Jump to content

Talk:Platinum

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ernstvgr (talk | contribs) at 09:35, 30 April 2013 (→‎Production and Trade: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articlePlatinum has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 19, 2010Good article nomineeListed

Template:V0.5

WikiProject iconSoftware: Computing GA‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.
WikiProject iconElements GA‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconMining GA‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining articles
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Price of platinum

For what reason was my edit to the price of platinum "not constructive"? Did you even read it. Sorry, but it was and I am changing it back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.154.176.128 (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Kitco chart linked to in footnote 41 is not useful - it shows the past year dating back from the current day of access, whereas the text talks about the specific year of 2008. If no-one minds, I'm changing the Kitco link to show their permanent chart for 2008, which is when the volatility referred to occurred. Tulliux (talk) 22:30, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that would make perfect sense. Bobby I'm Here, Are You There? 00:44, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Picture blocking

The first four(?) pictures in the the first gallery is blocking the information on the abundance of the metal in the column. Please fix. Androo123 (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine to me. Which browser are you using?—Tetracube (talk) 22:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is certainly dependent on the browser and screen settings. I moved the gallery slightly down hoping this might make things better for you (?). Materialscientist (talk) 22:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Platinum/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 20:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Toolbox

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: No dabs

Linkrot: No dead links. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:45, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    I made some copy-edits.diff
    Heating the ammonium salt in the presence of hydrogen reduces it to elemental platinum.Potassium hexachloroplatinate is similarly insoluble, such that the acid has been used in the determination of potassium ions by gravimetry. "such that", suggest rephrasing for better grammar. Green tickY
    The Lead does not mention the negative medical defects of the metal. Also, it should be expanded to at least 2 paragraphs to fully summarise the article as per WP:LEAD  Done
    Expanded the lead. Nergaal (talk) 01:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Suggest moving History above Production for balance.  Done
    moved Nergaal (talk) 01:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Formatting of citations appears inconsistent. Web sources need access date. Need to go through using appropriate {{citation}} templates for journals, books and web sources. Green tickY
    Sources appear fine.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    OK, just a few points noted above. On hold for seven days. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, much improved now. I am happy to pass this as a Good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Heating the ammonium salt in the presence of hydrogen reduces it to elemental platinum.Potassium hexachloroplatinate is similarly insoluble, such that the acid has been used in the determination of potassium ions by gravimetry. "such that", suggest rephrasing for better grammar.

I think I wrote that. Could you tell me what you object to again? KPtCl6 is insoluble. As a direct result, the acid (H2PtCl6) is used for .... --Rifleman 82 (talk) 00:11, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"such that" is clearly ungrammatical and the whole really makes no sence, suggest re-writing in plain english. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why it is ungrammatical. It's used often enough in mathematics that there is a symbol for it. But since you are bothered, I'll try and rewrite it. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 02:26, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is commonly used in mathematics, but in a general encyclopaedia such as Wikipedia, plain English is best. Thanks for changing this.

-- "I agree that "such that" sounds clumsy. "As a direct result," however, abruptly shifts the emphasis onto a subsidiary process away from the property itself. "... resulting in its use as..." would be smoother.

"Refer" or "reference?"

The growing use of "referenced" instead of the customary "referred to" in Wikipedia is regrettable. Besides sounding affected, "reference" tacitly "references" the Paris deconstructionists, and hence inevitably imports an obtrusive political echo into the subject. Note that my use of the verb in the previous sentence is the proper way to use this word, i.e., as a cultural signifier, not as a simple literary citation. Orthotox (talk) 20:13, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chemistry & compounds

While I usually prefer that these two sections be separate, they are clearly interlinked for this and all other articles. Things as they stand are not ideal. I'll come back tomorrow to tidy it up, but if anyone else would like to work on it, please feel free. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 02:45, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

Currently given as /ˈplæt.n.əm/ or /ˈplæt.nəm/. However, speakers (such as myself) without the Lennon-Lenin merger have an actual [ɪ] in the second syllable, and since the transcription is phonemic, more satisfactory would be to give "/ˈplæt.ɪn.əm/ or /ˈplæt.nəm/" thus producing all three correct phonetic renditions without having to overburden the page with a third phonemic version. 91.105.19.134 (talk) 18:39, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm... obvious wrong, but cited?

