Talk:Graphite

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Graphite. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050522074754/http://mineral.galleries.com/minerals/elements/graphite/graphite.htm to http://mineral.galleries.com/minerals/elements/graphite/graphite.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Is the gross calorific value of graphite known?  Presumably the fixed carbon is 100 per cent.  From the "Coal" article:
"Graphite is one of the more difficult coals to ignite and not commonly used as fuel; it is most used in pencils, or powdered for lubrication. "
The graph to the right shows a general decline above 89 per cent fixed carbon (semi-anthracite) and activated charcoal is 19 852 J/g.  The maximum calorific value on the chart in the coal article of 16 000 BTU/lb is 37 216.  Which is probably why, along with having better uses for it and the difficulty of ignition, it for the most part it not used for heating, of course.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Calorific_value_of_activated_carbon  
Opasw (talk) 02:54, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A form of coal 

message: Hello,
I found myself missing some references to justify the Structure section, in particular the nature of the bonds,
cohesion and optical properties:
Atoms in the plane are bonded covalently, with only three of the four potential bonding sites satisfied. The fourth electron is free to migrate in the plane, making graphite electrically conductive. However, it does not conduct in a direction at right angles to the plane. Bonding between layers is via weak van der Waals bonds, which allows layers of graphite to be easily separated, or to slide past each other
This review provides straightforward references for these, as well as being good
enough a reference itself.
I'm unsure how to (correctly) add references, I'd appreciate it if someone could (if deemed appropriate).
Miguelmurca (talk) 00:39, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the source. I added the citation for you. If you'd like to do this yourself, you could read Wikipedia:Citing sources. RockMagnetist (DCO visiting scholar) (talk) 04:46, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source for Properties 

message: Under "Other Properties" is this:
    If it is made in a fluidized bed at 1000–1300 °C then it is isotropic turbostratic, and is used in blood 
    contacting devices like mechanical heart valves and is called pyrolytic carbon, and is not diamagnetic.
But the linked pyrolitic carbon article says:
    It is also more diamagnetic (χ = −4×10−4) against the cleavage plane, exhibiting the greatest diamagnetism 
    (by weight) of any room-temperature diamagnet.
 John G Hasler (talk) 23:57, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Pyrolitic Carbon Diamagnetic Or Not? 

message: In section "Structure", there is this sentence, evidenced in italics:
In diamond the bonds are sp3 and the atoms form tetrahedra with each bound to four nearest neighbors.
Now, to my knowledge, sp3 is a term to designate a type of hybridization for the orbitals of an atom, and should not be employed to designate a kind of bond. The bonds in diamond are homonuclear covalent σ bonds, deriving from the overlap of sp3 hybrid orbitals.
In addition, just subsequently, there is this other sentence (in italics): "In graphite they (the bonds, I presume) are sp2 orbital hybrids and the atoms form in planes with each bound to three nearest neighbors 120 degrees apart". The sentence is not clear. A reshuffling could be beneficial, in my opinion. Ekisbares (talk) 09:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doubts about terminology 

message: From Pencils:
: "Low-quality amorphous graphite is used and sourced mainly from China."
This is unclear. Is higher-quality amorphous graphite produced elsewhere (for use in pencils), or do pencils not need higher-quality amorphous graphite? If the latter, "Low-quality" could be left out.
--Mortense (talk) 15:31, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear about low-quality graphite 

message: Graphite will oxidise at a high enough temperature, but can be used as a heat-resistant material at lower temperatures. It will even burn. See https://www.hindawi.com/journals/stni/2011/589747/
Some information on this in the article and figures would be good. I'm looking for sources. Andrewa (talk) 09:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burning 

message: The section "Rhombohedral graphite" contains four images showing structure of graphite. Are these all showing the rhombohedral graphite structure? If so, we probably also should have pictures of hexagonal graphite. AxelBoldt (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: , they are all showing the more common hex structure. There was no need for the "Rhombohedral graphite" section. Fixed. Ponor (talk) 15:57, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure graphics 

message: The proposal is to split this article into mineral forms of graphite and synthetic graphite (chemical).  Probably the synthetic material would be the forum for the fancy intercalation chem.  --Smokefoot (talk) 02:04, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Graphite as mineral species

message: I heard in a France24 tv interview a Moroccan scientist claim that he invented graphite when I came to read the article here... there is no mention of his name? 
the interview is about why he wasn't among the 2022 laureates for chemistry. 41.249.230.206 (talk) 23:15, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can identify a reliable source for this, we could add something about it. Girth Summit (blether) 23:32, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  invention of artificial graphite? 

message: In addition to significant changes in wording to make the article flow better, I also made these edits:
I removed the following because it looks like it was just copied and pasted from promotional websites:
* 
I removed these because they seem more promotional than relevant to the article:
* 
* 
Also, the word  was used inconsistently (with and without the registered trademark symbol), so I changed that. Coldspur (talk) 05:58, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big edits