Talk:Zinc/Archive 1

Article changed over to new WikiProject Elements format by Dwmyers 15:29 Feb 19, 2003 (UTC). Elementbox converted 15:21, 2 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 00:09, 2 July 2005).

Defect link
De following link doesnt work: http://www.iza.com/zwo_org/Publications/Discovering/0202.htm

Information Sources
Some of the text in this entry was rewritten from Los Alamos National Laboratory - Zinc. Additional text was taken directly from USGS Zn Statistics and Information, from the Elements database 20001107 (via [http://www.dict.org dict.org), Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (via dict.org) and WordNet (r) 1.7 (via dict.org). Data for the table was obtained from the sources listed on the subject page and WikiProject Elements but was reformatted and converted into SI units.

Word origin
zinc= Zn As to the origin of the word, from the Oxford Dictionary of English, 2nd ed.:
 * ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from German Zink, of unknown origin.

The article currently claims it's possibly from Old Persion. Anyone have any basis for this claim? eaolson 18:53, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Talk
Is any reason why in the table-image is 30P 35N (Zn-65) instead of 30p 34N (Zn-64 the most abundant estable isotope? Guillermo 14:52, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC) -

Löhneyes
I removed this line from the article:
 * The word "zink", as a term, was originally used by Löhneyes in 1697.

as it is unclear and possibly wrong. There are older uses of the word zinc (e.g. here, and the OED has zinke from 1651).

Vapor Pressure
Per the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, log(p/Pa)=5.006+A+B/T. For solid Zn, A = 6.102 and B = -6776; for liquid Zn, A = 5.378 and B = -6286. From this, I get p = 21.4 Pa for solid Zn. Not sure where the 192.2 value came from. Eric 18:09, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I don't know how you arrived at 21.4 Pa, but the article has apparently changed since you wrote your comment. The vapor pressure now seems to be in agreement with the formula you provided. Icek 17:58, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Reactions with an acid
Why in the description of the reaction with an acid does it say that zinc will yield hydrogen gas if impure? Shouldn't pure zinc also yield hydrogen gas?

Kevinpom 17:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Removed edits
I've removed some edits made by 63.164.145.85 because they are of dubious accuracy and completely unreference and unsupported. "On the other hand, it has been known for decades that when the free zinc ion concentration in water reaches levels of 100 nanomolar to 1 micromolar, all of the biota are killed, including the vertebrate fish. This has led marine biologists to develop what are known as the 'free metal' models of zinc toxicity. Free zinc in the body is also toxic. As little as 10 micromolar in fluids will harm and kill cells." See, which says zinc doesn't become toxic to the animal studied until into the millimolar range.

"The presence of zinc in ejaculate is the basis for crime-scene tests for ejaculate, which are merely tests for the high zinc concentration. No one knows why there is elevated zinc in ejaculate, though it has been proposed that the antimicrobial action of zinc ions might be useful for slowing infection in the reproductive system of the male and the female."

According to this, the test is for acid phosphatase, not zinc.

The purpose for zinc in semen appears to be complex and not as straighforward as being antimicrobial. This page lists three things zinc in semen does.


 * ACTUALLY, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER FOR ANY ROLE OF ZINC ION SEMEN, BUT THE ANTIMICRIBIAL HYPOTHESIS IS AT LEST PLAUSIBLE. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.151.205.181 (talk • contribs) 09:32, February 15, 2006.

"Swallowing a new (zinc) American penny often leads to lesion in the stomach wall, where the stomach acid brings so much zinc ion into solution that it chemically burns the tissue."

I can't find any support for this in a Google search. There was one case of a schizophrenic patient dying after ingesting dozens of coins, but not zinc lesions.

"This has been shown for the virus that causes the common cold, the duration of which is reliably shortened by application of millimolar concentrations of zinc ion into the mouth."

This is by far from certain. From, " The effect of zinc treatments on the severity or duration of cold symptoms is controversial... Additional research is needed to determine whether zinc compounds have any effect on the common cold.


