![]() | 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 |
How can an element with Mohs hardness of 7.0 be described as 'soft'? (Puna)
Otavan Suuri Snsyklopedia (an encyclopaedia) dercribes vanadium as hard and easily malleable, but it doesn't mention its Mohs hardness. (Puna)
Why is Vandium described as a "bright white metal" in the article, while the sidebar states that it is "silvery gray metallic"? (67.162.95.21)
I checked the entry in the Merck Index (12th edition, ISBN 0911910-12-3 ) on Vanadium and it disagrees on several points with the text box on the article..
Merck gives melting point of 1917C , density of 6.11 gcm-3 at 18.7C, electrical resistivity of 248nΩ.m and a half-life for 50V of 6E15 year ( the referenced website gives a third halflife of 3.9E17 years ).
Anyone have definative answers on this? Normally I'd trust Merck as it's THE reference for chemists, but typos or errors in it can't be absolutly ruled out. Astaroth5 21:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
until disambig it would seem better to leave this stuff in - it could even develop into a separate subsection in the history. as an encylopedia it's better to be encyclopedic than not Mccready 14:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Femto, Seems we have a disagreement here. How should we resolve it? Mccready 08:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
The "isotopes" section is not very clear. I don't want to mess with it too much because I'm not sure what it means. Could someone who knows what it is supposed to say improve its English? -- Strait 22:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Pentavalent VOSO4 has been reported to be more than 5 times as toxic as trivalent V2O3 (Roschin, 1967).
VOSO4 is a tetravalent vanadium compound. Is this an error for V2O5?-- Syd Henderson 21:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
It is good. Make no changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djgrunge ( talk • contribs) 18:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
On the image supposedly showing Vanadium on the periodic table, Vanadium is not actually highlighted - it is shown as a plain pink box. Compare with the image showing Titanium - Vanadium doesn't have the darker colour. I lack a program to edit .svgs with - could someone edit the Vanadium image? It's the next element right of Ti (the second image linked), if someone doesn't know where it is but wants to edit. -- Danny252 ( talk) 18:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)--
Stone (
talk)
23:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC){{
cite journal}}
: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors=
(
help)--
Stone (
talk)
23:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Petergans ( talk) 09:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Article changed over to new Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements format by Dwmyers 15:20 Feb 26, 2003 (UTC) and Maveric149. Elementbox converted 14:30, 2 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 20:16, 5 June 2005).
Some of the text in this entry was rewritten from Los Alamos National Laboratory - Vanadium. Additional text was taken directly from USGS Vanadium Statistics and Information, from the Elements database 20001107 (via dict.org), Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (via dict.org) and WordNet (r) 1.7 (via dict.org). Data for the table was obtained from the sources listed on the subject page and Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements but was reformatted and converted into SI units.
Paragraph two of the "History" section read like it had been translated from a foreign language. I have attempted a more concise and aesthetically pleasing replacement. Also I've removed redundant text regarding the element's namesake since Vanadis only needs to be explained once. -- lizardo_tx ( talk) 04:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Its always fun debating one's perceptions of chemistry, and I am no super expert, but IMHO, the analogy to phosphate should be mentioned but not pushed too much. VOCl3/POCl3 and the very(!) limited existence of VO43- are the heart of the usual analogy. Acidify phosphate and what do you get? Phosphoric acid. One just cannot do that same experiment with vanadate except under extremely dilute solutions and even these resulting vanadic acid" (see the lame articles on titanic acid and silicic acid) are metastable. Phosphates do not readily form pentacoordinate or hexacoordinate alkoxides, hence the polyphosphates are chains whereas the stable polyvanadates feature octahedral V. My reading indicates that vanadate in proteins mainly is used to stabilize pentacoordinate sites: vanadate forms transition state analogues, since the pentacoordinate phoshorus intermediates cannot be observed directly. So in a way, the technique exploits the difference, not the similarity, between phosphate and vanadate.-- Smokefoot ( talk) 14:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
The two theories are that they are created by exchanging iron and magnesium from hem and chlorophyl by vanadium the second theory is that they where part of ascidian biochemistry and were deposited with the vanadium allready in place.Premović, Pavle I. (1986). "Vanadium in ancient sedimentary rocks of marine origin". Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. 50 (9).
