Talk:Sulfur

This article is written in American English with IUPAC spelling (color, defense, traveled; aluminium, sulfur and caesium) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide and chemistry naming conventions, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Elements C‑class Top‑importance

	Chemistry portal 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.ElementsWikipedia:WikiProject ElementsTemplate:WikiProject Elementschemical elements articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

Materials C‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MaterialsWikipedia:WikiProject MaterialsTemplate:WikiProject MaterialsMaterials articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Rocks and minerals C‑class

	Earth sciences portal Sulfur is part of WikiProject Rocks and minerals, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use rocks and minerals resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Rocks and mineralsWikipedia:WikiProject Rocks and mineralsTemplate:WikiProject Rocks and mineralsRocks and minerals articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:WP1.0

Sulfur received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Spelling

The article begins "(in British English: sulphur)" but states later that "sulfur" has been the correct spelling in British English for at least two decades, so the article contradicts itself. Dadge (talk) 12:40, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is sulfur associated with volcanism?

The article did not answer my question: Why is sulfur associated with volcanism? It is a literally universal phenomenon, most notably on Jupiter's moon Io, so clearly there is something critical being left unmentioned in this article. I suspect it is a combination of the element's abundance, density, and melting points, but I'm not sure how that interplay works out. Badon (talk) 09:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The synonym brimstone, despite wrong information given in this article, derives from sulphur's abundance at the conal rim of volcanoes.

Nuttyskin (talk) 09:10, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Direct reactions between elemental sulfur and other elements

I have removed the following claim (formerly the last sentence of the opening paragraph):

Chemically, sulfur reacts with all elements except for gold, platinum, iridium, tellurium, and the noble gases.

The "except" portion directly contradicts the assertion in Wikipedia's own article on Iridium(III) sulfide, which specifically states that this compound can be "prepared by heating a mixture of elemental iridium and sulfur." An unfortunate complication: when I tried to find further documentation for this assertion, the reference I found described synthesis of a different compound, iridium disulfide ~~[iridium(IV) sulfide]~~, by direct reaction between the elements at atmospheric pressure. I have therefore created the new article ~~Iridium(IV) sulfide~~ Iridium disulfide, using that reference. The basic point still remains: iridium and sulfur do react directly, contrary to the "except" clause of the claim I have removed.

I would have preferred to correct, rather than simply remove, the false claim. Unfortunately, to make this possible, a correct statement about the exact extent of sulfur's reactivity with other elements will need to be found in a source; synthesizing this information ourselves, from multiple sources, would be WP:OR (specifically, WP:SYNTH).

—Syrenka V (talk) 14:01, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well said. I probably was the one who committed the crime of overstatement.--Smokefoot (talk) 14:04, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This dependence upon the establishing of authoritative sources, and not simply upon assertions based in scientific proof, will ultimately prove the doom of Wikipedia.

Nuttyskin (talk) 09:14, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can justify omitting iridium, if we also add the reference that says it does react. Very simple logical deductions are acceptable OR, such as knocking one element of the list when another source contradicts the one used. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:21, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Sulvere" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Sulvere. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]