Talk:Rare-earth element

Lede
The lede needs a different approach for accessibility. For example, after reading the entire lead, I cannot answer the rather simple question, are these substances solid, liquid or gas? That they are metals is indicative but not dispositive: mercury is a metal and it is a liquid; hydrogen is a metal and it is a gas. The general reader neither knows or cares what the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry is; my General Chemistry textbook defines the rare earth elements and that's plenty good authority. That organization name should be moved into a technical footnote. The second sentence about the actinides is placing a falsehood in one of the most important passages in the article - the actinides are not the lanthanides, and that's the end of the argument. That statement should be moved into the text and placed in a historical footnote.

The second paragraph of the lede is a bare list of the elements. Consider whether in an article about the chemical elements, we'd give a general description, then add a whole paragraph: "Their names are: ". The problem is that a bare list conveys no information, and it's a pernicious problem throughout the encyclopedia. The list here is especially superfluous because there's a whole level 2 section which is nothing but that list. We can omit the paragraph with no loss of information or readability.

The abbreviations section is rather garish; the abbreviations can be moved into a technical footnote.

So back to the lede: what do I experience if I have a "gob" of gadolinium on my tabletop (say in a chem lab)? Then again, if I'm digging in my backyard, and come across one of these, what do I see? Instead of a list of names, a paragraph describing one or a few of the commoner rare earths, and their applications, would be far more accessible. Here's what I propose for the first sentence of the lede: The rare earth elements, also called the rare earth metals or (in context) rare earth oxides, or the lanthanides (though yttrium and scandium are usually included as rare earths) are a set of 17 nearly indistinguishable lustrous silvery-white soft heavy metals. They are distributed thinly through the earth's crust, usually as oxides in minerals and clays containing silicon, iron, and other compounds. They are called "rare" because there are few concentrated or mineable deposits. Sbalfour (talk) 19:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

I've redrafted the lede a bit in accordance with the above, but it's still quite anemic. It could/should be 4-6 decent paragraphs incorporating at least the following:


 * a physical and chemical description/definition of the substances
 * their names and applications
 * their physical and chemical properties
 * their analytical chemistry, such as atomic numbers, electron shell configurations, valence, and periodic table slots
 * their natural forms and distribution in the earth's crust
 * how they were discovered and named

This is sort of defines the structure of the article itself. Sbalfour (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I've fixed some previous edit that left the fragment "though yttrium and scandium," in a random place in the lead section. This fix could benefit from examination by someone familiar with the chemical nomenclature involved. David Spector (talk) 15:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Abundance of Cerium?
The lead section (final paragraph) states that Cerium has an abundance of "68 parts per million". However, the overview table lists its abundance as 66.5 ppm. Not much of a difference - but still a difference. Which one is correct? PatricKiwi (talk) 19:11, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Following up: I see that the difference can be explained from the table in the page Abundance of elements in Earth's crust. The 68 ppm figure comes from "Barbalace"; the 66.5 ppm figure comes from the CRC.  Would anyone object to changing the number in the lead section (final paragraph) to 66.5 (the CRC number), to make it the same as the overview table? PatricKiwi (talk) 19:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
 * That seems reasonable.David Spector (talk) 15:06, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Biological Role?
It is no longer true that the lanthanides have no known biological role. They have been found to be required in the active sites of several specialized enzymes. For instance various lanthanide dependent methanol dehydrogenases have been found (see https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2018.01366/full) Ethan801 (talk) 21:13, 25 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I have added this information to the article, in the lead section. David Spector (talk) 15:17, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

"rare earth"
There is a sentence about them not actually being rare but if the article even mentions WHY they are called "rare earth" it sure hides it well. Why not have it stated the naming off the topic instead of only trivia like a town one of them were named after? 64.72.40.86 (talk) 13:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
 * See the last paragraph in the introduction:
 * Because of their geochemical properties, rare-earth elements are typically dispersed and not often found concentrated in rare-earth minerals. Consequently, economically exploitable ore deposits are sparse (i.e. "rare").
 * It should merit some treatment beyond that, though. Mind  matrix  14:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Biogeochemical Cycles
— Assignment last updated by MethanoJen (talk) 01:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ERTH 4303 Resources of the Earth
— Assignment last updated by Naeim9146 (talk) 21:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Rare earths vs rare-earths
It seems most of the sources use "rare earths" and not "rare-earths", yet the entire article is written with the hyphen.

Perhaps we need to open a discussion about which style the article should use. 71.11.5.2 (talk) 16:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)


 * The article has been fixed, and hyphens are now only used as modifiers. 71.11.5.2 (talk) 13:44, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Round Top Mountain in Texas
Round Top Mountain isn't listed in this article. Leaving this here, in case it might be useful to some editor. • Sbmeirow  •  Talk  • 13:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024
— Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

A lot of new developments need to be added
There have been numerous new geopolitical developments with regards to REEs as they become increasingly important with the rise of EVs. For instance, there is lots of pressure from the west to break China's monopoly in the industry. MP Materials is on the verge of producing REEs independently from China, Gina Rinehart has entered the industry, and both the Biden and Trump administrations have imposed tariffs on REEs from China. Should we include these developments in this entry? I am not even seeing anything about MP materials here. Frankserafini87 (talk) 21:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)