doi:
10.1016/0016-7037(86)90248-6. {{
cite journal}}
: Text "pages 1923–1931" ignored (
help) --
Stone (
talk)
11:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
It's mentioned a lot, including uses and how it's manufactured, but an explanation for the improved qualities would be nice. Xasodfuih ( talk) 01:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
there are entire sections lacking any references. The article cannot pass its GAN with those sections remaining unreferenced. Nergaal ( talk) 00:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
The following book should be useful in checking and referencing the general physical and chemical properties: Emsley, John (2003). Nature's Building Blocks: An A-Z Guide to the Elements. Oxford University Press. pp. 483–487. ISBN 0198503407. Xasodfuih ( talk) 01:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Is there a compelling reason to change the spelling from American to British English? The first version of this article that has a word spelled in a distinct American/British variation spells the word "oxidized." Is there a reason to change this? The Seeker 4 Talk 16:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
A user has begun changing American English spellings to British English. Is there a compelling reason to make this change? According to the MOS the article should remain in American English unless a reason is presented to change it and consensus is established to change the spelling. I have reverted these spelling changes and notified the editor to discuss it on the talk page here. If someone demonstrates to me the article should be in British English, I will gladly revert my actions, but I believe my revert of these spelling changes is in line with MOS. Comments? The Seeker 4 Talk 16:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
There is no discussion that I can see. Does it have a history of vandalization? 114.148.201.33 ( talk) 11:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
At some point an administrator might determine that the semi-protection should be made indefinite. This is reserved for only the most vandalised articles
If you wish to edit the article: either post a request here and it will be considered - or - post an unprotect request at
Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and an uninvolved admin will look the situation over and discuss it with the protecting admin and maybe it will be done.
We're done here, no more arguing needed. Good-day.
Vsmith (
talk)
03:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Fine, understood the rationale, thanks. 205.228.108.58 ( talk) 05:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
The page currently states: "Roscoe eventually produced the metal in 1867 by reduction of vanadium(II) chloride, VCl3, with hydrogen." There's got to be something wrong with that, since vanadium(II) chloride is VCl2, not VCl3. I'm not sure which of the two is really meant, but it seems worth pointing out for others who might. Norman Yarvin ( talk) 17:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
What is the meaning of "(although V2O3)" in "used in the manufacture of Ferro-Vandaium (although V2O3) it can be used as a dye and color-fixer."? -- Ben Best 13:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
"Organometallic chemistry of vanadium is well developed..." What does it mean for it to be "well developed?" --NotWillDecker —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.112.31 ( talk) 23:14, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Vanadinite2 sur goethite (Maroc).jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011
|
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC) |
In the article, it states that vanadium is a soft metal. The Mohs' hardness is 6.7, though, which is not soft. Why is this? -- 98.221.90.11 ( talk) 12:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
The creation section says Vanadium is formed in supernova, via the r-process. However, in the R-process article states that R-Process is responsible for half of the heavier-than-Fe elements, and that S-Process is responsible for the other half of heavier-than-Fe elements.
Notice the same problem with this concept that I did? Vanadium is lighter than Fe.
The section needs correction before expansion. :) Unfortunately being an electron microprobe specialist and not a particle physicist, I can't help any further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.120.124.199 ( talk) 16:33, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Vanadium etched.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 4, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-12-04. 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} 08:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
As you see, I just replaced this soon-to-be image of the month (above) with what I thought was a better one of vanadium bars at 99.95% (surface identical). Wups. I didn't know that this one was already "famous." Both are excellent images. My preference for the latter was a better scale sense and bulk sense in the bars (although you can see that the disc is about an inch wide). user:Alchemist-hp naturally prefers the other image, which he contributed. Do you have any idea about the purity, alchemist?
If anybody else working on this article has another opinion, please note it here (you can go back to one of my former versions of this article to see what the infobox looks like with the bar image). I'm going to go back to my second choice, which is to move the high purity bars out of the "alloy" section where they were misplaced, and at least begin one of the "pure metal" sections with them. If anybody votes with me on the infobox image, we'll do the same with the disc instead, and use it as an early section lead-off image, but not in the infobox (that is, trade it with the bar image as now placed). S B H arris 17:50, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sbharris, both images are made by Alchemist-hp :-) Both samples, the disc and the cuboids, have the same purity of 99.95%. Current I prefer the "V-disc" for the info-box. It has a much better quality (high resolution + sharpness). It is featured and it was POTD. -- Alchemist-hp ( talk) 19:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I object to calling Rio's work the "discovery" of the element Vanadium. Finding a wacky compound and claiming "I think there is a new element in here", is not discovering an element. There are plenty of people who have falsely claimed to "discovered" an element based on strange qualities of some compound. To discover an element you either have to isolate the element and prove it is an element or, prove that your compound contains a new element, and Rio emphatically failed to do either of these.
This whole subject has a political element to it, because Mexicans have an intense nationalistic pride about this so-called "discovery" since Rio is the greatest Mexican chemist. Nevertheless, allowing false claims of discovery to make Mexicans feel good is not objective and is not in the interests of an honest encyclopedia. It was Selholm who first proved that vanadium existed and to him belongs the honor of discovery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Chamberlain ( talk • contribs) 17:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Basically we give credit to somebody who thinks they've found a new element by some criterion, gives the places it can be found, and turns out later to be RIGHT. That is all. People who later first isolate the element (if that is even possible) get honorable mention. S B H arris 18:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Vanadium crystal bar and 1cm3 cube.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on January 17, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-01-17. 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} 17:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Just a little unclearity about how Henry Enfield Roscoe "produced the metal in 1867 by reduction of vanadium(III) chloride, VCl3, with hydrogen". Vanadium(III) chloride article says "VCl3 is prepared by simply heating VCl4 at 160-170 °C under a flowing stream of inert gas, which sweeps out the Cl2." Vanadium tetrachloride says "VCl4 is prepared by chlorination of vanadium metal." Surly this is not how Roscoe first produced the metal, or at least not the VCl3. Can someone please clarify? JTTyler ( talk) 18:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, that makes a lot more sense - tracing the metal back to the rock ore. I,m assuming the VN was made by treating the powdered ore with ammonia. These methods are no longer used to make vanadium so this "Roscoe process" might be worth mentioning in the article space with these details. JTTyler ( talk) 18:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Roscoe used ore from Alderley Edge, which was at that time a copper and cobalt mine, he says that this was the first source of larger quantities of vanadium he was aware of. He uses the reaction of vanadium oxide with ammonia, the same reaction berzelius claimed to have used to produce vanadium metal.-- Stone ( talk) 12:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The discoverer's name in this section was somehow temporarily vandalized to "a loser who lives in his parents basement" even though the reference was correct. With no edits, after several minutes the text again displays correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.250.177.83 ( talk) 14:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I changed vakuum to vacuum, thinking this was an error in translation from a German page. It was reverted in two minutes. I'm curious as to the reason, and I expect there is one. SpareHeadOne 00:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpareHeadOne ( talk • contribs)
The IMA have, since 2012, recognized vanadium as a mineral. See Min Mag 77 (and the current master list). Also Discovery of Native Vanadium, a New Mineral from the Colima Volcano, State of Colima (Mexico). Legacy comments in the lead, and in the occurrence section, state otherwise. My prose is too bad to touch a GA, but maybe this is of interest to other editors. Dong, where is my automobile? ( talk) 00:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to calculate how many protons, neutrons, and electrons are in a Vanadium 2+ ion with a molar mass of 53 grams per mole? If so please post on the comments page the instructions for the calculations. Thanks.
Well, it's fairly simple. The number of protons and neutrons is unaffected by the ion state. The protons in a single ion of Va2+ is equal to the atomic number. To know the number of neutrons you need to know the isotope of Va the ion represents; it is then the atomic weight minus the atomic number. The number of electrons in an electrically neutral atom is equal to the number of protons. To get a given positive charge, you subtract the charge from the number of electrons in the electrically neutral atom.
