Talk:Oxide

message: Why is there a list at all? If we need a list then the short list of elements that do NOT form an oxide would be more informative.--Axiosaurus (talk) 09:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support removing the list and replacing it with a link :Category:Oxides, with a statement that all elements except a handful form oxides, usually lots of oxides per element.  WE editors like lists but in the case of oxides, such a list implies a finiteness that is naive and misleading, as well as impractically long.  WE has lists of ligands, but every known compound except a few (mostly those that do not form oxides) would serve as a ligand.--Smokefoot (talk) 12:22, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of all known oxides 

message: The section of "solubility" is badly written. It does not explain why most of the oxides is not soluble in water, neither does it explain the relation between instability of O2− in water with oxide's solubility. Hope anyone pass-by can improve it. 
Salt (talk) 09:51, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solubility 

message: Here's a draft of a possible oxide table as discussed above. 28bytes (talk) 22:13, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, but the trouble is "known" here merely means existence of wikipedia articles. Example: we've got only one article on technetium oxide, but more are mentioned in technetium, and even if not mentioned, this doesn't guarantee the number. Another problem is many elements form a large number of non-stoichimetric oxides, which are rarely listed on wikipedia. Materialscientist (talk) 22:27, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Would dropping the legend and color-coding be better, then? Or perhaps replacing it with a coloring scheme based on something else? 28bytes (talk) 22:42, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I agree - the table is well intentioned and actually very nice if one knows the facts and the extraordinary complications associated with these materials.  But the table is also extremely naive and very, very misleading, which we cannot expect our readers to sort out.--Smokefoot (talk) 22:43, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: A first thought is to replace the number of oxides with their classification to basic, acidic and amphoteric, but, as all information, this would need to be properly referenced (not just to wikipedia itself). Materialscientist (talk) 22:48, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's another crack at it, with minimal coloring: just a simple "click on the element to get information about its oxide(s)" template. 28bytes (talk) 12:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oxide table 

message: Am scared to look at how high the hits are.  EVen just on chemistry, (listing major trends in structure and the like) this page is lacking.  Not to mention a broader disucsion of the topic (major applications, other?)  TCO (talk) 05:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Couldn't help myself.  It is 18,000.  (Sue Gardiner, this is not the sort of page that will be built by Facebookers dropping in and dumping unreffed sentences ad hoc.  It needs at least a grad student level person to care about it and at least put the major structure together.  We should think about how to attract those peoples.  Seriously.  We can still go after the Global South and the Facebookers.  Doesn't need to be one or the other...but we should do something to attract more semi-experts here.)TCO (talk) 05:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

text: Expound.  What should be pruned, what should be added, and why?TCO (talk) 03:57, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  we differ then on the definition of crap. In the meanwhile the current definition in the lead is referenced, see here, so no real problem exists V8rik (talk) 21:31, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Presence of two or more elements, one of which is O, is required for an oxide, but does not guarantee it will be called an oxide. Materialscientist (talk) 05:45, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I think the expression "binary compound" should be added in the first sentence.--Spmoura (talk) 18:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sheesh this page needs major work 

message: "Most of the Earth's crust consists of solid oxides, the result of elements being oxidized by the oxygen in air or in water. Hydrocarbon combustion affords the two principal carbon oxides: carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. Even materials considered pure elements often develop an oxide coating. For example, aluminium foil develops a thin skin of Al2O3 (called a passivation layer) that protects the foil from further corrosion."
I think it's a bit offtopic, but don't delete it, just move it down. 181.50.178.92 (talk) 22:24, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  this could be moved out of the introduction paragraph 

message: I work in a lab that studies complex oxides. My labmates recently noticed that no article on complex oxides exists. I am thinking of making a new, short article on complex oxides. Any objections? I could also just put it in as a section on this page. I prefer giving it its own article, but I may be biased from working on them for five years.Tedsanders (talk) 20:01, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: An intermediate step is to write a few sentence overview for this article, anchored with a reference to a textbook or monograph on complex oxides.  The real hurdles to the article are our abiltiy to  (a) create an article that does not cite you or your colleagues and (b) base the article on WP:SECONDARY sources - textbooks and reviews, not journal articles!  You'd be surprised how many people say they want to write an article but what they really want is to write something about their own (narrow) work.  Typically the lede paragraph define the field of complex oxides. Final advice: Wikipedia has no aspiration to report recent breakthroughs (which rarely are breakthroughs) or hot results.  We want settled knowledge.  That's my 2 cents. --Smokefoot (talk) 23:42, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Creating complex oxide article 

message: Oxides are often not thought of salts. Darsie42 (talk) 15:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which oxides are salts? 

message: I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:NOR, WP:CS, WP:NOR, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 17:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations