Talk:Vanadium/GA2
GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- Where are the references for the following:
- The paragraph that begins with "The correspondence between vanadate"
- "Three factors are rather" paragraph
- "Vanadium has been detected spectroscopically in light from the Sun and some other stars." sentence
- "Purification of vanadium" paragraph
- "Nonetheless, there is no evidence that vanabins carry oxygen, in contrast to hemoglobin and hemocyanin." sentence
- "The most dangerous compound" paragraph
- "and other organs." clause
- "Metallic vanadium is potentially a fire hazard, particularly when in a finely-divided state." paragraph
- "Other uses" should be written as prose rather than bulleted points
- Is the "Vanadium in literature" really necessary? I don't think it is.
Gary King (talk) 21:39, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
The prose needs to be better. Shouldn't "that has the symbol" be "that is represented by the symbol"? "was (incorrectly) suggested" – The brackets are unnecessary. Please give the entire article a run-through. Gary King (talk) 22:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
- Now it got a complete workover and I think it is OK now, please have a look.--Stone (talk) 06:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- "of an oxide"
- Is the article using American or British spelling? "stabilises" is British, with the "s" in "ses", while "analyzing" is American, with the "z" in "zing".
- "his claim of discovery four" – to clarify, as it isn't really all that clear what he claimed otherwise. Technically he didn't claim anything, just discovered.
- "Vanadium has good structural strength.[clarification needed]" – There's a tag here.
Gary King (talk) 16:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- There are a lot of small paragraphs. Can you merge them (logically) so that they flow better?
- Can you narrow down the number of images in the article? Free images are good, yes, but sometimes it's possible to go overboard with too many. Choose the ones that are most appropriate, and the rest can be left to a link to a Commons page. All four images in the gallery, for instance, is that necessary?
Gary King (talk) 19:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Merged several of the small paragraphes and reduced the number of images! Now better? The gallery was really a little to much. --Stone (talk) 20:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC)