Talk:Selenium/GA1
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk · contribs) 13:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Initial comments edit
I'm done an initial quick read of the article. On this basis, it looks a very strong contender for GA; and I would expect to be awarding GA at the end of this review. Having said that, I've not yet checked any of the references, so there may be some corrective actions - we will see. Pyrotec (talk) 15:53, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm now reviewing the article against WP:WIAGA section by section, starting from Characteristics and then doing the WP:Lead last. Here I will be mostly highlighting "problems", so a section that is OK is likely to have few comments here. There will be an overall summary at the end of the review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:19, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
- Characteristics -
- Physical properties -
- Appears compliant. I had a look at one of my old course books (Cotton & Wilkinson, 3rd ed, 1972) - Se8 made by evaporation of solutions below 72 C, stable gray form can be grown from hot solutions of Se in aniline or from melts: worth mentioning?
- Isotopes & Occurrence -
- These two subsections appear to be compliant.
Pyrotec (talk) 18:13, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- History -
Pyrotec (talk) - Ref 21 (Trofast, Jan. Berzelius' Discovery of Selenium) has not been fully cited. The article comes from a journal, which has a publisher, journal title, volume & no., date of publication, pages and ISSN: none of these are given in the citation.- Pyrotec (talk) - Ref 28 (The need for selenite and molybdate in the formation of formic dehydrogenase by members of the Coli-aerogenes group of bacteria. 57. 1954.) has not been fully cited. The article comes from a journal, which has a personal author, journal title, and page numbers: none of these are given in the citation.
- Otherwise OK.
- Production -
- Appears compliant.
- Chemical compounds -
- Chalcogen compounds -
- The text appears to contradict itself in respect of SeO3: i.e. "Selenium forms two stable oxides: selenium dioxide (SeO2) and selenium trioxide (SeO3). .... Unlike sulfur, which forms a stable trioxide, selenium trioxide is unstable and decomposes to the dioxide above 185 °C". I suspect that the problem lies in the wording of the "Unlike sulfur, ..." sentence.
Done SO3 is stable, but SeO3 isn't. I've fixed it. Double sharp (talk) 15:47, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- There is no mention of how selenium trioxide is made (I looked it up and also when it was first prepared - 1930, by the way).
- Done Would that be enough? Double sharp (talk) 15:47, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Pyrotec (talk) - The equation: "3 Se + 4 HNO3 → 3 H2SeO3 + 4 NO" is balanced for Se and N but not H and O; there appears to be one molecule of water missing.
- The text appears to contradict itself in respect of SeO3: i.e. "Selenium forms two stable oxides: selenium dioxide (SeO2) and selenium trioxide (SeO3). .... Unlike sulfur, which forms a stable trioxide, selenium trioxide is unstable and decomposes to the dioxide above 185 °C". I suspect that the problem lies in the wording of the "Unlike sulfur, ..." sentence.
- Halogen compounds -
- I find the wikilink on the two chemical compounds visually distracting. I would prefer the link to be on Selenium monochloride and Sulfuryl chloride with the chemical formulas afterwards. It has been done below for "(sulfur hexafluoride), SeF6", why the inconsistency?
- Done Double sharp (talk) 15:47, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- I find the wikilink on the two chemical compounds visually distracting. I would prefer the link to be on Selenium monochloride and Sulfuryl chloride with the chemical formulas afterwards. It has been done below for "(sulfur hexafluoride), SeF6", why the inconsistency?
...stopping for now. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 19:24, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
- In passing, I've completed refs. 21 and 28 and the HNO3 reaction (water is also missing in the source book), though don't expect much from me on more time-consuming issues :-). Materialscientist (talk) 01:22, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks Materialscientist. Pyrotec (talk) 13:45, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Selenides -
- The reaction: "Al2Se3 + 6 H2O → 8 Al2O3 + H2Se" is clearly wrong (or perhaps the vandals have struck?).
- Done Double sharp (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- The reaction: "Al2Se3 + 6 H2O → 8 Al2O3 + H2Se" is clearly wrong (or perhaps the vandals have struck?).
- Other compounds -
- I find the wikilink on the chemical compound S4N4 visually distracting. I would prefer the link to be on its proper name Tetrasulfur tetranitride with the chemical formula afterwards. It has been done below for "(sulfur hexafluoride), SeF6", why the inconsistency?
- Done Double sharp (talk) 16:06, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- I find the wikilink on the chemical compound S4N4 visually distracting. I would prefer the link to be on its proper name Tetrasulfur tetranitride with the chemical formula afterwards. It has been done below for "(sulfur hexafluoride), SeF6", why the inconsistency?
- Organoselenium compounds -
- Looks OK.
- Applications -
- Ref 54 (^ Davis, Joseph R. (2001). %7C page 278 Copper and Copper Alloys. ISBN 978-0-87170-726-0.) is strangely cited. It's a book, but the publisher is not cited; the page number appears to be 278, but its not clear what the "%7C page 278" means.
- Done Double sharp (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- Refs 58, 59, 60 and 66 are books, but the publishers are not cited.
- Ref 54 (^ Davis, Joseph R. (2001). %7C page 278 Copper and Copper Alloys. ISBN 978-0-87170-726-0.) is strangely cited. It's a book, but the publisher is not cited; the page number appears to be 278, but its not clear what the "%7C page 278" means.
- Biological role -
...stopping for now. To be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 15:08, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand "2 GSH + H2O2----GSH-Px → GSSG + 2 H2O". The equation "2 GSH + H2O2 → GSSG + 2 H2O" seems to make more sense and its almost identical to the equation in Glutathione peroxidase.
- Otherwise, OK.
- WP:Lead -
- Looks OK.
Pyrotec (talk) 08:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Overall summary edit
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- Well referenced.
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- Well referenced.
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
I'm awarding this article GA status. Having looked at other chemical/element articles, such as Oxygen which is now an FA, I suspect that Selenium could in due course become a strong candidate for WP:FAC. Congratulations on a fine article. Pyrotec (talk) 08:27, 17 June 2012 (UTC)