 * Good move, I was thinking of removing those bits, but hadn't done the research yet to back up a revert. You've done some research, why not add your info to the article?
 * Added note: dissolve the zinc out of a new penny with HCl and you get zinc chloride plus about 0.87 litre of hydrogen gas. What the effects of that are in the stomach ... I don't know, and am not curious enough to try it :-) Vsmith 01:53, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi there zincophiles: I have put back essentially all of my input that was previously removed because and added references to guide other readers/editors in evaluating the ionformation. Thus, I have added back the fact that free zinc ions are lethal above a few hundred nanomolar to a few micromolar, and added a recent reference. Those interested in more information should go to MedLine (entrez pubmed) and look up "free metal zinc toxin" or similar. You will find that the marine biologists and agronomists have studied for decades how just a few micromolar of free zinc (i.e., Zn2+ in aqueous solution) is letal to everything, inculding vertebrate fish. Those who put 100's of micromolar or even milliomolar of zinc into solutions do not realize that most of the zinc either precipitates as hydroxides or is bound to (many) organic zinc binders. (For more refs see, e.g., Frederickson et al., Nature Reviews in Neuroscience, 2006)

I also put back the information about zinc tests for finding semen at the crime scene, with a reference.

Another issue that we need to confront is the lack of a heading on ""Medicinal uses of zinc salt." This is because zinc ions (free ions) are potent antimicrobials, and they have been shopwn eeffectsive against the common cold (see most recent review in MedLine). Zinc ions are one of the oldest know effecdtive antimicriobials, in fact. More on this later.

The AREDS study on zinc and macular degeneration claims that zinc in the diet helps slow AMD, but the effect is trivially small. I am doing some research on zinc in the retina, and NONE of the opthalmologists I know presecribe zinc for AMD. This is because (i) too much zinc intake blocks copper utilization, (ii) zinc may CONTRIBUTTE to AMD and (iii) the putative therapeutic effect is so small that it would not even justify the cost of the pills. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zincdoc (talk • contribs) 08:32, February 15, 2006 UTC.

Zinc in semen
I've removed again the language about the forensic tests testing for zinc. I don't think that a zinc test is what's actually used in practice in forensic testing. The given reference was an evaluation of using a zinc test alongside the "gold standard" of acid phosphatase, and concludes that zinc tesing alongside AP will give better results, but it doesn't say if that's what's currently used by forensic-type people. The little that I can find through Google (among the many paternity testing and infidelity testing services, oy) is that the standard forensic crime scene test is an AP test. If anyone can find a authoritative citation online, please list it. eaolson 23:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

OK I give on the forensic testing (for now :-))). However, I also removed the sentence about zinc concentration in the prostat bring the highest in the body. This is completely misleading because the zinc is not in the prostate tissue, it is in the prostatic fluid. This can be seen in the micrographs published by Danscher and colleages. Immediately after ejaculation, the prostate tissue per se is most probnably about like other soft tissue, i.e., around 70 - 120 ppm zinc dry weight. The zinc in the prostatic fluid, however, is 10 mM OR MORE !

Psoriasis
I've also removed the section on psoriasis. It was completely unsourced and flat out wrong in some cases. Calamine is zinc-oxide based, which mean it's probably going to be completely un-ionized, as far as I know. Again, citations and verifiability would be helpful. eaolson 02:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Toxicity
Should it be indicated that in most practical considerations, zinc is considered nontoxic to humans (as per the Handbook on Toxicity of Inorganic Compounds)?Murphyr 21:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

"wasting of body tissues"
Under the deficiency part. What does that mean?

mossy zinc
There should be some mention of mossy zinc - I expect several people are looking it up. (It used to be common, now it is hardly mentioned.)

how is zinc obtained?
The article states nowhere whether zinc is mined or just falls from the sky, before it reaches a smelter. I presume there has to be some sort of mining activity. Why not say so? --dunnhaupt 19:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Zinc and Male Sexuality
this aspect of zinc is missing in this article, best source of zinc oysters! high level of zinc in semen.... for males, the effect of taking a high dose of zinc supplement is unmissable. Komaknacon 21:24, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I second this comment. Zinc supplements are helpful replenishment. Mcampbell422 (talk) 11:24, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

William Champion
While William Champion's method of producing zinc was essentially identical (except in scale) to Indian methods, I have never heard of any evidece that he went to India or how (if at all) the Indian technology was introduced to England. Could some one please provide a source for this?

