Talk:Beryllium/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: FREYWA 14:09, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Welcome to the Mayhem Box, where anything can (and usually does) happen; that is, this is a GA review, and I am the reviewer. FREYWA 14:09, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

Ready for this?

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   Nergaal said about too many 1 and 2-sentence paragraphs. Consider merging, and also some punctuation errors.

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   "It is estimated..." at the start of Applications and possibly some others.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

   The Applications section digresses to all those esoteric topics, but still OK.

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   The article will do fine...

Comments from Nergaal

• Just a quick comment: the article has lots of one-sentence (or two) paragraphs, and quite a few without references. Nergaal (talk) 14:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Stone

• The naming of Glucinium, Glucinum by Vauquelin did not take place in the first publication, which has to be included [1], but in a later one. I somewhere read that the name was suggested by the editor.
• The original publication of Bussy should also be included. Which can be found in this google book: [2]
• fluorescent material for fluorescent lights sounds nice, but what is it. zinc beryllium silicate doi:10.1016/0013-9351(80)90008-0
• The subsection Magnetic_resonance_imaging#Projectile_or_missile_effect does no longer exist

--Stone (talk) 20:44, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Fix it. FREYWA 00:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Materialscientist

The prose is shaky. I went through the first two paras and will go further when time permits. Whoever can copyedit this topic (for flow, clarity, repetitions, wlinks, etc.) please do. Materialscientist (talk) 05:16, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Beryllium 9 Positron emission

In the May, 1985 National Geographic magazine (Worlds within the atom article) it says that the Fermi reactor in Chicago gets positrons for acceleration testing from EO4Be9. I think that this is worthy of note in the Beryllium article, and maybe with an explanation of how this is accomplished.WFPM (talk) 20:49, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The reference and the fact are there, it is worthy of inclusion. FREYWA 07:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't find any other contribution Re a positron emission by EO4Be9. And it is interesting because the result would be the creation of an atom of OE3Li9, which is a very unstable neutron emitter, with a much higher mass excess value, (40939 vs 11348 Kev) and indicating the existence of an unexplained method of pushing these light isotopes uphill energetically without further explanation.WFPM (talk) 13:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)