Talk:Ferrihydrite

Neutrality issue resolved
The concern on the neutrality of viewpoints implied by the sentence 'A new structural model was proposed in 2007[17], but shown to be incorrect.[18][19][11]' has been resolved by rephrasing the sentence to 'A new structural model was proposed and has been refuted'. Other considerations in the paragraph below are either irrelevant or unsupported personnal views. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alain Manceau (talk • contribs) 15:16, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Dispute
The third paragraph on the article dedicated to ferrihydrite is a blatant break of the neutral point of view rules by the editor, Alain Manceau. This paragraph describes his work on this matter and the evidence in its favour is overblown. The final sentence 'A new structural model was proposed in 2007[17], but shown to be incorrect.[18][19][11]' is not at all the case. There is still much debate in the scientific literature on the structure of this phase and the model proposed by Michel et al (ref 17) is seen by many as a viable alternative to the so called 'standard model'. Wikipedia is not the forum for this kind of debate and for the editor to make it sound like the issue is settled is nothing more than propaganda. 81Rich, Dec 2009

Major work accomplished on this article
Completely in agreement with remarks by DIV (128.250.204.118 09:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC) posted below. Document revised accordingly. The reference list may seem a little long, but it is comprehensive. Please, don't add minor contributions to the reference list (there are several hundreds articles on this topic) to keep it useful. Thanks. --Alain Manceau (talk) 00:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Major work needed on this article
The article is quite wrong.

Ferrihydrite is a poorly crystalline / nanocrystalline ferric oxyhydroxide with indeterminate formula (but see references below for better approximations).

FeOOH would represent poorly crystalline goethite, which is something entirely different.

Prior to its official recognition in 1973, ferrihydrite precipitates were often called "hydrous ferric oxide" (or HFO). ...Unfortunately, some non-experts continue to refer to ferrihydrite as HFO and they/others also refer to other indeterminate/amorphous/nanocrystalline phases (e.g. poorly crystalline goethite) as HFO too.

To at least get the basic facts right see and
 * JOHN L. JAMBOR and JOHN E. DUTRIZAC; “Occurrence and Constitution of Natural and Synthetic Ferrihydrite, a Widespread Iron Oxyhydroxide”;  Chemical Reviews;  American Chemical Society;  1998;  98 (7): pp. 2549–2585.
 * ROCHELLE M. CORNELL and UDO SCHWERTMANN; The Iron Oxides : Structure, Properties, Reactions, Occurences and Uses, Second Edition;  Wiley–VCH, Weinheim, Germany;  2003;  664 pp.

Good luck!

— DIV (128.250.204.118 09:49, 26 June 2007 (UTC))


 * Well done to those who've contributed to making this article better :-)    —DIV (128.250.80.15 (talk) 01:42, 6 March 2008 (UTC))

Floater?
This substance is the thin layer that floats on water yes? The one you can make by boiling water in an iron pot and leaving it a couple of days. The film is mistaken for oil pollution. If someone could confirm this I would like to put a photo on the site.Polypipe Wrangler 02:01, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Ferrihydride
Ferrihydrite the same as Ferrihydride? If yes, should be mentioned 129.132.210.82 (talk) 19:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Never heard of ferrihydride before. Ferrihydrite was given lots of names by different groups before ferrihydrite became conventional/official.  It is possible ferrihydride is another variation used in a specific community.  However ferrihydrite comes in many different forms, so caution is required, as ferrihydride cuold well be intended to refer only to one ...or to none!
 * —DIV (128.250.80.15 (talk)) —Preceding comment was added at 01:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * A quick search gives the impression that Ferrihydride is used by some authors as an alternate spelling for the same substance, although it's much less common (235 hits rather 60 000 on Google). Not sure if it deserves mention. Philmarchand (talk) 20:24, 3 September 2008 (UTC)