I have since writing the foregoing undertaken a major expansion of the article on William Champion based on reputable printed sources. I have not found a source for the alleged link with Zawar, and have amended the statement I found there to express skepticism. If there is a link, I would be intersted in details. Peterkingiron 16:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * In the absence of a source being provided for the above, I have removed it. I have also rearranged some other material.  Peterkingiron 21:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Oysters
How much zinc is in the average oyster?

How much is good for us?

Can we eat too many oysters?

How many is bad for us?

How do the levels of Zinc differ in different types of oysters?

--24.123.188.12 18:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

"Soil conservation analyzes the vegetative uptake of naturally occurring zinc in many soil types. " What does this mean? It makes no sense to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.102.71.61 (talk) 06:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Applications section
Hi guys, just wondering why Zinc doesn't have an applications section? Surely there is plenty to write about? Lots of other minerals have applicator sections... User:74.92.140.6 gets credit for missing the gap :-) Scarian Call me Pat  23:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Why do you not write it? Peterkingiron (talk) 12:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Of course I would write it... if I knew what Zinc does ;-) - If there is not such a big demand for an applications section then we can just forget it for now. Scarian Call me Pat  23:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

The central roles of zinc
Zinc participates in the synthesis of testosterone and through "zinc fingers" - the parts that actually allow reading of genes - allows translation and ultimately protein synthesis. Also, zinc is involved in the antioxidant enzyme CuZn superoxide dismutase. Not only that, zinc is also a part of the insulin molecule. Mcampbell422 (talk) 11:25, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't Zinc be in Category:Biology and pharmacology of chemical elements ?
Shouldn't Zinc be in Category:Biology and pharmacology of chemical elements ? Eldin raigmore (talk) 20:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

In popular culture
Ahoy there. Bedevilled as my humanities topics are when someone observes that this or that historical incident was referred to in a B movie, and then clutters a good article up with dross, I thought I'd mention "In Popular Culture" here first. The Simpson's "Come Back Zinc" comes to mind immediately on seeing the article, but the least amount of research indicates: http://science-professor.blogspot.com/2008/10/zincists.html is a far more interesting thread to follow up, why Zinc is seen as an example "boring" element. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:50, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Alloys or accidental inclusions
"Brass, which is an alloy of copper and zinc, has been used since at least the 10th century BC. " Zinc, like bismuth, lead and antimony, occurs as a contaminant in bronze, but not as a conscious alloy until the first century BCE. This statement is unusual: it needs a reference and should be associated with a place. I'd have tagged it if I were that type.--Wetman (talk) 09:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The cited sentence is in the lead and thus does not reference there. It is expanded with the body with a reference. The rest from your message I honestly do not understand. Could you give a hint ? Materialscientist (talk) 09:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Similarity between zinc and magnesium
Is there any source for this from the opening paragraph: "Zinc is chemically similar to magnesium"? 217.44.213.34 (talk) 09:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

In the main article, I quote: "in circumstances where ionic radius is a determining factor zinc and magnesium chemistries have much in common.", however, in the opening paragraph, "Zinc is chemically similar to magnesium" does not include the part about their chemistries being similar only when the ionic radius is a determining factor. For example, the alkali metals have similar chemical properties even though their ionic radii are totally different! I propose to change the lead to make it clear. 217.44.213.34 (talk) 11:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