Vanadium has a significant biological role aside being present in an alternative nitrogenase. For example, V(III) has a role in tunic synthesis in ascideans, V(IV) is involved peroxidase and catalase activity in some toadstools, and V(V) is certain defensive halogen peroxidases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Semoderm ( talk • contribs) 06:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't Vanadium also be in Category:Biology and pharmacology of chemical elements ? Eldin raigmore ( talk) 18:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vanadium. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
The article is missing some information on the largest producers of Vanadium (companies, countries, regions). Also: Is Vanadium mostly a byproduct of mines exploiting primarily other stuff, or is Vanadium mining mainly a standalone operation? If the latter: What are its byproducts? -- BjKa ( talk) 12:22, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Much of the world's vanadium production is sourced from vanadium-bearing magnetite found in ultramafic gabbro bodies. Vanadium is mined mostly in South Africa, north-western China, and eastern Russia. In 2013 these three countries mined more than 97% of the 79,000 tonnes of produced vanadium.[36]
Is this the information you were looking for? -- Stone ( talk) 17:39, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)</ref>
[3]Alot of maintenance tags on this. If someone is keen to resolve these then we can look at other issues. AIRcorn (talk) 11:22, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Similarly to the situation with Pd, the article frequently strays from the main topic and has some MoS issues as well. Would probably require a rewrite to re-achieve GA status, which will certainly come in time. Will give 7 more days to see if substantial improvements are made to the article, but it doesn't appear too likely. Utopes ( talk / cont) 00:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Nothing major stands out to me in terms of needing improvement. The content is all suitable, but could use some light copyediting in terms of punctuation and transition. This is something that I might do after this list is complete. Done.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
22:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
"Some sources" is weaselly, and "perhaps" does not give confidence to the reader about the validity of the claim.
I believe that this section goes far too in depth with information about vanadium pentoxide, and includes information that is far more suitable on the compound's article rather than in the article for Vanadium. While I don't disagree that vanadium pentoxide is an important use for vanadium, it is not the primary topic of the article, and the article's pacing could better be spent discussing the chemistry of pure vanadium.
All of the subsections should probably be combined, and try to be woven more coherently together. I would start at a macro scale before moving down to small scale, all in one section. An example of this would be starting at the presence of vanadium in the universe, then the earth's crust, and then how it is found on earth (whether it's in seawater or bauxite). From there, I would make a subsection talking about where on earth vanadium is found, and what countries produce the most of it.
I've been letting this word slide earlier, but "Vanadium is more important in marine environments than terrestrial" is subjective in the terms that anybody can deem what they think is more important to them, and I'd recommend that this sentence be altered or removed. I'd also say that this section is far too long. By this I mean that the concentration of vanadium in the blood of ascidians isn't important enough to include in the article, but because importance is suggestive, I won't push for the removal of this content.
I probably wouldn't have GAR'ed this article, but because it was, I figured I would follow through with the review because there were several problems that needed addressing. With that being said, the fixes needed above are all that I think are necessary in order to bring the article back to GA status. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
While titanomagnetites are a major source there use will normally require the separation of vanadium from the titanium (and sometimes from the iron) the article has little or no information on the process used. I believe the ore is sometimes heated with alkali hydrogen sulphate and the leached but I don't know the importance of this and its further processing. I have read that some chromite ores also carry vanadium. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.227.15.253 ( talk) 09:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
What foods include V and its positive and negative effects on health should be expanded. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10381252 is a possible source. Kdammers ( talk) 15:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
-- Stone ( talk) 20:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Keresluna ( talk · contribs) 04:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
(Criteria marked
are unassessed)
@ Praseodymium-141: I will take on the review, however, it will take me awhile to read the whole article.
Thanks for taking up the review! I might not be very free over the next few weeks, so I might take some time to respond to comments. 141 Pr { contribs} 07:49, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I think that would be it for my grammar and prose comments. Keres🌕 Luna edits! 15:54, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Sorry for the late responses, I have been working on my own GAN, but I am free now. Here are some more comments. Keres🌕 Luna edits! 15:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Page number needed: 2, 6, 12, 29, 32, 38, 39, 40, 45, 46
Fix dead link: 67
Still doing this... Keres🌕 Luna edits! 03:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
@ Praseodymium-141: I see that the refs have been cleaned up by another person. I don't see any more issues, so I will pass this article. Keres🌕 Luna edits! 23:22, 19 April 2023 (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 |
How can an element with Mohs hardness of 7.0 be described as 'soft'? (Puna)
Otavan Suuri Snsyklopedia (an encyclopaedia) dercribes vanadium as hard and easily malleable, but it doesn't mention its Mohs hardness. (Puna)
Why is Vandium described as a "bright white metal" in the article, while the sidebar states that it is "silvery gray metallic"? (67.162.95.21)
I checked the entry in the Merck Index (12th edition, ISBN 0911910-12-3 ) on Vanadium and it disagrees on several points with the text box on the article..