"platina del Pinto, which is literally translated into 'little silver of the Pinto River.'"

platina del Pinto very clearly and obviously translates literally to "little silver of the Pinto" To say "little silver of the Pinto River" it would have to be platina de la Rio Pinto.

While Rio may be implicit, it's not in the literal translation, and any cited source that affirms this is quite simply wrong. Another case where Wikipedia fails as the largest example of the fallacy of appeal to authority ever.

72.247.151.10 (talk) 23:12, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank goodness that there's never more than one way to translate anything, since every language is always 100% the same in sentance structure and vocabulary. It's been so great since we created the "languatrons" which rattle off perfect, flawless translations of anything and everything with out any ambiguity or need for correction. I mean, it's not like I can throw "little silver of the Pinto" into Babelfish[1], and get "poca plata del Pinto" in Spanish, then translate it from Spanish to French and get "peu d'argent de du Peint", which then becomes "little d' money of Painted" in English.
So you see: just because you think something is wrong doesn't necessarily mean it is, or perhaps was when the citation was written. Can you say that EVERY dialect of Spanish ever written follows the same rules you're following? By "modern standards" there's many a work by Shakespeare that is grammatically wrong, but I don't think that arguement works. Best, Markvs88 (talk) 23:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Um...you might want to curb the snotty attitude. That's not the literal translation, this has nothing to do with dialect, and name-dropping Shakespeare doesn't help your case. The word "rio" is not there, period. Words have meanings. A "literal" translation this is not, and any assertion that it is is incorrect.
But thanks for playing. 74.177.198.250 (talk) 06:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gold

When it was cheaper than gold, platinum was used to make fake gold coins. See www.goldsovereigns.co.uk/fakes.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.55.83 (talk) 11:49, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Platinum-nugget.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Platinum-nugget.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on October 22, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-10-22. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 16:58, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Platinum nugget
A nugget of platinum, a dense, malleable, ductile, precious, gray-white transition metal. It is one of the rarest elements in the Earth's crust. It exhibits a remarkable resistance to corrosion, even at high temperatures, and as such is considered a noble metal. As a result, platinum is often found chemically uncombined as a native metal.Photo: Alchemist-hp
Archive – More featured pictures...

price of platinum...

How to calculate Platinum weight ... And like wise gold is calculated in karat for quality measurement, is there any for Platinum???

Please friends help me out.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonysince1989 (talk • contribs) 18:34, 26 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rarity of Platinum

The rarity of Platinum is given as 0.005 ppm. A source for this data should be given as the references I have indicate 0.003 may be more accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.207.160.37 (talk) 05:10, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please some try to include a list of platinum producing areas/ countries — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginger789 (talk • contribs) 15:16, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In 2009, South Africa was the top producer of platinum, with an almost 80% share, followed by Russia at 11%; world production in 2009 was 178,000 kg. Is what the text says, so there is no large other producer.--Stone (talk) 21:14, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does the number of isotopes of an element really correlate with occurence?

It is stated "Even though it has six naturally occurring isotopes, platinum is one of the rarest elements in the Earth's crust ...", suggesting that with so many isotopes it should be more common, yet I'm not aware of any reason why this should be. If it's a well-established phenomenon, there should be a cross-reference; if it isn't, the clause should be deleted. Indeed, were it true, elements such as hydrogen and oxygen should be vanishingly rare! Anybody know? Xarqi (talk) 09:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, one does not imply the other. I've removed the link in the article. The abundance needs a reference. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