A pair of further points

 * I remember reading a news piece in the last six months or so stating that zinc is one of several metals whose mineral deposits are close to being exhausted (IIRC, we are down to a few years of extraction left); nothing about this in the article. Does anyone know more about this situation, & how it relates to zinc?
 * I'm a little surprised that there is no reference to that other encyclopedia in the history of the metal -- Pliny's Natural history. Anyone know if the Elder Pliny mentions it? (I'd look in my copy, but my off-line life will keep too busy to look for the next couple of weeks.) -- llywrch (talk) 17:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Zinc in the Parkes process
The physical properties of molten Zinc are essential to the Parkes process for separating Silver and (if it is present) Gold from Lead. Perhaps this process should be mentioned in this article. --DThomsen8 (talk) 18:10, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Prestal
I noted the properties discussed for Prestal and did some follow-up research because the material sounded quite interesting. Other than the CRC reference and various quotes from it on the web, I have not been able to find any information on the material. In referencing the CRC Handbook directly, I found that their claims regarding the material had no citation as well. Also, though CRC indicates Prestal is a trademarked name, my search of the USPTO data base for a trademark in North America for Prestal came up with no results. Does this stuff really exist? Joe Bunda (talk) 19:42, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I added a Google book link with actual pictures of car parts. There are more Google Books results, but most are reprints from CRC book. It probably existed, but is hardly marketed under its name. Materialscientist (talk) 07:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Etymology
According to Walter W. Skeat's Concise Etymological Dictionary of the English Language, Zink is likely related to Zinn, "tin" in German, but this is unsure. He says "of uncertain origin, perhaps allied to zinn, tin, and meaning 'tin like.'" Perhaps someone could integrate this into the article? Some sort of etymological data would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.141.140 (talk) 03:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Included. Materialscientist (talk) 03:57, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Previous talk pages
What has happened to the previous talk pages? The archive should be accessible. Petergans (talk) 11:01, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * They're at the bottom center of the first box on the top of the page. Alexius  Horatius  11:05, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Zinc is a first row transition-metal?
Zinc is not technically a transition metal because it forms ions with a complete d-shell of electrons. This makes the opening of the article misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.225.50.57 (talk) 13:00, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. I have changed the info box. This means that a new article has to be created for "post transition metal" Petergans (talk) 10:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It already exists at post-transition metal. My feeling is that most people simply ignore the difference between a post-transition metal and transition metal. Another thought is the complete d-shell is volatile in solid state. Materialscientist (talk) 11:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this. What a diffence a hyphen can make! I have given transition metal a thorough going over, which ought to clarify the situation, though the sections in that article on colour and oxidation states are, in my view, still far from satisfactory. Petergans (talk) 19:31, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps we need to revisit this discussion about changing the table. --mav (talk) 05:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I added a parameter to account for situations like this. Zinc now mentioned as both a transition and a post-transition. --mav (talk) 02:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Transition metal?
The main text of this article assumes that zinc is a transition metal, but the "modern" definition at Transition metal would seem to exclude zinc, and in fact that article explicitly says "Zinc, cadmium, and mercury are not transition metals." Shouldn't this article be using the "modern" definition? 81.152.168.172 (talk) 03:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

"while the metal was unknown to Europe until the end of the 16th century."

There is a picture showing a roman brass bucket. So what does it mean that it is unknown?174.3.121.27 (talk) 06:12, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * It was unknown as a distinct chemical elements. "Something metallic" could be used for ages and be some alloy. Materialscientist (talk) 06:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Physical == ==

Per wp:head, a better alternative is == Physical characteristics==.174.3.121.27 (talk) 06:09, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, if it stands alone, but with a section heading "Characteristics" just above, this would be repetition. Materialscientist (talk) 06:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Medicinal=== ===

Per above, ===Medicinal=== should be changed to ===Medicine===.174.3.121.27 (talk) 06:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

✅ and ✅ Thanks! Spigot Map  13:17, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Zinc and the common cold
If a consensus can be reached that a particular zinc compound is the most effective cold treatment, based on available research, it would be nice if the information about zinc under the medicine section said so outright (while pointing out the controversy, including the possibility that no tested form of zinc safely fixes a cold, as well). As it is currently written, this page indicates only that zinc for treating colds is controversial, and after reading up on both zinc acetate and zinc gluconate, one may stumble across the arguments in reference 4 on the zinc acetate page for why zinc acetate is the preferred compound over all others (at least according to that single publication).

If the consensus is that there is still too much controversy to point a reader strongly in that direction, fair enough. I also don't know if a person looking for cold cures on Wikipedia overlaps well with the organization & content dictated by its mission as an encyclopedic resource. And finally, I'm not confident I did a thorough talk archive search, I'm new here. —eecharlie 22:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eecharlie (talk • contribs)


 * I don't think that's a decision we as editors can make. If there is a general consensus in the medical community about the effectiveness of zinc in treating colds, published in a peer-reviewed journal, then the case is easy: we cite it, and state it as fact. Given the current situation, the best we can do is to represent each of the differing viewpoints according to their weight (cf. WP:UNDUE), and leave it to the reader to decide the matter for herself.&mdash;Tetracube (talk) 23:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

That makes sense. Should there be a link from the mention of zinc preparations for the common cold to the Zinc preparations section of Alternative_treatments_used_for_the_common_cold? --eecharlie 03:42, 3 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure, why not. You could use the template for that.&mdash;Tetracube (talk) 03:56, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Done, hopefully correctly! &mdash;eecharlie 21:51, 7 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eecharlie (talk • contribs)

Contradiction in the Article
Under "Dietary Intake" it says "In the U.S., the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) is 8 mg/day for women and 11 mg/day for men."

