Talk:List of oxidation states of the elements

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Elements (Rated List-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is supported by WikiProject Elements, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements and their isotopes on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details.
 List  This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

use this link Nergaal (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Disagreement with CRC Press[edit]

There are many differences from the CRC press periodic table's list of oxidation states Are they listing common or all? How did we select which to label common? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucent (talkcontribs) 04:29, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

They are only listing the more usual oxidation states. Our list is based on Greenwood & Earnshaw (see the ref. at the bottom), which is much more comprehensive, with only a few extra oxidation states added (each addition is clearly labeled and referenced). The oxidation states that are labeled here as "common" are the ones labeled as common by G&E. I think it is safe to bet that no new "common" oxidation states will be discovered--all new discoveries are pretty exotic. --Itub (talk) 15:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Astatine +7[edit]

Are we sure about this?

This indicates that AtO4- doesn't exist, and because of the inert pair effect and lack of references, AtF7 seems unlikely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kazyan1 (talkcontribs) 05:32, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

actually exists; however, not many books mention it, for reasons discussed at Talk:Astatine. AtF
isn't known yet AFAIK. Double sharp (talk) 10:12, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Fractional oxidation states[edit]

We need a good way to show these. E.g. for O, we have, just listing the obvious ones: −½ (superoxides), −⅓ (ozonides), +½ (dioxygenyl). Doubtless C has a lot more, as another example. Double sharp (talk) 12:07, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Thulium(IV) - probably incorrect[edit]

The reference quoted for this pradyot patnaik's handbook of inorganic chemicals- yes he does say that +4 compounds are known (unreferenced) - but he is alone in this as far as I can tell. For example a recent review of Ln(IV) compounds in the Encyclopedia of Inorganic and Bioinorganic Chemistry DOI: 10.1002/9781119951438.eibc2033 does not mention Tm(IV) at all. To include this we need a reliable corroborative referenceAxiosaurus (talk) 10:50, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I've removed it here, pending reliable corroborative references. I see the Tm(IV) claim is already marked as "dubious" in Thulium#Chemical properties. Double sharp (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)