New Latin). It shouldn't be mentioned in the lead paragraph (the W symbol is already explained with wolfram), but in the history section where there is more room for writing things out and explaining, together with "spumi lupi".
>> wolframite (which was later named for Woulfe)
>> In 1781 Carl Wilhelm Scheele ascertained that a new acid could be made from tungstenite
Femto 20:53, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
---
I don't see why it should necessarily have to come from German? Anyhow, "everybody else" doesen't ignore the name Wolfram, as a matter of fact, most languages still retain it over Tungsten.-- TVPR 07:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
---
Yes, the name Wolfram comes from the German "Wolf Rahm" meaning the froth of the wolf. This is a name based on the wolf-like way that tungsten reacts with liquid tin. The name Wolfram was given by the brothers José and Fausto Elhuyar to whom the discovery of tungsten is attributed. / PJM, Sweden 75.148.70.237 ( talk) 14:06, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
It says
Does it make sense: "...and knives for drills..."? Maybe: "...and knives, for drills..."? 94.5.82.115 ( talk) 14:26, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
This I think was ment with that. A knive from WC would be stupid to do.-- Stone ( talk) 17:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I changed the sentence "... has the highest melting point of all elements" to "... has the second highest melting point of all elements", as carbon has a higher melting point than tungsten (3500 K vs. 3410 K). Note that I am talking about MELTING point, not BOILING point, and about all elements (as it is stated in the original sentence), not only metals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.188.120.242 ( talk) 12:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
In the Uses section it talks about "Victor" inventing a tungsten stylus for records. Who's Victor? It seems oddly written and the citation isn't real. The page is protected right now so I can't do anything about it 64.132.80.134 ( talk) 22:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Victor Talking Machine Company is the thing I found.-- Stone ( talk) 06:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
No mention of a Tungsten record needle on that page though, and still the "citation" doesn't link to an outside source 64.132.80.134 ( talk) 19:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Does http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8874460 (from http://what-if.xkcd.com/89/ ), which details a case of acute tungsten toxicity, have any place here?-- Prosfilaes ( talk) 07:18, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
General Content in the applications section
The following statement appears at the end of the "applications" section:
"Lately, tungsten is used for jewelry because of its longevity and high durability."
This sentence is a standalone paragraph and the information provided is already included in the applications sections. Also, the tone also seemed a bit inconsistant with the rest of the article. I removed the sentence, but it the was replaced.
I should have mentioned the proposed edit here first. I still think that the sentence should be removed, but I made the mistake of making the change without discussing it here. 206.197.156.11 ( talk) 17:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC) K Mlnarik 9/9/09
Measuring the half life of Tungsten
Given that the half-life is so long and that decay is therefore a very rare event I would like to ask how it is possible to accurately measure its half life? For example if a reasonable mass of Tungsten only has one theoretical atomic decay a year there is a real statistical chance (by random variation) that none or more may occur and so one would surely need to measure over an unfeasible period of time? Also such a low rate would surely be masked by contamination and background radiation or re-absorption of emitted particles? Could an explanation of the method be added as a link? [ManInStone].
I would suggest changing the reporting of half lives to standard form i.e. x*10^n.
Are +2, +3, +4, +5 common oxidation states?
There were minimum oxidation state -2. Replaced it with +2, because metals do not have negative oxidation states. -- Yyy 08:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. The minimum should be -2. A real example is the compound Na2W(CO)5 (sodium pentacarbonyltungstate), where assigning CO as a neutral ligand gives you a tungsten oxidation state of -2! I think there also may be a [W(CO)4]4- salt also. John Ellis and his group at the Univ. of Minnesota were very active in these low oxidation state compounds. habrahamson 08:55 CDT 2006-10-25
Reference 72 looks bogus. The book title is irrelevant, and the link points to an unviewable page in Google books. [Rich Schroeppel 140701.1331MDT] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.250.219.84 ( talk) 19:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
"In the prelude to WWII China's production of tungsten played a role as China could use this leverage to demand material assistance from the US government. [1]
"
This is a very dubious claim. China was unable to export much of anything after the Japanese invasion in 1937, so it did not supply tungsten to the United States and had no such leverage. The source cannot be legitimately described as "news": Skolnick was a lone-wolf scandalmonger, sensationalist, and conspiracy believer who has been dead since 2006. Whatever was "reprinted" on this now-dead website may not even have originated with him. Rich Rostrom ( Talk) 06:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
The IMA have, since 2011, recognized tungsten as a mineral. See Min Mag 75 (and the current master list). A legacy comment in the second paragraph states otherwise. I'm having trouble finding a source discussing its initial discovery. American Mineralogist, Volume 96, 1166-1170 makes note of it when introducing a new mineral, Yttriaite-(Y), found embedded within native tungsten. Also The finding of native tungsten microcrystals in Bilokorovychi proterozoic conglomerates of the Volyn region (in Russian). Dong, where is my automobile? ( talk) 16:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Heaviest element (non-transuranic) would be uranium. The bacterium citrobacter absorbs it, so does the lichen trapelia involuta. However, tungsten is a heavier metal (g/cm³). I think it is just confusion over atomic weight vs. elemental density. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.181.196.142 ( talk) 02:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Tungsten. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Tungsten has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Other sources state that the element with the highest point is CARBON at around 3500°C. Which suggests that this statement is incorrect The free element is remarkable for its robustness, especially the fact that it has the highest melting point of all the elements. 141.0.157.169 ( talk) 01:48, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I understand that there are some risks to people choosing to use tungsten in a ring to be worn on fingers. The hardness of the material makes it (1) more likely that a major finger injury will occur if the ring is caught on an object, and (2) more difficult to remove by emergency personnel in the event of a finger injury. Specifically with (2), if a finger is injured, the finger is likely to swell. Rings must be removed (normally cut off as they will no longer fit over the swollen finger) to prevent the ring from cutting off blood circulation to the finger. If the ring cannot be removed, it begins to act like a tourniquet, resulting in the eventual loss of the finger due to loss of blood flow and consequent gangrene. Because tungsten rings are so hard, special tools must be stocked by emergency personnel that allow them to break the ring and remove it from the finger in the event of an injury.
