Talk:Toxic heavy metal

message: This article doesn't really talk about anything associated with heavy metals The hub 12:08, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Topic 

message: I don't think beryllium, the second lightest metal and the fourth lightest element, should be included in the definition of heavy metals. However, mentioning that light, but toxic, metals are sometimes incorrectly called heavy metals would be fine. -- Kjkolb 02:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beryllium included as a heavy metal 

message: I'm sorry, I am confused, a search of wikipedia will aid you to discover that both beryllium and potassium are (as labeled according to other wikipedia users) the "second lightest metals" since I doubt this is true, could someone who knows please verify which one of these two entries is true, following is the link to the Potassium article.  Thanks for your help.
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium
:The article says that potassium is the second lightest by density (at least it does now). Beryllium has a lower atomic mass, so it is lighter on a per atom basis. Density is mass divided by volume, though (they're not talking density on a single atom basis, which beryllium would win). If a light element packs its atoms closely together, then a solid piece or a cupful of the element may be heavier than a heavier element with atoms spaced farther apart. -- Kjkolb 10:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Beryllium or Potassium as Second-Lightest Metal

message: A request for the above separate page was put on the Expansion page.
A minor point for the article on creation - the use of heavy metals in "detective fiction poisoning" - Arsenic and Old Lace, and thallium in Agatha Christie's The Pale Horse. Jackiespeel 17:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Heavy metal poisoning

message: Shouldn't the title of this page be Heavy metal rather than Heavy metals, by Wikipedia:Naming conventions?  ―Wmahan. 06:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page title 

message: I got to this page from a link from Omega-3_fatty_acid, in particular, am interested in which foods have a high risk of heavy metals (such as certain fish... which ones?), and in what magnitudes?
* Generally fishes and sea food - the larger, the more mercury poisoned may they be; sea salt; kelp; other.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ozrev (talk • contribs) 22:55, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heavy metals in food sources 

message: I'm not sure if that was the appropriate tag, but this article does not read like an encyclopedic entry should.  I don't currently have the knowledge to update the article properly, so hopefully this tag will draw someone in. Maghnus 05:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added Wikify Tag 

message: Is depleted Uranium classified as a heavy metal?  Would it be an acceptable example (it is quite dense, it is a metal, so I would be hard pressed to deny that it is a heavy metal).
: read referece #1 and your question will be answered C.wolke (talk) 21:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Depleted Uranium

message: Heavy metal, in most cases, is pejorative, so I've long understood it to exclude essential minerals. Then again, I see that balance is important, so I can understand some authors including Zinc. Beryllium is a hard case, since it's lighter than many inevitable elements of biology (carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus). Lead is clearly in the category. So are Tin and antimony. I mean to avoid saying "Heavy Metal" without excluding transition metals. I've got this tap water dechlorinator that says on the bottle that it removes Heavy Metals. I'm not going to believe that until I see a precipitate. BrewJay (talk) 10:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: read referece #1 and your question will be answered C.wolke (talk) 21:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  One Decision 

message: *http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/28/28090/1.html
*http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwermetalle
*http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantal
*http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schmelzpunkt
*http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siedepunkt
194.66.226.95 (talk) 15:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: TEGA-Öfen erhitzen die Proben bis auf 1000 Grad Celsius (NASA/JPL/University of Arizona/Texas A&M)

message: Bismuth is not stable.Tailsfan2 (talk) 22:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Bismuth

message: The article says: One source defines heavy metal as one of the "common transition metals, such as copper, lead, and zinc. 
Well, that source isn't worth citing as whoever wrote it doesn't know that lead is not a transition metal - it's a group 4 element. 194.75.159.78 (talk) 13:23, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know if the source actually said that, but it was erroneous/confusing ... removed. Vsmith (talk) 15:57, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lead is not a transition element

message: As the article indicates, the meaning of heavy metal is unclear.  This article thus joins a collection of similarly dubious articles including toxic metals, gold salts, and now light metals.  I am sure that the creation of these articles was motivated by good intentions, but as a chemist, I think that these articles do a net disservice to the readership: they delude readers into thinking that these terms have merit among mainstream chemists.  --Smokefoot (talk) 17:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I tend to agree with you (I was the one to add reference #1 and the whole bit about the ambiguity of the term). However, we can't deny that "heavy metal" is used very often by the public (every time there is a news report on Hg or Pb for instance), and is even used by many members of the scientific community who should know better. It is therefore important to have a Wikipedia article that acknowledges this term's existence and explains what people "think" they mean when they use it. The article should make it clear that this term is meaningless. This isn't so clear in the article right now - if anything, the warnings of the first paragraph seem to be ignored by the content of the rest of the article. Time for a re-write. I've moved your comment to the top of the comments section in the hopes that it will inspire someone to work on the article (I hope I haven't committed a faux-pas in doing so!)Nojamus (talk) 19:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with Nojamus -- people use the term "heavy metal" extremely often, and so it is important to have a Wikipedia article on that topic. Even though the term is almost as meaningless as phlogiston or Martian canal or Counter-Earth. I hope that all these articles never delude our readers, but all make it clear that these terms do not have merit. --68.0.124.33 (talk) 22:05, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agree on the dubious value.  Quote: "...these terms do not have merit."  Perhaps not from a chemist's perspective, but they do from a linguist's.  ...and socially, as do vampires, beauty and GOD.  Quote: "Many different definitions have been proposed—some based on density, some on atomic number or atomic weight, and some on chemical properties or toxicity."  ...yet the first three or four are mostly ignored.  This should be repaired.  Vocabulary.com: "PRIMARY MEANINGS OF: heavy metal 1 n, a metal of relatively high density (specific gravity greater than about 5) or of high relative atomic weight (especially one that is poisonous like mercury or lead)"  And freedictionary.org "Heavy metals (Chem.), the metallic elements not included in the groups of the alkalies, alkaline earths, or the earths; specifically, the heavy metals, as gold, mercury, platinum, lead, silver, etc." RE: the conversation here, scientists should not control this topic any more than they should control the topic of beauty or GOD.  I think the Philosophy of Science agrees.<BR> --68.127.85.25 (talk) 00:27, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Article of dubious value

message: Arsenic (As) is not a metal at all. I suggest to remove As completely from the text as this element being listed here is even more misleading than the term "heavy metal" itself. C.wolke (talk) 20:43, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arsenic 

message: The lede says "The term originated with reference to the harmful effects of metals like ..." but the second paragraph of  says "The origin of the term is not clear." Seems like one of these needs to be changed a bit. YBG (talk) 04:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Changed the second one, thanks. Sandbh (talk) 08:03, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the term 

message: I've removed a bit of over-use of toxic. Seems the rewrite last spring was rather over-done with every occurrence of heavy metal replaced with toxic heavy metal. Seems the over-use of toxic was a case of WP:OR by a naive or rather careless editor. Vsmith (talk) 21:44, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toxic overkill 

message: Suggested file to add to this article. — Cirt (talk) 17:04, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bill Nye for National Science Foundation 

message: Lead poisoning is common amongst societies and individuals that distill (almost alwasy illegaly) alcohol using copper pipine and other equipment that is soldered together. High temperature vapours leach significant quantities of lead from the solder, thus contaminating the alcohol.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.161.4.233 (talk) 08:33, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I've added this to the article, in contamination sources. Sandbh (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omitted source of lead poisoning. 

message: FYI, the meaning and usage of  is under discussion, for the move request, see talk:heavy metal music -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 05:49, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: "Heavy metal"

message: — Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024