Talk:Caesium fluoride
 | Caesium fluoride was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| Current status: Delisted good article | ||||||||||||||||
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Reaction
editWhy isn't this compound created by reacting caesium straight with fluorine?
- Seems like it be made that way, and maybe someone has even tried it. However, both Cs and F2 are extremely hazardous materials due to their reactivity. If the goal is "create a given thing from any starting material one wants", it's more practical to pick easier-to-handle stuff. Consider that if you want gaseous H2O, you could set off a giant hydrogen explosion, but in practice, most people would just boil a pot of water. DMacks 05:37, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- Also, making both Cs metal and F2 gas is very energy intensive. In theory, the energy could be recovered when they are reacted, but this would be inefficient. The above comment is right; cesium and fluorine would cause a violent explosion if mixed. --71.227.190.111 00:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
I am a tenth-grade Chemistry student, and I was wondering what the result of the ionic bonding of Cesium (explodes in water) and Fluorine (the most reactive element) is. Thank you Wikipedia :-) --- Dralwik|Have a Chat My Great Project 02:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
GA Review
editRe-reviewing this article to see if it continues to meet the current Good article criteria.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
- a (fair representation):
- It is stable.
- It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
- a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
- a (tagged and captioned):
- Overall:
- a Pass/Fail:
- a Pass/Fail:
I have converted the outdated reference formatting to inline citations, per WP:CITE. The article meets the citation requirement of the GA criteria. This article will keep its GA status. Cheers! Dr. Cash 06:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Francium Fluoride
editDoes it exist? 89.100.206.201 (talk) 17:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Not for long. Francium's extreme radioactivity would make that problematic. Jokem (talk) 02:44, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
- Theoretically, it exists; it's even quite possible that it's been made. However, Fr is so hard to come by that it's unlikely to have been made on a scale where you could see it, and I'm sure it's properties are mostly unknown. Walkerma (talk) 04:09, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Lead Section
editThe lead section needs work. Please help by checking and providing citations for the claims to ionic character and electronegativity. Also, please rewrite the leader in encyclopedic style. Kmva (talk) 19:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Caesium fluoride. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060116134617/http://www.npi.gov.au:80/database/substance-info/profiles/44.html to http://www.npi.gov.au/database/substance-info/profiles/44.html
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).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:43, 12 November 2016 (UTC)