I believe this risk to those considering the purchase of a tungsten ring, or to those already wearing them, should be mentioned in the Applications section of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloemer ( talk • contribs) 15:58, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Good luck seeing these happen... Double sharp ( talk) 02:13, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
If this is the case, why isn't it true for uranium, which has significant 5f-6d hybridisation and directional bonding? Double sharp ( talk) 06:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
This is the English wiki... why no english units in parens by the metric numbers? Are you trying to alienate everyone born before 1975?? Msjayhawk ( talk) 02:00, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Article changed over to new Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements format by maveric149. Elementbox converted 11:12, 14 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 15:26, 12 July 2005)
I thought tungsten oxide is a volatile oxide (hence not protective), which is why light bulbs need to be evacuated or filled with inert gas - to prevent the oxidation of the tungsten at elevated temperatures.
The oxide would tend to crumble due to repeated expansion and contractions from dramatic heating and cooling of a light bulb filament as the light is repeatedly turned on and off. Even some air would get through at the super hot temperatures of the filament. The oxide would tend to block the light given off.
Why is there a sentance stating the "resistance" of tungsten at the bottom of this paragraph? The material properties column already lists the resistivity of tungsten which is a much more fundamental material property.
The isotope stability information on this page is wrong [5]
I have removed |critical point C=13620
and |critical point F=24800
from infobox W. These are not used in template:infobox element (do not show). -
DePiep (
talk) 15:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
How about rewording this -
(also for the fact that it has a higher melting point then any other non alloy in existence)
to this -
(also for the fact that it has the highest melting point of any metal, and the highest of any element except carbon)
Latter wording does provide consistency with info on the Osmium page, i.e. melting point for osmium is 4th highest behind carbon, tungsten...
-- VatievonHans ( talk) 23:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Marquet P, François B, Vignon P, Lachâtre G. A soldier who had seizures after drinking quarter of a litre of wine. Lancet. 1996 Oct 19;348(9034):1070. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8874460
Marquet P, François B, Lotfi H, Turcant A, Debord J, Nedelec G, Lachâtre G. Tungsten determination in biological fluids, hair and nails by plasma emission spectrometry in a case of severe acute intoxication in man. J Forensic Sci. 1997 May;42(3):527-30. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9144946
The photo caption says that tungsten mining is an important part of Rwanda's economy. Yet the Wikipedia article on Rwanda says that industry accounts for less than 15% of the country's GDP, and that wolframite is only one of its industrial products. How important to Rwanda is tungsten mining really? 213.127.210.95 ( talk) 18:28, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Many sources online give the boiling point of tungsten as 5555 C / 5828 K, including List_of_chemical_elements. Many others give a similar number 5660 C / 5933 K, or 5930 K, 5900 K, etc; and still others give the wildly different 5900-ish C or even 5600-ish K. I suspect these are errors where the units got mixed up. This article's 5930 C is consistent with this theory, since it's 5660+270. Regardless, we should have an actual source, or just default to what List_of_chemical_elements uses, if anyone knows what that is... Patallurgist ( talk) 05:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
I remember a coarse metal bar in elementary school gym being labeled tungsten that was lightweight and hollow. Is my memory wrong on this? -- Scottandrewhutchins ( talk) 00:44, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tungstem. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 19:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tungston. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 19:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
I did this removal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Tungsten&oldid=prev&diff=920788821
It was reverted by user DePiep with the following reason: possible COI or advertising
I find this both a strange reversal, and a dubious explanation given. The text I removed is as follows: There are only a few UK based companies which specialise in machining this such as MGS precision in the heart of England.
Wikipedia is a international encyclopedia, if we are to mention a company that use this metal, it should be a good reason for it, and no such reason is given. Besides that, there is a direct link to the company web site in the text, something that as far as I know is not within the guidelines for Wikipedia. Add to that the reason given for the revert seems to be misleading, to say the least. I am the one removing a sentence possibly advertising, user DePiep revert it, so he let the advertising sentence be there.
