Talk:Chromium/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

This article deserves GA status. It is well written, both for beginners and specialists; it is neutral, stable and well referenced (thus verifiable). The topic is clearly of top importance. There were minor problems with style, references and a few statements, but they were fixed in the review process. Some of the old comments are listed below. NIMSoffice (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * "Chromium boride (CrB) is used as a high-temperature electrical conductor"

A proper citation is needed here (beware that most web pages are simply copying wikipedia content and thus are not a good reference). There is no question that Cr borides are conductive, but, I'm not sure they are actually used as high-temperature conductors, and CrB is relatively rare compared to CrB2.


 * Right! In the first beginning I searched for a good ref, but forgot later about it. I will try to find something, but I would think it is not important enough for the article anyway.--stone


 * deleted the sentence --Stone (talk) 17:47, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I do not understand the sentences

"Chromium(III) chloride, the common commercial form of the hydrate is the dark green complex [CrCl2(H2O)4]Cl,"


 * substitute hydrate by chloride! If you buy Chromium(III) chloride you normally get the dark green complex not the waterfree compound.I will try to change the sentence in a way that is better to understand.--stone
 * The comercial available chromium(III) chloride hydrate is the dark green complex--stone

"It does suffer from nitrogen embrittlement and hence no straight chromium alloy has ever been developed."


 * chromium is reacting with nitrogen from air and forms nitrides at temeratures necessary to work the metal parts. This would make the material brittle. This property makes chromium based alloys (mare than 50% chromium) problematic. I will try to get a good ref for it.--Stone (talk) 09:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

and suspect they are wrong. Would someone fix them.

- temperature value is required here.
 * "The red brown compound is stable at room temperature but decomposes spontaneously at higher temperatures."


 * decomposes at 150-170°C added and added ref --stone


 * "This layer is a spinel structure only a few atoms thick and is very dense, preventing diffusion of oxygen into the underlying material. (In iron or plain carbon steels the oxygen migrates into the underlying material.)" - reference is required here.


 * I added a nice, but long, review from 1976 --stone

Please check. The discussion is about chromium(VI) and thus chromium(V) and chromium(IV) seem suspicious, and I can't access the reference given there.
 * "The second process includes the direct binding of chromium(V) and chromium(IV) compounds to the DNA."


 * added chromium(V), produced by reduction in the cell, and chromium(IV) so the Cr(V) is the proposed active species in the toxicity.-- stone

The headers in the infobox template are very misleading. For example, item "Crystal structure" is by no means atomic property and belongs to "Physical properties", as well as most items of "Miscellaneous".
 * This issue is technically irrelevant to the GA review, but it is important for all element pages.


 * I will have a look and discuss it with the elements project. --stone

I have put the GA nomination on hold.NIMSoffice (talk) 01:50, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I will try to work my way through it. --Stone (talk) 09:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)