Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of elements by name/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

List of elements by name

edit

This list was already in pretty good shape; I did some formatting and referencing, and added atomic weight/isotope information, and included notes on that. I think this is ready for FL status. --Spangineer (háblame) June 30, 2005 17:27 (UTC)

  • Comment, maybe some pictures in the space at the side? File:PhoenixSuns 100.pngPhoenix2File:Teamflag1.png 30 June 2005 19:49 (UTC)
  • Comment - It's good as far as it goes, but maybe it needs a bit more of a lead. One issue I was wondering was about the alternative names given. How common are they? Are they used in some English-speaking countries and not others, or are they obsolete names no longer used anywhere? In a list that's specifically by name, those sort of things are important. OpenToppedBus - My Talk July 1, 2005 08:59 (UTC)
  • Well, I started putting them in since the first one I ran into was Aluminium vs. Aluminum. After doing all of them, it looks like the majority are old names (maybe latin) that are the base for the element's symbol. For example, why is Potassium's symbol K? Because it was also named Kalium. I have no idea where or when it was named Kalium, however. All of those name differences are in that first reference mentioned. You may be right, it's just as easy to remove them (I think I'd like to leave the parenthetical references in, however). Also, any ideas for what else needs to go in the lead? Thanks for your comments. --Spangineer (háblame) July 1, 2005 12:10 (UTC)
  • Oppose I agree that it needs more of a lead as well as pictures. I'm not sure how pictures would be included in a list like this, but featured list criteria require them. I hope these problems will be solve and I can change my vote.--Sophitus July 1, 2005 14:59 (UTC) You know what, ALoan, you're absolutely right. Somehow I forgot that exception to the photo rule. I apologize for any inconvenience, Support--Sophitus July 1, 2005 17:51 (UTC)
  • Support - it is a rather limited list, but it does what it says on the tin. All sorts of other information could be added (electron configuration, group and period in the period table, physical characteristics like melting point) but I think this is fine as it is. -- ALoan (Talk) 1 July 2005 16:06 (UTC)
    • ... And now it has so much more. If anyone wanted images so that the table didn't look so dull and drab, take a look at it now =). I added colums with the group/period info, and color coded the whole thing according to the groupings on Periodic table (large version). I don't think that physical characteristics should go on this list; they should get their own list. Electron configuration is a possibility, but would take up alot of space and I'm not sure it would fit on smaller screens. It's a great idea for another list, however. --Spangineer (háblame) July 1, 2005 21:59 (UTC)
  • Support -- I don't like the garish colours though. =Nichalp «Talk»= July 2, 2005 18:03 (UTC)
  • Would you prefer a monochromatic table, or colors that were more dull? I used the same colors that are used on the periodic table (and several other chemistry lists) but I'd be willing to work with you and whoever else to find a less jarring color combination. --Spangineer (háblame) July 3, 2005 20:54 (UTC)
That would be pleasing to the eye yes. How about using only greens or blues? =Nichalp «Talk»= July 4, 2005 07:30 (UTC)
Right now there are 10 different categories, so I'm not sure if there are enough shades of green and blue for the colors to be distinctive. What about using browns and grays as well, and just getting rid of the pinks/reds? Also, do you think that the color coding of the Periodic table (large version) is acceptable, or also garish? --Spangineer (háblame) July 5, 2005 14:10 (UTC)
I rather suspect that the colours are selected by a WikiProject (Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements, perhaps?) - we should not cut across schemes that are co-ordinated across Wikipedia without asking for their input. -- ALoan (Talk) 5 July 2005 17:26 (UTC)
Yeah, you're right; there is a rationale behind the colors. I think we might be stuck with what we've got right now, unless you prefer monochromatic, which in my opinion isn't as helpful. --Spangineer (háblame) July 5, 2005 23:03 (UTC)
No probs with that if there is an official colour listing. =Nichalp «Talk»= July 9, 2005 05:16 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_elements_by_name/archive1&oldid=1138486378"