I hope this is sufficient to make an admin look into this and revert what I regard as a inappropriate edit by DePiep. Ulflarsen ( talk) 21:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
As the user DePiep has accepted that the sentence can be removed, I do so. My reasons for removing it is several. First, this is a general article about Tungsten, its not about Tungsten in UK, Norway or any other country. To have this sentence seems to indicate that there is something special with the company mentioned, but if so, it should at least be supported by good sources, not a link to the company website. Second, as it stands the sentence reads more as an ad for the company, than adding useful information to the article about Tungsten. Ulflarsen ( talk) 08:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
The article mentions tungsten as the element that has the highest melting point (carbon stays solid longer) When I went to edit, it said not to mention carbon because it has no liquid state. I think this should be visible in the article, because it is misleading. Apricot2000 ( talk) 17:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a whole book about this element. Double sharp ( talk) 04:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
The boiling point in this article is inconsistent. In the lead it is 5828K and in the infobox it is 6203K. Which is correct? TheForgottenKing ( talk) 03:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
This is 2021. No one calls Tungsten "wolfram". Can we not get rid of that obsolete reference? This is just silly. 73.6.96.168 ( talk) 07:03, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Whether the origin of the dispute over wolfram and tungsten would justify the retention of wolfram as an alternate name for element 74, only time will tell.So "tungsten" definitely dominates in English, but "wolfram" is not completely gone (just mostly gone). Double sharp ( talk) 10:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I have a novelty block of 99.95% pure tungsten. Rather surprised that a standard magnet sticks to the tungsten. Must be something about magnetic susceptibility. If this empirical fact is relevant, I don't know where it would fit in the article. Magnet won't stick to anything else non-ferrous. Or maybe I'm missing something. Rairden ( talk) 09:37, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
More than a decade ago, there is a similar discussion about this. However, I found this doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123378 which said that some bacteria use uranium for respiration, which means it is biologically functional. So tungsten is not that heaviest element, uranium is. Nucleus hydro elemon ( talk) 06:10, 2 December 2022 (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 moved the hastelloy and stellite links from "high speed steel" to "superalloy" since neither are steels. Stellite is cobalt-based and hastelloy is primarily nickel. I also removed tool steel from the superalloy line since it is not a superalloy and rarely contains tungsten. Tungsten's added heat-resistance is what differentiates high speed steel from plain tool steel. Ryanrs 08:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
On other wiki's the melting temp is mentioned to be 3407, also searching on G00gle for wolfraam 3407 shows me enough resources to believe that 3407 is correct. Do we use the wrong temp on the en:wiki ?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 57.67.146.66 ( talk • contribs) .
Does anyone know anything about this substance, and would it be a good addition to the article? Someone please answer. I heard that it is just like depleted uranium in that it is self-sharpening and pyrophoric, but not radioactive. DebateKid 20:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
The history section needs some work, and has some contradictory information. The first paragraph (which shouldn't be the first paragraph) gives the etymology of the name "Wolfram", with a 1747 date for Wallerius' denomination thereof. But then the next paragraph says it was first hypothesized to exist in 1779. I imagine there's something about it existing as an element in 1779, but I'm unsure just what's being said there. We probably need something more along the lines of Niobium#History, since they have similar naming issues. -- jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 16:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Hoping to find how much Tungsten Carbide weighs relative to gold or platinum. Figure others would also be interested when evaluating for jewlery purposes. DE 66.104.16.162 16:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Given that the half life is so long and that decay is therefore a very rare even I would like to ask how it is possible to accurately measure its half life? For example if a reasonable mass of Tungsten only has one theoretical atomic decay a year there is a real statistical chance (by random variation) that none or more may occur and so one would surelyneed to measure over an unfeasable period of time? Also such a low rate would surely be masked by contamination and background radiation?
[ManInStone]
Thanks for the refernces, I followed them up, but they just seemed to contain tables of values rather than an explanation of the method. Perhaps this method should be covered by the "half life" page. I gather Bismuth has an even lower decay rate.-- ManInStone 14:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Mark Hubbard here: at least two sections have extensive text that appears to have been copied verbatim from http://www.chemistrydaily.com/chemistry/Tungsten. If this text is being used with permission, then I assume there should be a linked attribution. 71.128.36.112 22:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
At some stage during extensive edits of Tungsten by User:Ziggy Sawdust on 2nd May, the following section has been removed. That appears to have done that without explanation or discussion, and the result is that the Chemical properties and Compounds sections of the article are badly degraded.
"Aqueous polyoxoanions
Aqueous tungstate solutions are noted for the formation of heteropoly acids and polyoxometalate anions under neutral and acidic conditions. As tungstate is progressively treated with acid, it first yields the soluble, metastable "paratungstate A" anion, W7O246−, which over hours or days converts to the less soluble "paratungstate B" anion, H2W12O4210−. Further acidification produces the very soluble metatungstate anion, H2W12O406−, after equilibrium is reached. The metatungstate ion exists as a symmetric cluster of twelve tungsten-oxygen octahedra known as the "Keggin" anion. Many other polyoxometalate anions exist as metastable species. The inclusion of a different atom such as phosphorus in place of the two central hydrogens in metatungstate produces a wide variety of heteropoly acids, such as phosphotungstic acid H3P W12O40 in this example."