Merck gives melting point of 1917C , density of 6.11 gcm-3 at 18.7C, electrical resistivity of 248nΩ.m and a half-life for 50V of 6E15 year ( the referenced website gives a third halflife of 3.9E17 years ).
Anyone have definative answers on this? Normally I'd trust Merck as it's THE reference for chemists, but typos or errors in it can't be absolutly ruled out. Astaroth5 21:07, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
until disambig it would seem better to leave this stuff in - it could even develop into a separate subsection in the history. as an encylopedia it's better to be encyclopedic than not Mccready 14:41, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi Femto, Seems we have a disagreement here. How should we resolve it? Mccready 08:09, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
The "isotopes" section is not very clear. I don't want to mess with it too much because I'm not sure what it means. Could someone who knows what it is supposed to say improve its English? -- Strait 22:21, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Pentavalent VOSO4 has been reported to be more than 5 times as toxic as trivalent V2O3 (Roschin, 1967).
VOSO4 is a tetravalent vanadium compound. Is this an error for V2O5?-- Syd Henderson 21:07, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
It is good. Make no changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Djgrunge ( talk • contribs) 18:10, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
On the image supposedly showing Vanadium on the periodic table, Vanadium is not actually highlighted - it is shown as a plain pink box. Compare with the image showing Titanium - Vanadium doesn't have the darker colour. I lack a program to edit .svgs with - could someone edit the Vanadium image? It's the next element right of Ti (the second image linked), if someone doesn't know where it is but wants to edit. -- Danny252 ( talk) 18:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Missing or empty |title=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)--
Stone (
talk)
23:41, 9 December 2008 (UTC){{
cite journal}}
: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors=
(
help){{
cite journal}}
: Cite uses deprecated parameter |authors=
(
help)--
Stone (
talk)
23:59, 9 December 2008 (UTC)Petergans ( talk) 09:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Article changed over to new Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements format by Dwmyers 15:20 Feb 26, 2003 (UTC) and Maveric149. Elementbox converted 14:30, 2 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 20:16, 5 June 2005).
Some of the text in this entry was rewritten from Los Alamos National Laboratory - Vanadium. Additional text was taken directly from USGS Vanadium Statistics and Information, from the Elements database 20001107 (via dict.org), Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (via dict.org) and WordNet (r) 1.7 (via dict.org). Data for the table was obtained from the sources listed on the subject page and Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements but was reformatted and converted into SI units.
Paragraph two of the "History" section read like it had been translated from a foreign language. I have attempted a more concise and aesthetically pleasing replacement. Also I've removed redundant text regarding the element's namesake since Vanadis only needs to be explained once. -- lizardo_tx ( talk) 04:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Its always fun debating one's perceptions of chemistry, and I am no super expert, but IMHO, the analogy to phosphate should be mentioned but not pushed too much. VOCl3/POCl3 and the very(!) limited existence of VO43- are the heart of the usual analogy. Acidify phosphate and what do you get? Phosphoric acid. One just cannot do that same experiment with vanadate except under extremely dilute solutions and even these resulting vanadic acid" (see the lame articles on titanic acid and silicic acid) are metastable. Phosphates do not readily form pentacoordinate or hexacoordinate alkoxides, hence the polyphosphates are chains whereas the stable polyvanadates feature octahedral V. My reading indicates that vanadate in proteins mainly is used to stabilize pentacoordinate sites: vanadate forms transition state analogues, since the pentacoordinate phoshorus intermediates cannot be observed directly. So in a way, the technique exploits the difference, not the similarity, between phosphate and vanadate.-- Smokefoot ( talk) 14:50, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
The two theories are that they are created by exchanging iron and magnesium from hem and chlorophyl by vanadium the second theory is that they where part of ascidian biochemistry and were deposited with the vanadium allready in place.Premović, Pavle I. (1986). "Vanadium in ancient sedimentary rocks of marine origin". Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. 50 (9).