Under "Toxicity" it says "The USDA RDA is 15 mg Zn/day."

It appears that the first statement is true as of the 2004 Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) from the USDA.

Dhiren00 (talk) 02:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Departure from SI units
you might think that changing kilotonnes, megatonnes, and gigatonnes to thousand tonnes, million tonnes, and billion tonnes adds clarity, but it doesn't really help. SI units are widely understood everywhere, except possibly in USA. But this is a science page, and formerly a featured article. SI units are de rigueur in science, which deprecates use of the word billion, because it is not the same everywhere. Let's keep it consistent and correct. -- 99.233.186.4 (talk) 05:52, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Who is "you"? and how do you know what he/she thinks? :-)
 * This "science" page is oriented at layperson, who might think of kilotonne, megatonne, etc., as something related to explosive power. Million tonnes, etc., is less ambiguous and is equally correct. Materialscientist (talk) 06:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Checking Google for gigatonne, i see there is no ambiguity whatsoever. But you are proposing to normalize popular slang, instead of educating people on the correct usage of terms. Such contributions fit better with urbandictionary.com rather than an encyclopedia. Will you follow this up to propose that we abandon the use of SI system altogether, and delete the words kilotonne and megatonne from articles except when using explosives? It is absurd. -- 99.233.186.4 (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
 * A counter question, do you mean that "hectogram" would be more accurate or more common than "hundred gram" because scientists invented decimal prefixes? I believe use of prefixes should rely on common sense and not be obligatory in general articles. Neither obligatory is SI, and gram and centimeter are perfectly valid units. Materialscientist (talk) 00:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * What's obligatory is to avoid creating ambiguity. The word billion is not understood everywhere to be the same quantity. -- 99.233.186.4 (talk) 02:54, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Hidden commercial content?
"For fortification, however, a 2003 review recommended zinc oxide in cereals as cheap, stable, and as easily absorbed as more expensive forms."

Really?? I think some people with very clear interests paid a visit to this page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.213.53 (talk) 10:59, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't seem the least bit commercial to me. It is neutrally worded, doesn't mention any product name, and is sourced to a peer-reviewed journal article.  This is exactly the kind of info that should be in the "Dietary intake" section. -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Repeat: Similarity between zinc and magnesium
1. Although Calcium has a melting point of 842 C, and Magnesium is 650 C, is close to Zinc 419 C. What is startling is the low boiling point and what should be noted is the unusually high vapor pressure in vacuo of Magnesium, Zinc, Cadmium, and Mercury at room temperature. The s electrons on these metals easily pair to form a spherical S orbital and exist as a mono atomic gas. The volatility of zinc is exemplified by "Fume fever" when welding Galvanized metal (c.f. Cadmium) and loss of Zinc, in Brass metal exposed to high temperatures, due to evaporation. The Zinc vapor in fume fever is metallic Zinc that does not immediately react with Oxygen in Air.

Approximate MP and BP: Be 1300 2500 Mg 650 1100   Al  660 2500 Ca 842 1500   Zn  420  910   Ga   30 2200 Sr 780 1400   Cd  320  770   In  160 2100  Sn  230 2600   Sb  630 1600 Ba 730 1900   Hg  -40  360   Tl  300 1500  Pb  330 1800   Bi  270 1600

2. Zinc Telluride is a salt not alloy in the CRC. The formation of Brass is due to Zinc melting and dissolving into the remaining Copper, Copper's melting point is over 100 C higher than Zinc's BOILING point. Can you find me a Zinc-Iron, Zinc-Cobalt, Zinc-Nickel true alloy not due to co-plating? Why doesn't the steel under the galvanized coating dissolve into the zinc when its melted? Could it be that Iron's melting point is over 500 C higher than Zinc's BOILING point? Titanium's melting point is over 900 C higher than Zinc's BOILING point?
 * Zinc telluride is indeed not an alloy but salt; however, cadmium zinc telluride is sort of alloy of cadmium telluride and zinc telluride. Materialscientist (talk) 01:15, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