Your changes to the Applications section are also unhelpful. They have degraded the information content of the section, and again the changes appear to have been made without discussion with the article's editors. Plantsurfer ( talk) 07:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
I have archived the first GA review and the second GA review. Dr. Cash ( talk) 03:22, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
The page discusses how the half lives are "so long they can be considered stable" - thus stating they're not actually stable. Yet the infobox states them as stable.
Shouldn't it display the actual length, rather than falsely claiming "stable"? Or if it should say stable - why shouldn't Bismuth, which also has a half life long enough to be considered stable?
I just lost teh game (
talk) 06:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
Tung sten comes from Danish and not Swedish as mentioned in the article, how ever it means the same "heavy stone". Main parts of the Swedish language derives from Danish. And the word Tung sten (tungsten) derives from Danish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.17.100.113 ( talk) 11:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to correct that tungsten is used to interconnect metals and metals to transistors and not between dielectrics to transistors as stated in the older text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.217.112.246 ( talk) 19:13, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't Tungsten be in Category:Biology and pharmacology of chemical elements ? Eldin raigmore ( talk) 20:50, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
It would be informative to state the reason why tungsten (and tantalum etc.) has such a high melting point. Is it because it forms covalent bonds (like carbon/diamond) in addition to its metallic bonding? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.232.196.151 ( talk) 08:45, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
can somebody fix the formula template? —Preceding unsigned comment added by CheesyBiscuit ( talk • contribs) 15:36, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
I would edit this minor point but I don't have a Wikipedia account and this page is semi-locked. A sentence from the first paragraph reads: "The pure form is used mainly in electrical applications, but its many compounds and alloys are used in many applications, most notably in incandescent light bulb filaments, X-ray tubes (as both the filament and target), and superalloys." The gripe is that the word "used" is in the same sentence twice.
Suggested improvements: "The pure form is used mainly in electrical applications, but its many compounds and alloys are widely applied, most notably in incandescent light bulb filaments, X-ray tubes (as both the filament and target), and superalloys."
or
"The pure form is used mainly in electrical applications, but its many compounds and alloys have many applications, most notably in incandescent light bulb filaments, X-ray tubes (as both the filament and target), and superalloys."
Tungsten nickel alloys are commonly used in high quality darts because of their high density. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.96.212.101 ( talk) 01:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I would add this myself but the article is protected. Tungsten is used to fabricate gold bars. Gold plated tungsten bars are made as counterfeits. The density of tungsten is that of real gold to three decimal places. Only expensive laboratory tests can verify real gold from gold plated tungsten bars. Counterfeit gold in small sizes like 1 ounce coins are not common as the costs of manufacturing a counterfeit of such a small quantity is not cost effective. Special:Contributions/gelato ( talk) 07:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
There are also two large mines in Peru and Canada. The Peruvian produces a special quality http://www.malaga.ca/ The Canadian mine is temporarily closed http://www.northamericantungsten.com/s/Cantung.asp —Preceding unsigned comment added by Caravanseray ( talk • contribs) 17:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
Why is called "Heavy Stone" in english? isnt that ilogical when the sign for it is W, and that the one who discovered it called it wolfram?
Because tung sten (Swedish) means heavy stone in English.
See my own changes of a week or so ago (early October 2008). "Tung" means, heavy, yes, but translates better as "hard", and though tungsten is not particularly heavy, it IS particularly hard, which is why the Swedes and Danes used the word "tung", NOT because of its weight! KDS4444 KDS4444 04:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KDS4444 ( talk • contribs)
The article mentions that tungsten has an LD50 of 500mg/kg to 5g/kg. This needs clarification; is this a reference to the pure metal, or to tungstate ion? The former is chemically so inert that it can't be particularly hazardous, so I assume it's a reference to the latter. Stonemason89 ( talk) 18:12, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
This page says that the electrical resistivity of Tungsten equals to 52.8 nΩ·m while the Electrical resistivity page says it is 56.0 nΩ·m. Both at 20°C. Which one is true so we can at least have consistency across these two pages. 194.105.120.80 ( talk) 10:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Please remove (The page is protected)
"Early epidemiologic association with cancer
On 20 August 2002, officials representing the U.S.-based Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that urine tests on leukemia patient families and control group families in the Fallon, Nevada area had shown elevated levels of tungsten in the bodies of both groups.[27] Sixteen recent cases of cancer in children were discovered in the Fallon area, which has now been identified as a cancer cluster; although the majority of the cancer victims are not longtime residents of Fallon. However, there is not enough data to support a link between tungsten and leukemia at this time.[28]"
Removed. This is speculation, and seems to be consistent with a growing use of tungsten carbon and jewelry. Many organizations (Scott Kay) have been involved in discrete the material to increase sales of precious metals. This is akin to mentioning that elevated levels of Iron are also present in people who have elevated levels of Tungsten.
When empirical data has been obtained then this may become a valid addition to the post. However, until such time, assuming that a stable metal is somehow poisonous seems fishy. The fact that this page is also semi-protected makes me wonder if some jewelers are in active disaccredit of this material in Jewelery. In addition Tungsten Carbin (which is used in Jewelery) is not mentioned at all.
What better way to prevent people from selling a wedding band then by spreading any notion that wedding band may cause cancer!
I Big_green_jelly_bean am not a jeweler nor do I ever wish to be. I run a website for quilters http://www.allourquilts.com, and request this change to produce accurate and fair information.