doi:
10.1016/0016-7037(86)90248-6. {{
cite journal}}
: Text "pages 1923–1931" ignored (
help) --
Stone (
talk)
11:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
It's mentioned a lot, including uses and how it's manufactured, but an explanation for the improved qualities would be nice. Xasodfuih ( talk) 01:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
there are entire sections lacking any references. The article cannot pass its GAN with those sections remaining unreferenced. Nergaal ( talk) 00:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
The following book should be useful in checking and referencing the general physical and chemical properties: Emsley, John (2003). Nature's Building Blocks: An A-Z Guide to the Elements. Oxford University Press. pp. 483–487. ISBN 0198503407. Xasodfuih ( talk) 01:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Is there a compelling reason to change the spelling from American to British English? The first version of this article that has a word spelled in a distinct American/British variation spells the word "oxidized." Is there a reason to change this? The Seeker 4 Talk 16:56, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
A user has begun changing American English spellings to British English. Is there a compelling reason to make this change? According to the MOS the article should remain in American English unless a reason is presented to change it and consensus is established to change the spelling. I have reverted these spelling changes and notified the editor to discuss it on the talk page here. If someone demonstrates to me the article should be in British English, I will gladly revert my actions, but I believe my revert of these spelling changes is in line with MOS. Comments? The Seeker 4 Talk 16:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
There is no discussion that I can see. Does it have a history of vandalization? 114.148.201.33 ( talk) 11:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
At some point an administrator might determine that the semi-protection should be made indefinite. This is reserved for only the most vandalised articles
If you wish to edit the article: either post a request here and it will be considered - or - post an unprotect request at
Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and an uninvolved admin will look the situation over and discuss it with the protecting admin and maybe it will be done.
We're done here, no more arguing needed. Good-day.
Vsmith (
talk)
03:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Fine, understood the rationale, thanks. 205.228.108.58 ( talk) 05:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
The page currently states: "Roscoe eventually produced the metal in 1867 by reduction of vanadium(II) chloride, VCl3, with hydrogen." There's got to be something wrong with that, since vanadium(II) chloride is VCl2, not VCl3. I'm not sure which of the two is really meant, but it seems worth pointing out for others who might. Norman Yarvin ( talk) 17:13, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
What is the meaning of "(although V2O3)" in "used in the manufacture of Ferro-Vandaium (although V2O3) it can be used as a dye and color-fixer."? -- Ben Best 13:50, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
"Organometallic chemistry of vanadium is well developed..." What does it mean for it to be "well developed?" --NotWillDecker —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.9.112.31 ( talk) 23:14, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Vanadinite2 sur goethite (Maroc).jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011
|
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:44, 29 July 2011 (UTC) |
In the article, it states that vanadium is a soft metal. The Mohs' hardness is 6.7, though, which is not soft. Why is this? -- 98.221.90.11 ( talk) 12:31, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
The creation section says Vanadium is formed in supernova, via the r-process. However, in the R-process article states that R-Process is responsible for half of the heavier-than-Fe elements, and that S-Process is responsible for the other half of heavier-than-Fe elements.
Notice the same problem with this concept that I did? Vanadium is lighter than Fe.
The section needs correction before expansion. :) Unfortunately being an electron microprobe specialist and not a particle physicist, I can't help any further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.120.124.199 ( talk) 16:33, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Vanadium etched.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 4, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-12-04. 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} 08:58, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
As you see, I just replaced this soon-to-be image of the month (above) with what I thought was a better one of vanadium bars at 99.95% (surface identical). Wups. I didn't know that this one was already "famous." Both are excellent images. My preference for the latter was a better scale sense and bulk sense in the bars (although you can see that the disc is about an inch wide). user:Alchemist-hp naturally prefers the other image, which he contributed. Do you have any idea about the purity, alchemist?
