Template:Did you know nominations/Ununennium
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 12:48, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
|
Ununennium
( )
- Back to T:TDYK
- Article history
- ... that ununennium is the element with the lowest atomic number that has not yet been synthesized?
Improved to Good Article status by Double sharp (talk). Nominated by SSTflyer (talk) at 13:54, 5 October 2015 (UTC).
Article passess!
Article:
- Has far more than 1500 characters
- Is not new, but has been expanded more than 5x by nominator in the past week
- Is Good Article status
- Has sufficient inline citations
- Meets core policies, etc.
Hook:
- Hook is interesting
- Hook is very concise and short
- Has a citation in article
Nominator:
- Has reviewed another article
- 5x expanded article
Well done! Fritzmann2002 7 October 2015 8:19 (UTC)
@Fritzmann2002 and SSTflyer: Sorry if I'm missing something, but can you point out where the hook fact is cited in the article? I can only find it in the lead, where it doesn't have a citation. 97198 (talk) 11:22, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
- "As ununennium is the lightest undiscovered element, it has been the target of synthesis experiments by both German and Russian teams in recent years." sst✈ 11:34, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
- Is atomic number directly correlated with mass (i.e. is "lightest" synonymous with "lowest atomic number")? Sorry if this is a very basic question – I have forgotten most of what I once knew about chemistry! 97198 (talk) 11:58, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
-
Apologies for inadvertently holding up this nomination. Personally I think that the hook fact should be plainly stated in the article and/or should be obvious to lay readers without requiring technical knowledge (in this case, about chemistry) to interpret it. But that's just my feeling and at a quick glance I couldn't see anything in the DYK rules about whether or not this is explicitly required, so I've slapped a re-review icon on so that someone else will hopefully drop by with a second opinion. Sorry if this all turns out to be a non-issue – I just want to be sure. 97198 (talk) 11:26, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
- This stuff is on the edge of science, the hook explains why. To say it is the "lightest" misses the point, it disappears before you can weigh it, see it, or touch it etc etc. This stuff is 100% useless, and 100% interesting (to science geeks) in 2015. I think we need to wave this through. If you have basic Chemistry/Physics then you will get this. DYK hooks are allowed about difficult to access modern art and this is the other side of the coin. I have rearranged the main hook fact below.Victuallers (talk) 21:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
- (Alt119)... that the first 118 elements have been synthesised and element number 119 is called ununennium?
- I only just passed high school chemistry by the skin of my teeth and the grace of a lab partner who understood what we were doing, decades ago, and I still remember that atomic number correlates directly to atomic mass (though IIRC there is a single exception). On the other hand, it would be helpful for the article to explicitly state that lowest number = lightest element, since Wikipedia readers include people who have not yet been to high school, as well as people who don't retain trivia the way I do. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 07:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- I found this link which seems to say that the atomic number only implies density. Can I suggest @SSTflyer: that you make the lede = the article = the hook as the latter looks like the easiest to source? It is a very nice and useful article. Victuallers (talk) 14:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
- Density has nothing to do with this. That's just introducing a confusion. Density is a property of a bulk material, like a crystal for instance. "Lightest" in the context of elements refers to the weight of an atom which does not correlate directly with density. SpinningSpark 15:52, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
- This is quite straightforward, normal terminology (I am not a chemist by the way, I am an electrical engineer). If this is the only issue holding up this nomination I recommend passing at this stage. The element articles are all written to Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements/Guidelines and many are Featured Articles. If an FA found it necessary to explain what "lightest" meant I might be prepared to change my mind, but the lightest element of all, hydrogen, is an FA and uses the term unadorned. SpinningSpark 16:05, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
- This is quite straightforward, normal terminology (I am not a chemist by the way, I am an electrical engineer). If this is the only issue holding up this nomination I recommend
- Density has nothing to do with this. That's just introducing a confusion. Density is a property of a bulk material, like a crystal for instance. "Lightest" in the context of elements refers to the weight of an atom which does not correlate directly with density. SpinningSpark 15:52, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
- I found this link which seems to say that the atomic number only implies density. Can I suggest @SSTflyer: that you make the lede = the article = the hook as the latter looks like the easiest to source? It is a very nice and useful article. Victuallers (talk) 14:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
- I only just passed high school chemistry by the skin of my teeth and the grace of a lab partner who understood what we were doing, decades ago, and I still remember that atomic number correlates directly to atomic mass (though IIRC there is a single exception). On the other hand, it would be helpful for the article to explicitly state that lowest number = lightest element, since Wikipedia readers include people who have not yet been to high school, as well as people who don't retain trivia the way I do. —GrammarFascist contribstalk 07:00, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