As I recall it there was previously information on very high rates of a rare and rather nasty type of cancer being associated with tungsten particles or fragments trapped inside tissues. Someone suggested that it was not from pure tungsten but from nickel or cobolt in alloys (I thought i had been found for pure W too). I think these finding were well verified and not speculations (which those mentioned above may be). This needs to be investigated and if the information has been removed unproperly it should be replaced and more editing restrictions applied! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.227.15.253 ( talk) 11:01, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
This article says tungsten's enthalpy of fusion is 52.31 kJ/mol.
According to http://www.chemicool.com/elements/tungsten.html, http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/periodic/W.html, and http://www.americanelements.com/ww.html, the Lf value is 35.4 kJ/mol (americanelements.com says 35.2).
I don't see how to change it. 168.156.112.103 ( talk) 20:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
Removed from Occurrence:
"Wolframite is also considered to be a conflict mineral due to the unethical mining practices observed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.[citation needed]"
As the political climate in certain countries has no relevance to the abundance of minerals and where they can be found. 60.241.162.143 ( talk) 10:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC) 11-December 2010
You haven't touched the hot topic of counterfeiting gold by either coating tungsten with gold,or embedding a tungsten core into a gold ingot. Noting that tungsten is very much in demand suggests that a lot of counterfeiting is going on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.207.221.99 ( talk) 19:55, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Wednesday 9-27-06 Portland, OR 3:31pm Pacific Coast Time
Who on the discussion page would be the expert on pure tungsten metal? Considering my extremely low income level, What is the best, lowest price, retail source of this metal? There are plenty of websites that sell both scrap tungsten and new tungsten; but unfortunately the purity of these various forms can vary from website to website. The purist form that I found on one particular website is 99.95% in foil form(apparently pure tungsten is quite difficult to extract.). (It's unfortunate that no one has ever experimented with more cost effective "Sci-Fi" methods of producing tungsten - such as attempting to artificially produce tungsten from simpler metals - similar to how artificially produced diamonds are manufactured. But artificial tungsten is another story and for a PHd - which I'm not!) Does anyone in the discussion page have any physical work experience with tungsten? Is the metal compatible with common workshop tools such as tin-snips, powerdrills, saws, etc. ? I wish to design my own storage/ holding container for "Dry Ice"; This is for a personal, experimental science project that I'm cogitating; Is tungsten tough and strong enough to tolerate physical contact with "Dry Ice" for an indefinite duration of time, or does tungsten undergo any adverse chemical reaction with "dry ice"?
From: MyPresentCPUisTooSlow, registered User (I know, I need to shorten my user name - eventually)
Mark Hubbard here: REMBAR, a New York company that fabricates tungsten parts, discusses briefly the difficulties of working with tungsten under the heading, "Physical Properties of Tungsten": http://www.rembar.com/Tungsten.htm
Mark Hubbard here: A better storage/holding container for dry ice is ordinary styrofoam, the thicker the better. You can start with an inexpensive cooler and build additional insulation around the sides, bottom and top using whatever is at hand, sealing the seams with duct tape. It works surprisingly well.
Tungsten currently retails for $3 to $8 an ounce. One seller on eBay is currently selling high purity tungsten rod for $4.89 an ounce.
Tungsten is alloyed with other metals to improve its workability and to reduce its brittleness. These alloys commonly have a range of densities from 17 (90% tungsten - Class 1 Heavy Metal) to 18.5 (Class 4 Heavy Metal), although copper/tungsten alloys are sometimes as low as 50/50 or less. As mentioned above, because of its extremely high melting point, W is usually not melted and cast like other metals. Instead, it is powdered and sintered (heated and put under intense pressure) to form a solid metal product. See the article on powder metallurgy if you are interested in this aspect. 71.128.36.112 04:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
I am a metallurgist and have some indirect contact with tungsten. First, it is used in diamond drill bits used in drilling wells. A Graphite mold is first shaped and industrial diamonds are embedded in the wall of the mold. Molten tungsten is then poured into the mold and the metal bonds to the diamonds in a way no other metal does providing strength to the drill bit and and tightly fused diamonds to cut rock with.
A second use of tungsten is as tungsten carbide. About 25% carbon makes an alloy that can be used for drill bits and cutting tools. Your local Home Depot sells them for cutting harden steel. Of course they are also the most expensive drill bits you will find at that store (haven't seen diamond drill bits there yet).
The third use of tungsten which is becoming very popular is in counterfeiting gold coins and gold ingots. At 4 dollars an ounce vs 1400 dollars a troy ounce, there is a lot of money to be made. A gold plated tungsten coin or a gold ingot with a core of tungsten is a real temptation to the criminal minded. Gold has a specific gravity of 19.30 and tungsten of 19.25. The difference of 3 parts per thousand or 0.3% is not easily detected by the casual observer. Obviously hardness testing will uncover the coins, and ultrasonic testing will uncover the ingots. But is that really done? Does a company that is making so much money selling the product really want to rock the boat? 65.207.221.99 ( talk) 20:17, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
"Tungsten metal forms a protective oxide when exposed to air but can be oxidized at high temperature."
