Talk:Indium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Version 0.5 (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
 
Note icon
This article is within of subsequent release version of Natural sciences.
WikiProject Elements (Rated GA-class, High-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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

Article changed over to new Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements format by maveric149. Elementbox converted 14:50, 5 July 2005 by Femto (previous revision was that of 02:10, 23 May 2005).

Information Sources[edit]

Some of the text in this entry was rewritten from Los Alamos National Laboratory - Indium. Additional text was taken directly from USGS Indium Statistics and Information, from the Elements database 20001107 (via dict.org), Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (via dict.org) and WordNet (r) 1.7 (via dict.org). Data for the table was obtained from the sources listed on the main page and Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements but was reformatted and converted into SI units.

cost of indium[edit]

On the "Los Alamos National Laboratory" site it says: "The present cost of indium is about $1 to $5/g, depending on quantity and purity. "

This is far more expensive than it's said here.

According to my 2003-2004 Alfa Aesar (scientific supply) catalog, In prices range anywhere from US $1.5/g for 99.99% pure shot to $60 for a .23 g piece of very thin foil. I imagine industrial purchasers who would buy in large quantities and might not need super-high purity might be able to get it for less than $1/g.
Ah, here is an authoritative source: US Geological Survey It may be the source for the 2000 $188/kg number. Cost in 2003 was $170/kg and the estimated number for 2004 was $600/kg. It's not clear why the big jump from 2003 to 2004.
The "big jump" is probably due to increased demand from LCD manufacturers, who use indium-tin oxide as a transparent electrode. This is now one of the largest markets for indium.

This is true. The price for 99.99% pure indium jumped to over $1000/kg around 2005 due to the popularity of LCD screens, but has settled back to between $500 and $600 (http://www.metal-pages.com/metals/indium/, Feb. 2011). Of course, when you buy indium by the gram from a company that doesn't actually make it (Alfa Aesar), you will certainly pay more. Indium foil is a value added product and will cost significantly more than indium ingot because of such things as added processing, thickness tolerance, and preservation considerations (e.g. specialized packaging to prevent oxidation and contamination).

I would suggest that the value in the article is correct. Eric 18:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Recent prices of $700 to $1000/kg are reported on the Chinese metal industry news site metalfirst.com. In addition, the element collector's website emovendo.net has .9999 Indium available for just over $1/g as of 15-Feb-2006.

Indium comments[edit]

Indium's "cry", as it is commonly called, sounds more like a crunching sound.

Teck Cominco is now called Teck Metals.

An interesting property of indium is that it cold welds. Clean the oxide off two strips of indium with a bit of dilute HCl and press them together. They will instantly bond together; when pulled apart the bond will hold and the indium will tear next to the bond.

References[edit]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Indium. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:00, 2 October 2016 (UTC)


Ok, will take a look now - notes below: Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:00, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

The last sentence of teh lead, (. Indium has no biological role and while its compounds are somewhat toxic when injected into the bloodstream, most occupational exposure is through ingestion, from which indium compounds are not absorbed well, and inhalation, from which they are moderately absorbed.) is long. Recommend splitting.
 Done Double sharp (talk) 13:58, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
I'd rejig the top of the Physical section - if you switch the first two sentences, you can place the two sentences mentioning softness next to each other and remove the "very soft" from the sentence, Indium is a very soft, silvery-white, highly ductile, relatively rare post-transition metal with a bright luster. - also rareness is not a property but should be mentioned in occurrence.
 Done Double sharp (talk) 08:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
InH3 has only a transitory existence, even at low temperatures, before decomposing - how long and how low?
Dunno. It's not actually known, see Greenwood and Earnshaw (p. 232): "InH3 and TlH3 appear to be too unstable to exist in the uncoordinated state though they may have transitory existence in ethereal solutions at low temperatures." Double sharp (talk) 08:36, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
link monovalent
 Done Double sharp (talk) 08:52, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
the History could possibly be expanded - e.g. what happened, how did the element get ratified etc. Any fleshing out of this section would be welcome and give more of a story
I have added a little bit of info (Reich was colour-blind and used Richter as an assistant with the spectroscopy; they later fell out because Richter claimed sole credit – perhaps because he was the one to isolate the metal, and the one who first saw the violet spectral line for obvious reasons). There's not much to say about how the the element was ratified, though. IUPAC did not yet exist in 1863, but the spectral-line evidence was convincing. The next year Richter isolated indium metal, and if there were any ghostly doubts in 1863, they would have been firmly quashed in 1864. Double sharp (talk) 09:10, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Other than that, reads well. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Also, I addressed the [citation needed] tag. Double sharp (talk) 09:49, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Would be prudent to note at File:Kristallstruktur Chrom(III)-chlorid.png that this structure representative of Indium trichloride...
 Done (and referenced to the book that the German WP uses as a source for this). Double sharp (talk) 14:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
On a plus, Earwigs is clear

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:
Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:
Citations to reliable sources, where required:
No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:
Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail: - all good pending one image query above. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:42, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Indium. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:10, 26 July 2017 (UTC)