That etymology is rather expansive. I've read several sources that have said, "Platina means 'little silver'." Though I do not have any sources off the top of my head, I know the etymology is too expansive. I don't care if wikipedia prefers book sources, the point of citations is to prove that you found an accurate source of information (preferably an accurate one), not to have sources that appeal to the users. A source that appeals, for all we know, could be wrong! (I'm only trying to contribute, not cause trouble)--96.242.163.228 (talk) 17:00, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I found the book of the previous etymology online [2], but you can find several sources that state that such etymology found in the book is a bit inaccurate. Do we remove the book source, since it doesn't seem to have much citation influence on other information? --96.242.163.228 (talk) 21:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please cite your sources here first. Mindat takes information from various sources, which are not always as reliable as books. Materialscientist (talk) 21:45, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the "del Pinto" part from "platina del Pinto" - Britannica, Oxford dictionary and www.etymonline.com don't mention it. Indeed sounds speculative. Materialscientist (talk) 22:31, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ulloa called the material platina del Pinto in 1756 [3] --Stone (talk) 09:39, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Ulloa wrote it "was called Platina di Pinto", i.e. it is not that he named it so. Ulloa is not the sole discoverer. Thus the question is what came first, "platina" or "platina del Pinto", and which term was more common. Materialscientist (talk) 09:48, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What I can tell you from looking in the references below and looking into a full bibliography here [4] I can tell you that in the 1750s already both del and di was used. --Stone (talk) 19:25, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
First, I have no preference to any of these names, and mostly reacted to the IP changes. Second, it seems (say, from your list [5]) that all three names were used. I would treat all those historical reports as primary sources and go by secondary sources, which is what I tried to do following Britannica and Etymonline. (I've briefly checked one major Soviet etymological dictionary right now - it also omits Pinto). Materialscientist (talk) 07:25, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The flap about the use of Platinum with Hydrogen and/or Deuterium makes the structure of the atom interesting. It may be visualized as an accumulation of 78 Deuterons plus the following number of excess neutrons: 34 for EE78Pt190 (0.014%), 36 for EE78Pt192 (0.782%), 38 for EE78Pt194 (32.967%), 39 for EO78Pt195 (33.832%), 40 for EE78Pt196 (25.242%), and 42 for EE78Pt198 (7.163%). Nothing has been mentioned concerning about isotopic differences related to this matter. 78Pt Platinum is the 8th element of the 3rd (2 + 4 + 4 = 10) 10 element transmission series and accordingly lacks 2 deuterons from being a completed 80Hg Mercury stricture. It may thus be assumed that 2 of the excess neutrons are in locations where deuterons would result in the creation of of 80Hg Mercury. The fact that the atom lacks 2 protons from achieving a 90Hg configuration probably indicates there are 2 corner positions in the 78Pt structure series that did not accumulate the required proton of the deutron pair.The stability trend line through this area has the formula A = 3Z - 40, which runs through EE78Pt196, but does not continue into 79Au Gold because OE79Au197 is the beginning of a new trend line extension that extends from OE79Au197 through OE83Bi209. The question accordingly arises as to if any of the various isotopes are particularly significant with relation to this subject matter. The constituency values indicate that the greater than + 38 isotopes are nearer to the stability trend line category. It is accordingly considered that a design of experiments concerning the properties of 78Pt Platinum should include tests of the specific isotopes EE78Pt190, EO78Pt195, and EE78Pt198, in order to discover any significant factors related to the excess neutron number.WFPM (talk) 14:16, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

--Stone (talk) 19:10, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is a "Native Deposit"?

Does their exist some ancient Cherokee tradition that involves storing platinum in one's bank account?

Seriously, I'm sure this article is an excellent read for a chemist, yet I doubt all too many chemists require Wikipedia to tell them stuff about platinum they likely already know anyway.

Well written article.

Too well written.

Care to dumb it down a good half dozen notches for those of us who aren't quite sure what a "μ" is, or even when a link is provided, are sent on very distracting little cyber-adventures to explain to us what an "isotope" is or how exactly a metal can be classified as the most laid back, relaxed, "least reactionary metals" of the bunch, only to be led to an article entitled Abundance of elements in Earth's crust (???)... ultimately just leading us to vanish into Wikipedia Bolivia having completely forgotten that we originally came here to find out about Latinum or something? 70.80.23.98 (talk) 12:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Platinum reactivity error

This article plainly states that platinum is the "least reactive metal", linking to a basic reactivity series (which contains very few elements in it) as proof. This is misleading, as Iridium is the least reactive metal, and it isn't the only metal that is less reactive than platinum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xavier47 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Production and Trade

I noticed that the section "Production and Trade" deals with production only, trade in not mentioned or described.Ernstvgr (talk) 09:35, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Platinum&oldid=552860161"