3. Zinc's standard potential is misleading as most Zinc batteries are alkaline and Zinc's potential in alkaline solution rises significantly higher than Hydrogen (.8 V in 1 M OH-) due to removal of Zn+2 as Zincate ([Zn(OH)4]2−)

4. Einstein used ejection of electron by UV light from Zinc surface for his 1904 theorem on photoelectric effect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shjacks45 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Please correct quote from King James Bible
It should be "instructor of every artificer..." not "instructor in every artificer...". I'd do it myself but the article is locked. Thanks! -- 77.21.99.8 (talk) 04:04, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks. :) --mav (reviews needed) 00:24, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Compounds of zinc?
We should make a decision about whether we want a family of articles on "Compounds of .." The implications would be for about 50-100 new articles that would require maintenance at a time when even the element articles are not super. But unless we decide to go that way, I recommend that compounds of zinc be merged into the section on compounds in the main zinc article. --Smokefoot (talk) 16:40, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * For some articles, well-sourced details which were perceived as overly technical were split into daughter articles to pass GA/FA (compounds of berkelium, compounds of californium, this one, maybe a few more), while with others they were considered Ok to stay in the main article. I would treat this problem individually. Materialscientist (talk) 23:39, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

While I don't deny the status quo, I disagree with how having a systematic survey of an element's compounds (binary chalcogenides, pnictogenides, halides, and so on) precludes passing GA/FA. I would imagine an article should *fail* GA/FA for lacking adequate discussion on this topic. While the article on zinc compounds is a little lengthier, the latter two are prime candidates for being reintegrated into the main articles. Even the discussion on zinc compounds in zinc is too brief. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 00:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I would favour the creation and extension of compounds of.., content from the current zinc page should move to this page. The element page then can focus on the element itself which will benefit the quality. Why persisting on having BIG articles, what about content flow and readability: zinc takes you to compounds of zinc and then to organozinc compounds V8rik (talk) 18:45, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Zinc and Compounds of zinc follow well-established Summary Style format which aims to give varying levels of detail in different articles in order to serve different user's needs. The summary of zinc compounds here needs to be a bit on the short side especially since zinc compounds, how they are made, interact and etc are a topic in their own right. The folks at FAC are well aware of this and that is why there is a separate article for that detail. And the quality of the element articles has improved greatly in the last 10 years and continues to get better. True that progress on daughter articles is slower, but that isn't a reason to add bloat to the main articles. --mav (reviews needed) 00:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Etymology
"The element was probably named by the alchemist Paracelsus after the German word Zinke."

Why? This should be included.174.3.121.27 (talk) 06:01, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

"Zinc (... from German: Zink), or..."

The Spanish-language Wikipedia says: "La etimología de cinc parece que viene del alemán, Zincken o Zacken, para indicar el aspecto con filos dentados del mineral calamina..." (ENGLISH TRANSL.: The etymology of zinc seems to come from the German "Zincken" or "Zacken" [= spike] to indicate the look/semblance of serrated edges of the mineral hemimorphite...)

There is one flaw in the Spanish version: "Zincken" is misspelled; it should read "Zinken". "Zacken" is correct, though. But apart from that, as a native German speaker, I would support Spanish entry. Stephan0008 (talk) 19:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Zinc Toxicity article
I read the "Precautions" section of this article - which refers you to Zinc toxicity as the 'main' article on the subject. However, that article is actually just a subset of what is stated in this article!

IMHO, we should either delete Zinc toxicity - or move content out of this article into it and merely summarize the main information here.

SteveBaker (talk) 12:46, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Zinc fragment sublimed and 1cm3 cube.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Zinc fragment sublimed and 1cm3 cube.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 17, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-06-17. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! — howcheng  {chat} 16:50, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

