Template talk:Infobox isotopes (meta)/Archive 1

Proposal: new columns & tables
Proposals for adding columns to Infobox element isotopes (aka isoboxes). It follows that we need four different table setups (four table headers).

New columns are: spin, chain, from chain, 1st-when, 1st-who, iso-note. Table setups: 1. STABLE elements, 2. ALL ROWS STABLE, 3. CHAIN (unstable elements), 4. SYN (synthetic heavies).

Topics & setup

 * An earlier discussion at WT:ELEMENTS, Archive 25 (March 2017). From there, I've token some quotes from Double sharp.


 * The changes are mostly columns (quantities) to be added. We need to pre-define the tables using them. It appears that sets of elements require different columns (=tables). For now, we expect four different sets (four different table headers). No new rows foreseen (existing rows are: stable, and decay 1–4).
 * Within one table (=element), the number & type of isotopes (rows) are free for the editor (not be limited by table header or by this discussion).


 * The column set for 'stable' has a different 'header' already. For now, we can keep that way of doing. That is: each table can accommodate stable isotope rows.


 * Columns 'decay energy' and decay 'product' are removed.


 * Do not worry about: table format tweaking, which isotopes to list(!), exact value formatting, row-templates, linked/notlinked values, Infobox element (it will follow, later), how must I enter it (hardcode it. The isotope-row templates not used).


 * Do worry about: main table structure; columns: number, order, header text; covering all expected isotope situations per element?, possible values, add helpful examples


 * Implementation: when accepted, per element one table-header (1 out of 4) must be picked, to announce which columns are used. Then isotope data be entered & maintained. Can happen: empty cells. May not happen: number of columns in table varying (righthand side indenting).
 * Technically: When decided here, template changes will follow. Expect new parameter names like spin, but we'll try to smartly automate other details (such as correct table header picking).

Overall discussion is below, at (not here).

Table 1: Add 'nuclear spin' (all isotopes)
Double sharp: "I find that when I write "Isotopes" sections in articles on stable elements (H to Bi, except Tc and Pm), I want to mention the stable isotopes and their natural abundance, but then one of the other things I want to go into is nuclear spin (important for Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR))".

The 'spin' column is added to every table proposed. For the stable 1H to 83Bi (except: Tc, Pm) elements, it is the only addition.
 * Every element (stable, unstable)
 * Parameter spin
 * Values: one per isotope (row)
 * Typical values: (2−), 1/2+, 1/2&minus;, 1&minus;, 0+, (3/2)−, (19/2−)

Table 2: When stable isotopes only, use simplified table
When all listed isotopes are stable, we can use a simplified header: remove column Decay mode. Note that the spin value is added.
 * Currently for isoboxes: boron, bromine, helium, lithium, magnesium, neon, oxygen. This list may change, since editors are free to reasonably add/remove nonstable isotopes (IOW, when a nonstable isotope row is added, this simple form can not be used any more. Also, the other way around).

Table 3: Add 'from decay chain' (when unstable)
Double sharp: "For the unstable elements past Bi, I would want a detail on where each natural isotope comes from in the radioactive decay chain, like I did in text at Radium."
 * 84Po - E118(?), (+ Tc?, Pm?)


 * Parameter: chain
 * One value for every unstable isotope (row).
 * Possible values: &lt;blank>, thorium-232, uranium-235, uranium-238, neptunium-237, ...

Table 4: Add 'from', '1st-when', '1st-who' (synthetic heavies)
Double sharp: "For the most unstable superheavy elements from Lr onwards at the cutting edge of modern science, I would want to know where each isotope comes from, when it was synthesised first, and who did it. So once we go beyond the things covered in the main infobox, I am not sure if we can add anymore, because the needs of each element are a little bit different; but if we are splitting it out, then I would think that it ought to go into some more detail."
 * Lr - E121+
 * Columns added:
 * from: isotope(s) synthesised from.
 * Values: &lt;blank>, Cm-249 or 248Cm
 * 1st-when: date of first synthesis
 * Values: &lt;blank>, year (preferably), full date (if needed)


 * 1st-who: first synthesis person or institute
 * Values: &lt;blank>, name/institute (usually wikilinked)
 * iso-note: longer note in extra subrow, over multiple columns.
 * Values: &lt;omit>, freetext. Should be used scarcely.

Discuss 'from, '1st-' columns
Q: Would this cover the existing table in Berkelium ?

Q: I'm not sure this 'from' column is different from 'decay chain' column. If yes, should the chain be added here btw? And 'reaction' is a third column (unused here)? -DePiep (talk) 15:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, what is this table? I do not see one at that link. Double sharp (talk) 15:36, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * My error. Somewhere you mentioned a synthetic element with an elaborate history isotopes table. (Rf?). I hope you see the gist of the history columns. -DePiep (talk) 22:02, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * For inspiration More historie tables in: Bohrium, Copernicium (has reactions). -DePiep (talk) 22:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The reactions are mostly relevant for the heaviest elements (maybe from nobelium onwards), I would think. I would think that it seems the most sensible thing to include for the "from" column, leaving bare isotopes (e.g. 238U, 235U, 232Th) for the natural trace radioisotopes, since only in those cases can you just mine the parents instead of having to make them yourself in slme nuclear reaction. Double sharp (talk) 04:19, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm only exampling suggestions I got from you, mainly. reaction can be added too, or replace the from column.
 * Projected usage is that an element having at least one isotope with these columns relevant, will have this table (header=columns). Those will be the heaviest element then, OK. Point now is whether you see it useful & informative for the isobox. -DePiep (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I would think so, yes! ^_^ Double sharp (talk) 00:06, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Discuss this setup in general
On a cursory look, I don't find much there to disagree with. Sorry for not giving a more detailed response; I'm fairly tired. Double sharp (talk) 15:36, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't worry. Won't have time this August to implement at all. -DePiep (talk) 22:16, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Mobile view issue
When in mobile view, the bottom row of the internal wikitable does not show OK. In that row, cell borders are missing. This creates a visual difference with the rows above. See Isotopes of hydrogen, or /testcases. (Screenprints needed?).

The template stack, including sandboxes, is listed in the testcases page. They are free to edit for this (taking care to not mix up ec's of course).

The same issue appears in Template:Infobox element, for example Infobox hydrogen in hydrogen (both the vapor table and the isotopes table!). Now, this element infobox template is way more complicated, so I put this point up here for research. Any ideas? BTW, these wikitable-subtemplates are not shared between these infoboxes. ping. - DePiep (talk) 10:38, 13 March 2018 (UTC)