If anybody else working on this article has another opinion, please note it here (you can go back to one of my former versions of this article to see what the infobox looks like with the bar image). I'm going to go back to my second choice, which is to move the high purity bars out of the "alloy" section where they were misplaced, and at least begin one of the "pure metal" sections with them. If anybody votes with me on the infobox image, we'll do the same with the disc instead, and use it as an early section lead-off image, but not in the infobox (that is, trade it with the bar image as now placed). S B H arris 17:50, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Sbharris, both images are made by Alchemist-hp :-) Both samples, the disc and the cuboids, have the same purity of 99.95%. Current I prefer the "V-disc" for the info-box. It has a much better quality (high resolution + sharpness). It is featured and it was POTD. -- Alchemist-hp ( talk) 19:06, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
I object to calling Rio's work the "discovery" of the element Vanadium. Finding a wacky compound and claiming "I think there is a new element in here", is not discovering an element. There are plenty of people who have falsely claimed to "discovered" an element based on strange qualities of some compound. To discover an element you either have to isolate the element and prove it is an element or, prove that your compound contains a new element, and Rio emphatically failed to do either of these.
This whole subject has a political element to it, because Mexicans have an intense nationalistic pride about this so-called "discovery" since Rio is the greatest Mexican chemist. Nevertheless, allowing false claims of discovery to make Mexicans feel good is not objective and is not in the interests of an honest encyclopedia. It was Selholm who first proved that vanadium existed and to him belongs the honor of discovery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John Chamberlain ( talk • contribs) 17:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Basically we give credit to somebody who thinks they've found a new element by some criterion, gives the places it can be found, and turns out later to be RIGHT. That is all. People who later first isolate the element (if that is even possible) get honorable mention. S B H arris 18:54, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Vanadium crystal bar and 1cm3 cube.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on January 17, 2013. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2013-01-17. 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} 17:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Just a little unclearity about how Henry Enfield Roscoe "produced the metal in 1867 by reduction of vanadium(III) chloride, VCl3, with hydrogen". Vanadium(III) chloride article says "VCl3 is prepared by simply heating VCl4 at 160-170 °C under a flowing stream of inert gas, which sweeps out the Cl2." Vanadium tetrachloride says "VCl4 is prepared by chlorination of vanadium metal." Surly this is not how Roscoe first produced the metal, or at least not the VCl3. Can someone please clarify? JTTyler ( talk) 18:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, that makes a lot more sense - tracing the metal back to the rock ore. I,m assuming the VN was made by treating the powdered ore with ammonia. These methods are no longer used to make vanadium so this "Roscoe process" might be worth mentioning in the article space with these details. JTTyler ( talk) 18:53, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Roscoe used ore from Alderley Edge, which was at that time a copper and cobalt mine, he says that this was the first source of larger quantities of vanadium he was aware of. He uses the reaction of vanadium oxide with ammonia, the same reaction berzelius claimed to have used to produce vanadium metal.-- Stone ( talk) 12:17, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
The discoverer's name in this section was somehow temporarily vandalized to "a loser who lives in his parents basement" even though the reference was correct. With no edits, after several minutes the text again displays correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.250.177.83 ( talk) 14:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
I changed vakuum to vacuum, thinking this was an error in translation from a German page. It was reverted in two minutes. I'm curious as to the reason, and I expect there is one. SpareHeadOne 00:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpareHeadOne ( talk • contribs)
The IMA have, since 2012, recognized vanadium as a mineral. See Min Mag 77 (and the current master list). Also Discovery of Native Vanadium, a New Mineral from the Colima Volcano, State of Colima (Mexico). Legacy comments in the lead, and in the occurrence section, state otherwise. My prose is too bad to touch a GA, but maybe this is of interest to other editors. Dong, where is my automobile? ( talk) 00:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Does anyone know how to calculate how many protons, neutrons, and electrons are in a Vanadium 2+ ion with a molar mass of 53 grams per mole? If so please post on the comments page the instructions for the calculations. Thanks.
Well, it's fairly simple. The number of protons and neutrons is unaffected by the ion state. The protons in a single ion of Va2+ is equal to the atomic number. To know the number of neutrons you need to know the isotope of Va the ion represents; it is then the atomic weight minus the atomic number. The number of electrons in an electrically neutral atom is equal to the number of protons. To get a given positive charge, you subtract the charge from the number of electrons in the electrically neutral atom.
