Talk:Unsepttrium

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Page[edit]

Does anyone think that this page should not be a redirect, but be a content page? Unsepttrium is a very significant element, as it is the last neutral element physically possible, and any elements after it could only exist as ions. Yankeesrule3 (talk) 04:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, since it is supposedly the limit for a neutral atom, the last chemical element possible. (though not the last nuclear physics element). 70.24.251.208 (talk) 07:51, 2 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you keep making this article into a redirect for no apparent reason?[edit]

My edits restoring the content to this article have been reverted twice. No reason has been given, other than a discussion at WT:ELEM which has barely even started. An editor there redirected the article without any discussion - a clear violation of WP:POINT. Such elements as unbioctium, untriseptium, unpentpentium, and unsepttrium - especially untriseptium and unsepttrium - are clearly notable, having been thought by reliable sources at various points in time to be the end of the periodic table. Why are these editors making a WP:POINTY removal of content? Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 20:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite a common thing or a project, when a person suggests stuff and when it isn't objected, it is done if the person suggested the thing still wants to. It just happens, nobody's usually against that-- so everyone's OK. Right or not, it works this way.
Clearly notable-- don't think so. They're just an opportunity of where it may end. They are nothing to write without this info. Hear you scream, "but it is a point!" Not really. It doesn't take much to be an end-- it is a thing simply determined by its Z. No experiments, nothing in relation-- just that stuff. Since it is the only one to think of, you could better have a nice discussion on where it ends. 137 is just a number coming from an equation. Period. That's it. Is it worth it to have an article when you copy all of the stuff in another one, which has some other info? Don't think so. If you want to make it useful, do some cleanup for the current discussion, collect it all-in-one and get details. Everyone will love it. You risk to get a barnstar if you make it to GA (say).--R8R Gtrs (talk) 12:07, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]