History / Ancient use
the statement "Palestinian brass from the 14th to 10th centuries BC" is historically incorrect at best and is politically driven at worst. at that time Jewish state of Judah existed in what is today Israel. 10th century BC is the time of King David's and King Solomon's kingdoms, which spread north to Damascus (see http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/israel_hist_1973.jpg). Palestine as a place name did not appear till after destruction of the Second Temple by the Romans who renamed Judah to erase the very name from memory. i am making a correction in the article. Dr voland (talk) 00:01, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Use in printing processes missing
Not one word about the use of zinc in various printing processes? See Zincography and Photozincography for historical examples. As I recall, the "instant offset" printing services of the 1970s (at that time, cheaper than xerox for more than, say, 50 identical copies of something) were still using zinc sheets, and mention of "modern zinc-plate lithographic printing" in the abovementioned Zincography article indicates this important use is ongoing. AVarchaeologist (talk) 02:34, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Semi-protection
why is this artilce protected? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.245.127.15 (talk) 15:33, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I has been semi-protected due to repeated vandalism. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * expires 8 May 2014!!! don't you think that is a bit too much? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.245.127.15 (talk) 11:12, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 14 May 2013
The structure of section 6 - Biological role is illogical. The sentence about dreaming ("Some supplemental zinc users report an increase in vivid dreaming") does not need a separate section. Please cut it out and append it to section 6.3 - Dietary intake. The section 6.5.1 - Agriculture then needs to be reformatted to form an own section under section 6 - Biological role (i.e. section 6.5.1 becomes section 6.5).

Dandelyonn (talk) 13:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yellow check.svg Partly done: The bit about dreaming was an unsourced addition, so I removed it from the article. This puts Agriculture as a subsection of Deficiency, which appears to me to be correct. Thanks! -- El Hef  ( Meep ? ) 14:51, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Color
Why zinc usually looks bluish, not silvery-white? Passivtion? Or metal itself has bluish shde in its pure form?

95.49.56.52 (talk) 12:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I dunno, but pure Cd is really bluish. Double sharp (talk) 16:33, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Fix typo request
Typo: change "evicence" to "evidence"

Thazz (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done with thanks, Nici  Vampire  Heart  19:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Cochrane Review "Zinc for the common cold" has been withdrawn
The Cochrane Review "Zinc for the common cold" has been withdrawn due to concerns regarding the calculation and analysis of data in the review. Zinc for the common cold-Withdrawn So, I removed the sentence from the article that was entirely based on this review, and modified the next sentence for clarity. Someone more knowledgeable about the topic should see if the whole paragraph needs to be reworded. Sydney Poore/FloNight&#9829;&#9829;&#9829;&#9829; 18:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on Zinc
Cyberbot II has detected links on Zinc which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:


 * http://www.drugfuture.com/OrganicNameReactions/ONR144.htm
 * Triggered by  on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:44, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Electron configuration image


I found this image (the one to the right) in the commons, and I thought it should probably be somewhere on this page, what do you guys think.Lukejodonnell (talk) 22:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Derivation
The introductory sentence states that zinc is derived from the German word "Zink" while the third paragraph postulates a derivation from the German word "Zinke". According to Google translate, Zink is literally zinc while Zinke is prong. At no point in this article is any meaning actually given for the source word, whether Zink or Zinke. I notice that there is at least one other hypothesis discussed on this talk page (zinc from zinn, the German for tin). I don't know which is correct, but a little consistency and an explanation of the meaning of the root word would be appreciated. --Khajidha (talk) 15:27, 17 May 2016 (UTC)


 * The OED has this to say about the etymology of the word zinc:

"German zink (of obscure origin), whence also late 17th cent. French zinc (†zinch, †zin, †zain), Swedish, Danish zink, etc., modern Latin zincum"
 * --Ben (talk) 16:14, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Sections "Dietary supplement" and "Dietary intake"
IMHO section "Dietary supplement" and "Dietary intake" should be merged (or better distinguished), as it is rather confusing at the moment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SelfishSeahorse (talk • contribs) 11:20, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Difficult to merge, as intake based on zinc to stay healthy, whereas supplement evidence - mostly quite weak - addresses possible health benefits for specific diseases or conditions.David notMD (talk) 19:55, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Zinc. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130219203257/http://www.fertilizer.org/HomePage/LIBRARY/Our-selection2/Fertilizer-use.html/Zinc-in-Soils-and-Crop-Nutrition.html to http://www.fertilizer.org/HomePage/LIBRARY/Our-selection2/Fertilizer-use.html/Zinc-in-Soils-and-Crop-Nutrition.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Madanapala
The early studies section attributes a 1374 description of zinc to Madanapala, but the Madanapala of the linked article died in 1162. Is there another Madanapala in Indian history that we need to refer to here? I know attribution isn't always accurate, but the introduction to an edition of the book excerpted on Google Books claims it was at least sponsored by Madanapala, if not actually his work. I also see that in The Positive Background of Hindu Sociology (p. 72) the author of the 1374 Nighantu is called "Madanapala of Kanauj," in case this helps distinguish him from any other hypothetical Madanapalas. Lusanaherandraton (talk) 23:36, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Dietary Reference Intakes
I am creating the same format for DRIs for vitamins and minerals. That is a U.S.- based system that identifies Estimated Average Requirements (EARs), Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs), Adequate Intakes (AIs) if there is not enough information to establish EARs and RDAs, and Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (ULs). Another major regulatory agency that has established ULs is the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). ULs for both are provided, as they often differ. If there is a UL (for some vitamins none has been determined) then rationale may be covered in a Toxicity section. In addition to DRIs, the U.S. also established Daily Values, using this on food and dietary supplement labels as % DV. Most of the DVs were revised in May 2016. What I have written can be improved. It lacks EFSA or other major country RDAs. It lacks an estimate of what percentages of people are deficient - although that is often covered in a separate section on deficiency and consequences of deficiency. I am creating this Subject in all of the Talk pages of the vitamin and mineral entries I have edited. Comments and improvements are welcome.David notMD (talk) 20:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Changed section to Dietary recommendations and added European Union information and citations.David notMD (talk) 12:07, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Split article to Zinc and Zinc in Biology?
Some of the other minerals that are also essential nutrients have concise content on the biological role of the mineral in the main article, with a redirect to a separate article: _______ in Biology. See Selenium as example. Zinc could benefit from such a split. I would do it but I have no experience in creating new articles.David notMD (talk) 12:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
 * As a WP:Featured article, this page needs to summarize all sub-articles about zinc, including Zinc sulfate (medical use) and Zinc deficiency (among others), per WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. Restructuring the article is always a possibility, but this article post-restructuring will need to appropriately summarize all relevant sub-articles.  Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 01:58, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * 100% agree. For the other minerals that are also essential nutrients there is concise content, usually under section title "Biological role", with a redirect to "____ in Biology" as the child article. This means there is also some duplication of content, but from WP:SUMMARYSTYLE it is clear that is allowed/recommended. David notMD (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Edit request 9/27/13
zinc gluconate is discussed as a dietary supplement but it should be zinc glycinate which is far superior (see link), and readily available. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18271278

Large expansion & restruc in biology and med
Recently, the article has been expandeed and restructured wrt == sections Aapplication, Biological role, Soil remediation, Precautions. Mostly by Doc James and Sepi333. See also previous talk #Split biology?.

As it stands now, I think the TOC shows that these topics (and their subsections) show repetition or being split over multiple sections. It also indicates that there may be too much detail. If large protion of medicine/bio aspects are to be included (limit? off-topic?), at least the top sections should be complete and non-repetitive. Say: Application, Biological, [Human?] Health/Medicine only. -DePiep (talk) 09:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * correct ping -DePiep (talk) 10:29, 11 January 2018 (UTC) . -DePiep (talk) 10:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Might make sense to split off into a subarticle. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Sleep review
 Seppi  333  (Insert 2¢) 00:58, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

The source for note 157 should be noted as a deadlink
It's been retracted by the journal which published it for plagiarism--A21sauce (talk) 16:04, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Zinc in a negative oxidation state?
It is claimed in the infobox, without giving a source, that one possible oxidation state of zinc is -2. I find this claim surprising, given that the Zn atom has a negative electron affinity (and one of the most negative among all not-noble-gas-elements at that according to the electron affinity data page), meaning that it actively (doully) withstands gaining an extra electron. Therefore, I’d expect that if Zn really does sometimes show a negative oxidation state, it does so in a covalent compound. Is that true? If Zn sometimes has a negative oxidation state, sources should be given. In that case, could the article give more info about that supposed negative oxidation state of Zn? On the other hand, if the claim that Zn has a negative oxidation state is untrue, it should be removed.

Kniva Keisarabani the Goth (talk) 17:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Does this source Template:List_of_oxidation_states_of_the_elements help? -DePiep (talk) 16:01, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Negative oxidation states for metals are usually not the sort of thing that is well-described as a single anion (Au− being the exception that proves the rule here). See Zintl ions. Double sharp (talk) 15:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)