Vanadium has a significant biological role aside being present in an alternative nitrogenase. For example, V(III) has a role in tunic synthesis in ascideans, V(IV) is involved peroxidase and catalase activity in some toadstools, and V(V) is certain defensive halogen peroxidases. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Semoderm ( talk • contribs) 06:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't Vanadium also be in Category:Biology and pharmacology of chemical elements ? Eldin raigmore ( talk) 18:46, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Vanadium. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
The article is missing some information on the largest producers of Vanadium (companies, countries, regions). Also: Is Vanadium mostly a byproduct of mines exploiting primarily other stuff, or is Vanadium mining mainly a standalone operation? If the latter: What are its byproducts? -- BjKa ( talk) 12:22, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
Much of the world's vanadium production is sourced from vanadium-bearing magnetite found in ultramafic gabbro bodies. Vanadium is mined mostly in South Africa, north-western China, and eastern Russia. In 2013 these three countries mined more than 97% of the 79,000 tonnes of produced vanadium.[36]
Is this the information you were looking for? -- Stone ( talk) 17:39, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)</ref>
[3]Alot of maintenance tags on this. If someone is keen to resolve these then we can look at other issues. AIRcorn (talk) 11:22, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
Similarly to the situation with Pd, the article frequently strays from the main topic and has some MoS issues as well. Would probably require a rewrite to re-achieve GA status, which will certainly come in time. Will give 7 more days to see if substantial improvements are made to the article, but it doesn't appear too likely. Utopes ( talk / cont) 00:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
Nothing major stands out to me in terms of needing improvement. The content is all suitable, but could use some light copyediting in terms of punctuation and transition. This is something that I might do after this list is complete. Done.
Utopes (
talk /
cont)
22:04, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
"Some sources" is weaselly, and "perhaps" does not give confidence to the reader about the validity of the claim.
I believe that this section goes far too in depth with information about vanadium pentoxide, and includes information that is far more suitable on the compound's article rather than in the article for Vanadium. While I don't disagree that vanadium pentoxide is an important use for vanadium, it is not the primary topic of the article, and the article's pacing could better be spent discussing the chemistry of pure vanadium.
All of the subsections should probably be combined, and try to be woven more coherently together. I would start at a macro scale before moving down to small scale, all in one section. An example of this would be starting at the presence of vanadium in the universe, then the earth's crust, and then how it is found on earth (whether it's in seawater or bauxite). From there, I would make a subsection talking about where on earth vanadium is found, and what countries produce the most of it.
I've been letting this word slide earlier, but "Vanadium is more important in marine environments than terrestrial" is subjective in the terms that anybody can deem what they think is more important to them, and I'd recommend that this sentence be altered or removed. I'd also say that this section is far too long. By this I mean that the concentration of vanadium in the blood of ascidians isn't important enough to include in the article, but because importance is suggestive, I won't push for the removal of this content.
I probably wouldn't have GAR'ed this article, but because it was, I figured I would follow through with the review because there were several problems that needed addressing. With that being said, the fixes needed above are all that I think are necessary in order to bring the article back to GA status. Utopes ( talk / cont) 21:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
While titanomagnetites are a major source there use will normally require the separation of vanadium from the titanium (and sometimes from the iron) the article has little or no information on the process used. I believe the ore is sometimes heated with alkali hydrogen sulphate and the leached but I don't know the importance of this and its further processing. I have read that some chromite ores also carry vanadium. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.227.15.253 ( talk) 09:27, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
What foods include V and its positive and negative effects on health should be expanded. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10381252 is a possible source. Kdammers ( talk) 15:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
-- Stone ( talk) 20:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Keresluna ( talk · contribs) 04:21, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
(Criteria marked
are unassessed)
@ Praseodymium-141: I will take on the review, however, it will take me awhile to read the whole article.
Thanks for taking up the review! I might not be very free over the next few weeks, so I might take some time to respond to comments. 141 Pr { contribs} 07:49, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
I think that would be it for my grammar and prose comments. Keres🌕 Luna edits! 15:54, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Sorry for the late responses, I have been working on my own GAN, but I am free now. Here are some more comments. Keres🌕 Luna edits! 15:47, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
Page number needed: 2, 6, 12, 29, 32, 38, 39, 40, 45, 46
Fix dead link: 67
Still doing this... Keres🌕 Luna edits! 03:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
@ Praseodymium-141: I see that the refs have been cleaned up by another person. I don't see any more issues, so I will pass this article. Keres🌕 Luna edits! 23:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)