Talk:Copernicium/GA1

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

Reviewer: F R E  Y W A  05:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

This is my 6th GA, and as always, I may penalise this article for not being up to standards to prose and refs. I have no bias, but I have a sense of humour. The Chase is on! F R E  Y W A  05:39, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Although there's one kink left, it doesn't matter that much so I'll pass this article. F R E  Y W A  07:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Although there's one kink left, it doesn't matter that much so I'll pass this article. F R E  Y W A  07:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Although there's one kink left, it doesn't matter that much so I'll pass this article. F R E  Y W A  07:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you please specifically provide examples of prose errors? (Otherwise I don't know where to start looking for them in such a huge article!) Lanthanum-138 (talk) 10:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Examples of errors:

Best of luck in fixing these and finding more. Don't say GANDISEEG. F R E Y W A  16:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Difficulty of oxidation of the elements from its neutral state compared to group 12 elements has also been predicted. Is it copernicium or not? Redundant also.
 * During reactions with gold, it is shown to be a with a volatile metal and group 12 element. Erronoeusly added short words.
 * Fixed. About the mentioned "also", it's not that bad, the text seems to flow better with it, at least to me. Please change it if I'm wrong--R8R Gtrs (talk) 19:36, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  07:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Chemical properties
 * Extrapolated oxidation states
 * Copernicium is the last member of the 6d series of transition metals and the heaviest group 12 element in the Periodic Table, below zinc, cadmium and mercury. Not MOS compliant.
 * Oxidation of copernicium from its neutral state is also likely to be more hard, than those of previous group 12 members. Punctuation error and what is "more hard"?
 * Both done--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  18:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Among lighter group 12 members, for which +2 oxidation state is the most common, only mercury can show +4 oxidation state, but it is highly uncommon for this element, existing at only one compound at extreme conditions. For the first 2, the problem is there is no article. "For this element" is implied by "only mercury". The word "at" should be "in".
 * Diatomic ion Hg22+ featuring mercury in +1 oxidation state is well-known, but Cn22+ ion is predicted to be unstable or even non-existent. No article present.
 * Both done --Lanthanum-138 (talk) 14:28, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  04:56, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Experimental atomic gas phase chemistry
 * Copernicium has the ground state electron configuration [Rn]5f146d107s2 and thus should belong to group 12 of the periodic table, according to Aufbau principle. Generally, "the" should precede things named after persons (but not persons themselves).
 * I've been studying German since October, and I can tell you "Aufbau" is not a person. German word Bau comes from verb bauen, "build", and auf is most closely translated as "up". Therefore, the word means "building up" or something like that. Uppercase is due to that German nouns are always capitalized.--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh snap. Anyway, put "the" between "to" and "Aufbau". F R E  Y W A  18:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Nucleosynthesis
 * In hot fusion reactions, very light, high-energy projectiles are accelerated toward very heavy targets (actinides), giving rise to compound nuclei at high excitation energy (~40–50 MeV) that may either fission or evaporate several (3 to 5) neutrons. This is a contradiction to the first nuclear reaction in the article.
 * Done--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  18:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hot fusion
 * In March 1998, they claimed to have synthesized two atoms of the element in following reaction. Grammar error.
 * In 2000, Yuri Yukashev in Dubna repeated the experiment but was unable to observe any spontaneous fission from 5 minutes activities. Another slip of the tongue.
 * Check if now OK--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  18:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Decay product
 * To date, no other elements have known to decay to copernicium. Does this imply something absurd? Atoms are obviously nonliving.
 * Done --Lanthanum-138 (talk) 14:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  08:23, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * History
 * Official discovery
 * A single atom (the second has subsequently been dismissed) of copernicium was produced with a mass number of 277. Watch your tenses.
 * Past Simple, here you go--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  18:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Isotopes
 * Half-lives
 * Try and chunk this down: The most stable isotope, copernicium-283, has a half-life of 4.2 minutes, even through longer half-life for this isotope can occur, at 5 minutes, and copernicium-285 may have an isomer with an even longer half-life, 8.9 minutes. Copernicium-285 has a half-life of 29 seconds; other isotopes have half-lives only shorter than 0.1 seconds. Copernicium-281 and copernicium-284 have half-life of 97 ms, and the two other isotopes have half-lives slightly under a millisecond. Concerning areas are bolded.
 * Please explain what's wrong and give suggestions--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * two other - swapped words. only shorter - redundant "only". half-life, 8.9 minutes - break of flow, replace comma with "of". even through longer half-life for this isotope can occur, at 5 minutes - really bad structure, change to "although it is suspected that this isotope has an isomer with a half-life of 5 minutes". F R E  Y W A  18:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Done --Lanthanum-138 (talk) 14:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  04:56, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Nuclear isomerism
 * Although unconfirmed in recent experiments, it is highly possible that this is associated with an isomer, namely copernicium-285b. No source for this.
 * Hmmm, yeah, I've been trying to find some proof for it since the beginning of GAN (I found something for 283Cn). If anyone can help, please do so--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I've rewritten the paragraph and added two refs.--R8R Gtrs (talk) 19:28, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  07:01, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
 * However, more recently,283Cn has been observed to undergo 9.52 MeV alpha decay and SF with a half-life of 3.9 s. Minor typo.
 * Done--R8R Gtrs (talk) 18:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  18:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a thing I would like to see: the table in the section Theoretical calculations on evaporation residue cross sections should have the identical cells saying "Dinuclear system" merged into one, as should the cells having references 41 and 42.
 * I'm not sure how to do this, so leaving it first --Lanthanum-138 (talk) 14:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I do know how to, but I don't even see reason to keep the table, it's quite too technical and is not very interesting or notable, as well the subsection and even the neighboring one. I've had these feelings for some time time, so it's not spontaneous, and now finally removed--R8R Gtrs (talk) 09:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * F R E Y W A  11:53, 27 May 2011 (UTC)