From what I read in a research paper a while ago (in which they heat tungsten by induction in still air), the oxide has a lower melting point than the tungsten metal, which allows it to be ablated away by a hot enough flame, and the layers of tungsten underneath oxidized and ablated away and so on. But what temperature, exactly?
Which of these forms under a hot flame? All of them? What's the minimum temperature flame required to turn a piece of tungsten into smoke (rather than just heat it up)? Would a pure oxygen atmosphere make a difference? — Omegatron 18:45, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
what is the price for Tungsten
The term decomposes means it moves to another form (oxide in this case. If it behaves like Iron, FeO, Fe2O3, Fe3O4, where Fe2O3 is a mixture of the other two, then I would expect a change in the amount of oxygen. Which way, I don't know. 65.207.221.99 ( talk) 20:28, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I question the sentence "Tungsten [...] is commonly accepted as the name of the material, although some chemists [...] refer to it as wolfram" What does "commonly accepted" mean? Are there any verifications for this statement? Maybe the material is commonly accepted to be called tungsten in the english-speaking world, in case that is what is meant. But if you consider other languages, I would say that wolfram, wolframio, wolfraam, Βολφράμιο etc. appear at least as often (cp the names of this article in other languages, for example). Please consider redrafting the sentence. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.94.57.157 ( talk) 16:02, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Tungsten (Swedish, "heavy stone") is actually the mineral itself and Wolfram (German, "eats tin like wolf") is the actual metal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.183.132.2 ( talk) 09:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
It is thought to be one of the hardest metals of all by the majority, so it does seem like a good example. Robo37 ( talk) 21:35, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Wolfram evaporated crystals and 1cm3 cube.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on March 5, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-03-05. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng { chat} 20:59, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
The times for the "stable" isotopes given in the table and in the text are inconsistent. -- Maxus96 ( talk) 02:33, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
This article looks like it could easily be a Featured article. I'm not a significant contributor or I'd do it myself, but somebody needs to come along and nominate this as a Featured article candidate. — Kierkkadon talk/ contribs 21:18, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Vickers hardness is not measured in MPa, nor is Brinell hardness. I don't know what the values should be, but 3430 and 2570 look reasonable without the pressure units. Reference the Wikipedia links to Vickers hardness and Brinell hardness on the page. Udokre ( talk) 21:47, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
I thought Wolfram was a German word, and so the "W" symbol was the only chemical element symbol to come from a language other than Latin. But the article claims a Latin form. Isn't it more likely that the Latin form is modern, taken from the German?
It's not latin: don't be misled by the "ium" in "Wolframium" My understanding of the naming is:
Malcolm Farmer 23:06, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Here are some references and suggestions. Somebody else may put it into a useful edit of the article.
This [2] includes the etymology of Wolframite \Wol"fram*ite\, n. [G., wolframit, wolfram; wolf wolf + rahm cream, soot; cf. G. wolfsruss wolfram, lit., wolf's soot.] (Min.)
[3] (also contains other reference data): Tungsten - (Swedish, tung sten, heavy stone); also known as wolfram (from wolframite, said to be named from wolf rahm or spumi lupi, because the ore interfered with the smelting of tin and was supposed to devour the tin)
http://www.tungsten.com/tunghist.html however gives a more detailed etymology than most dictionaries and it appears that the origin of the word wolfram is more or less obscure.
The name "wolframium" seems to be only of historical interest (but definitely label it New Latin). It shouldn't be mentioned in the lead paragraph (the W symbol is already explained with wolfram), but in the history section where there is more room for writing things out and explaining, together with "spumi lupi".
>> wolframite (which was later named for Woulfe)
>> In 1781 Carl Wilhelm Scheele ascertained that a new acid could be made from tungstenite
Femto 20:53, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
---
I don't see why it should necessarily have to come from German? Anyhow, "everybody else" doesen't ignore the name Wolfram, as a matter of fact, most languages still retain it over Tungsten.-- TVPR 07:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
---
Yes, the name Wolfram comes from the German "Wolf Rahm" meaning the froth of the wolf. This is a name based on the wolf-like way that tungsten reacts with liquid tin. The name Wolfram was given by the brothers José and Fausto Elhuyar to whom the discovery of tungsten is attributed. / PJM, Sweden 75.148.70.237 ( talk) 14:06, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
It says
Does it make sense: "...and knives for drills..."? Maybe: "...and knives, for drills..."? 94.5.82.115 ( talk) 14:26, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
This I think was ment with that. A knive from WC would be stupid to do.-- Stone ( talk) 17:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I changed the sentence "... has the highest melting point of all elements" to "... has the second highest melting point of all elements", as carbon has a higher melting point than tungsten (3500 K vs. 3410 K). Note that I am talking about MELTING point, not BOILING point, and about all elements (as it is stated in the original sentence), not only metals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.188.120.242 ( talk) 12:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
In the Uses section it talks about "Victor" inventing a tungsten stylus for records. Who's Victor? It seems oddly written and the citation isn't real. The page is protected right now so I can't do anything about it 64.132.80.134 ( talk) 22:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Victor Talking Machine Company is the thing I found.-- Stone ( talk) 06:00, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
No mention of a Tungsten record needle on that page though, and still the "citation" doesn't link to an outside source 64.132.80.134 ( talk) 19:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Does http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8874460 (from http://what-if.xkcd.com/89/ ), which details a case of acute tungsten toxicity, have any place here?-- Prosfilaes ( talk) 07:18, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
General Content in the applications section
The following statement appears at the end of the "applications" section:
"Lately, tungsten is used for jewelry because of its longevity and high durability."
