Template:Did you know nominations/Indium(III) sulfate


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:28, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Indium(III) sulfate

 * ... that Indium sulfate is unusual in forming a complex with the sulfate ion in solution?


 * Reviewed: Ensifera

5x expanded by Graeme Bartlett (talk). Self-nominated at 22:53, 30 May 2015 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svg I don't doubt the accuracy of the hook, but I'm not finding that claim repeated as stated in the article. The article says that "Indium is unusual in forming a sulfate complex", but doesn't specify that it's "unusual in forming a complex with the sulfate ion in solution". At least in my mind, these are slightly different claims. Can we tweak either the hook or the article so that they match up? Otherwise this is a Symbol confirmed.svg for the nomination in all other factors (article criteria, hook criteria and QPQ).  Imzadi 1979   →   12:05, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * How about alt1 ... that Indium sulfate is unusual in forming a complex with the sulfate ion?
 * You may have to read more to find out that it is in a water solution. I was going to say unique, but since I nominated I discovered other metals also do it, but not so well. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:11, 1 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg Need a reviewer to see whether the new hook solves the issue raised with the original hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 14:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg The ALT1 hook is acceptable. In ticking this, I am relying on Imzadi1979's review on the other DYK criteria. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Umm, ALT1 is unintelligible. The idea is that the aqueous form of indium(III) sulfate contains complexes of associated indium and sulfate rather than having them dissociated, right? The title of the cited article says aqueous solutions so that's not in doubt. How about this? Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 04:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * ALT2: ... that Indium sulfate is unusual because the indium and sulfate remain associated while in aqueous solution?
 * This alternative hook is OK by me. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg New reviewer needed to check ALT2 hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Alt2 is posing a problem because the word unusual is a bit of OR by me, and can only be really determined by a search of the chmemical literature not showing much of this happening, so I will strike alt2 and propose:


 * ALT3 ... that Indium sulfate does not remain in solution when diluted, but precipitates as a basic salt?
 * (hook is in Indium(III) sulfate section last sentence. Reference is the Wolfram W. Rudolph one, and I can email the paper if needed). Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:06, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg I can see that on page 7 of the research paper..weird indeed. good to go. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:28, 14 July 2015 (UTC)