|↓||Skip to table of contents||↓|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bronze article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Bronze has been listed as a level-3 vital article in Science. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|This article is written in American English (labor, traveled, realize, defense), and some terms used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot I. Any threads with no replies in 90 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
The statement "Bronze is considerably less brittle than iron." was nonsensical. I have deleted it. Pure iron is extremely flexible and ductile. However, this leaves the article without a coherent description of the mechanical properties of bronze, which were life-changing and of major importance for human cultural and economic development. Bronze age refers. Can anyone contribute factually accurate information here?? Plantsurfer (talk) 23:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- The metallurgy of iron and steel is quite complex and outside the scope of this article, but the above deleted statement was more or less correct. While pure elemental Fe is technically called "iron" and is, as you stated, quite soft and ductile, few people outside of a metallurgy or chemistry lab are referring to pure elemental Fe when they talk about "iron". When people speak of "iron", the material they are most often referring to is actually "cast iron" or "pig iron", which is an alloy of Fe with at least 2.1% carbon. Elemental Fe with between 0.002% and 2.1% carbon is referred to as "carbon steel". Once the carbon content goes over 2.1% the alloy is no longer referred to as steel, and it is again referred to as some kind of iron. Cast iron and pig iron are very brittle. A more syntactically correct statement would be that "Bronze is considerably less brittle than cast iron". I have restored a more informative version of the above deleted statement using "cast iron" rather than just "iron".Gcronau (talk) 07:29, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Latten is: what ?
Introduction: 1st para, last sentence: "Historically the term latten was used for such alloys." Which alloys ? The context leaves it unclear whether latten refers to bronze or copper alloys. Please would someone knowledgeable correct this ? Thanks. Darkman101 (talk) 05:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
The subsection on bronze statues contains the following sentence:
Bronze sculptures, although known for their longevity, still undergo microbial degradation; such as from certain species of yeasts.
Following the link that was provided and searching the article on the other end, the only reference that I could find was a species of yeast that grows on modern plastic coatings put protectively on ancient bronze statues. There is nothing about the yeast attacking the bronze itself. I propose that this sentence and the accompanying reference be totally removed, since the statement is fictional and the linked article contains absolutely no information about bronze itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakewind Writing (talk • contribs) 18:07, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Nitpick: Serbo-Croatian name for bronze
As it currently stands in the article:
early Persian birinj, biranj (برنج) "brass" (modern berenj), piring (پرنگ) "copper", from which also came Serbo-Croatian pìrinač "brass", Georgian brinǰao "bronze", Armenian płinj "copper".
Note that Pirinač means "rice" in Serbian. The correct word is "bronca" in Croatian, and "Bronza"/" Бронза " in Serbian.
Wikipedia technical problem: location of photographs
The problem apparently is general. Specifically, the photos for the "Musical instruments" subsection, in the editing layout of the text, are placed right below the subsection title. However, in the published text, they are located very clumsilly in the "See also" section. I tried to 're-set' the layout (by removing, then re-inserting the photos), but that simple fix didn't work. Elfelix (talk) 19:40, 24 October 2015 (UTC)