This sentence is a standalone paragraph and the information provided is already included in the applications sections. Also, the tone also seemed a bit inconsistant with the rest of the article. I removed the sentence, but it the was replaced.
I should have mentioned the proposed edit here first. I still think that the sentence should be removed, but I made the mistake of making the change without discussing it here. 206.197.156.11 ( talk) 17:19, 9 September 2009 (UTC) K Mlnarik 9/9/09
Measuring the half life of Tungsten
Given that the half-life is so long and that decay is therefore a very rare event I would like to ask how it is possible to accurately measure its half life? For example if a reasonable mass of Tungsten only has one theoretical atomic decay a year there is a real statistical chance (by random variation) that none or more may occur and so one would surely need to measure over an unfeasible period of time? Also such a low rate would surely be masked by contamination and background radiation or re-absorption of emitted particles? Could an explanation of the method be added as a link? [ManInStone].
I would suggest changing the reporting of half lives to standard form i.e. x*10^n.
Are +2, +3, +4, +5 common oxidation states?
There were minimum oxidation state -2. Replaced it with +2, because metals do not have negative oxidation states. -- Yyy 08:25, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
I disagree. The minimum should be -2. A real example is the compound Na2W(CO)5 (sodium pentacarbonyltungstate), where assigning CO as a neutral ligand gives you a tungsten oxidation state of -2! I think there also may be a [W(CO)4]4- salt also. John Ellis and his group at the Univ. of Minnesota were very active in these low oxidation state compounds. habrahamson 08:55 CDT 2006-10-25
Reference 72 looks bogus. The book title is irrelevant, and the link points to an unviewable page in Google books. [Rich Schroeppel 140701.1331MDT] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.250.219.84 ( talk) 19:33, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
"In the prelude to WWII China's production of tungsten played a role as China could use this leverage to demand material assistance from the US government. [1]
"
This is a very dubious claim. China was unable to export much of anything after the Japanese invasion in 1937, so it did not supply tungsten to the United States and had no such leverage. The source cannot be legitimately described as "news": Skolnick was a lone-wolf scandalmonger, sensationalist, and conspiracy believer who has been dead since 2006. Whatever was "reprinted" on this now-dead website may not even have originated with him. Rich Rostrom ( Talk) 06:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
The IMA have, since 2011, recognized tungsten as a mineral. See Min Mag 75 (and the current master list). A legacy comment in the second paragraph states otherwise. I'm having trouble finding a source discussing its initial discovery. American Mineralogist, Volume 96, 1166-1170 makes note of it when introducing a new mineral, Yttriaite-(Y), found embedded within native tungsten. Also The finding of native tungsten microcrystals in Bilokorovychi proterozoic conglomerates of the Volyn region (in Russian). Dong, where is my automobile? ( talk) 16:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Heaviest element (non-transuranic) would be uranium. The bacterium citrobacter absorbs it, so does the lichen trapelia involuta. However, tungsten is a heavier metal (g/cm³). I think it is just confusion over atomic weight vs. elemental density. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.181.196.142 ( talk) 02:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Tungsten. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:50, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Tungsten has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Other sources state that the element with the highest point is CARBON at around 3500°C. Which suggests that this statement is incorrect The free element is remarkable for its robustness, especially the fact that it has the highest melting point of all the elements. 141.0.157.169 ( talk) 01:48, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
I understand that there are some risks to people choosing to use tungsten in a ring to be worn on fingers. The hardness of the material makes it (1) more likely that a major finger injury will occur if the ring is caught on an object, and (2) more difficult to remove by emergency personnel in the event of a finger injury. Specifically with (2), if a finger is injured, the finger is likely to swell. Rings must be removed (normally cut off as they will no longer fit over the swollen finger) to prevent the ring from cutting off blood circulation to the finger. If the ring cannot be removed, it begins to act like a tourniquet, resulting in the eventual loss of the finger due to loss of blood flow and consequent gangrene. Because tungsten rings are so hard, special tools must be stocked by emergency personnel that allow them to break the ring and remove it from the finger in the event of an injury.
I believe this risk to those considering the purchase of a tungsten ring, or to those already wearing them, should be mentioned in the Applications section of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bloemer ( talk • contribs) 15:58, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Good luck seeing these happen... Double sharp ( talk) 02:13, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
If this is the case, why isn't it true for uranium, which has significant 5f-6d hybridisation and directional bonding? Double sharp ( talk) 06:59, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
This is the English wiki... why no english units in parens by the metric numbers? Are you trying to alienate everyone born before 1975?? Msjayhawk ( talk) 02:00, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Article changed over to new Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements format by maveric149. Elementbox converted 11:12, 14 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 15:26, 12 July 2005)
I thought tungsten oxide is a volatile oxide (hence not protective), which is why light bulbs need to be evacuated or filled with inert gas - to prevent the oxidation of the tungsten at elevated temperatures.
The oxide would tend to crumble due to repeated expansion and contractions from dramatic heating and cooling of a light bulb filament as the light is repeatedly turned on and off. Even some air would get through at the super hot temperatures of the filament. The oxide would tend to block the light given off.
Why is there a sentance stating the "resistance" of tungsten at the bottom of this paragraph? The material properties column already lists the resistivity of tungsten which is a much more fundamental material property.
The isotope stability information on this page is wrong [5]
I have removed |critical point C=13620
and |critical point F=24800
from infobox W. These are not used in template:infobox element (do not show). -
DePiep (
talk) 15:03, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
How about rewording this -
(also for the fact that it has a higher melting point then any other non alloy in existence)
to this -
(also for the fact that it has the highest melting point of any metal, and the highest of any element except carbon)
Latter wording does provide consistency with info on the Osmium page, i.e. melting point for osmium is 4th highest behind carbon, tungsten...
-- VatievonHans ( talk) 23:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Marquet P, François B, Vignon P, Lachâtre G. A soldier who had seizures after drinking quarter of a litre of wine. Lancet. 1996 Oct 19;348(9034):1070. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8874460
Marquet P, François B, Lotfi H, Turcant A, Debord J, Nedelec G, Lachâtre G. Tungsten determination in biological fluids, hair and nails by plasma emission spectrometry in a case of severe acute intoxication in man. J Forensic Sci. 1997 May;42(3):527-30. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9144946
The photo caption says that tungsten mining is an important part of Rwanda's economy. Yet the Wikipedia article on Rwanda says that industry accounts for less than 15% of the country's GDP, and that wolframite is only one of its industrial products. How important to Rwanda is tungsten mining really? 213.127.210.95 ( talk) 18:28, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Many sources online give the boiling point of tungsten as 5555 C / 5828 K, including List_of_chemical_elements. Many others give a similar number 5660 C / 5933 K, or 5930 K, 5900 K, etc; and still others give the wildly different 5900-ish C or even 5600-ish K. I suspect these are errors where the units got mixed up. This article's 5930 C is consistent with this theory, since it's 5660+270. Regardless, we should have an actual source, or just default to what List_of_chemical_elements uses, if anyone knows what that is... Patallurgist ( talk) 05:49, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
I remember a coarse metal bar in elementary school gym being labeled tungsten that was lightweight and hollow. Is my memory wrong on this? -- Scottandrewhutchins ( talk) 00:44, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tungstem. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 19:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Tungston. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 ( talk) 19:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
I did this removal:
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Tungsten&oldid=prev&diff=920788821
It was reverted by user DePiep with the following reason: possible COI or advertising
I find this both a strange reversal, and a dubious explanation given. The text I removed is as follows: There are only a few UK based companies which specialise in machining this such as MGS precision in the heart of England.
Wikipedia is a international encyclopedia, if we are to mention a company that use this metal, it should be a good reason for it, and no such reason is given. Besides that, there is a direct link to the company web site in the text, something that as far as I know is not within the guidelines for Wikipedia. Add to that the reason given for the revert seems to be misleading, to say the least. I am the one removing a sentence possibly advertising, user DePiep revert it, so he let the advertising sentence be there.
I hope this is sufficient to make an admin look into this and revert what I regard as a inappropriate edit by DePiep. Ulflarsen ( talk) 21:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
As the user DePiep has accepted that the sentence can be removed, I do so. My reasons for removing it is several. First, this is a general article about Tungsten, its not about Tungsten in UK, Norway or any other country. To have this sentence seems to indicate that there is something special with the company mentioned, but if so, it should at least be supported by good sources, not a link to the company website. Second, as it stands the sentence reads more as an ad for the company, than adding useful information to the article about Tungsten. Ulflarsen ( talk) 08:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
The article mentions tungsten as the element that has the highest melting point (carbon stays solid longer) When I went to edit, it said not to mention carbon because it has no liquid state. I think this should be visible in the article, because it is misleading. Apricot2000 ( talk) 17:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
There is a whole book about this element. Double sharp ( talk) 04:58, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
The boiling point in this article is inconsistent. In the lead it is 5828K and in the infobox it is 6203K. Which is correct? TheForgottenKing ( talk) 03:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
This is 2021. No one calls Tungsten "wolfram". Can we not get rid of that obsolete reference? This is just silly. 73.6.96.168 ( talk) 07:03, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Whether the origin of the dispute over wolfram and tungsten would justify the retention of wolfram as an alternate name for element 74, only time will tell.So "tungsten" definitely dominates in English, but "wolfram" is not completely gone (just mostly gone). Double sharp ( talk) 10:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I have a novelty block of 99.95% pure tungsten. Rather surprised that a standard magnet sticks to the tungsten. Must be something about magnetic susceptibility. If this empirical fact is relevant, I don't know where it would fit in the article. Magnet won't stick to anything else non-ferrous. Or maybe I'm missing something. Rairden ( talk) 09:37, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
More than a decade ago, there is a similar discussion about this. However, I found this doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0123378 which said that some bacteria use uranium for respiration, which means it is biologically functional. So tungsten is not that heaviest element, uranium is. Nucleus hydro elemon ( talk) 06:10, 2 December 2022 (UTC)