Talk:Fullerene

message: Bucky balls were popular in the US a few decades back, and they continue to be sold as toys. See [] for example. This should perhaps be a separate page. Wakablogger2 (talk) 02:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Toys 

message: I came here looking for the toy Buckyballs... I cant seem to find it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pyrospark (talk • contribs) 16:06, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did not find what i was looking for 

message: This article needs to be protected urgently. Google features bucky balls on the front page. This is the first search result, so spammers cause vandalism. Protection needed at least for one day.--78.190.26.157 (talk) 21:19, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article protection 

message: please replace any "discovered" with "synthesized" or "invented" 
the term "discovered" applies only to naturally occurring items. 94.162.80.211 (talk) 09:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fullerenes occur naturally, and had been produced in space and on earth (in arc discharges, for example) for many decades. Thus Kroto et al. did not not really synthesize them - they, crudely speaking, separated them from a common discharge soot. Process optimization is essential only for the C60 yield. Materialscientist (talk) 09:49, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 94.162.80.211, 4 September 2010 

message: Hi. Could anyone explain what happens with the 4th Coal bounding? I can see that the coal uses only 3 in the Fullerens. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.238.106.96 (talk • contribs) 
:Carbon forms double bonds in many organic compounds, including fullerene. Materialscientist (talk) 10:16, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Buckminsterfullerene-2D-skeletal.png Simon de Danser (talk) 02:11, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

text: Or to put that another way … —Tamfang (talk) 02:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  4 bondings of C

message: Add the word 'The' or 'An' in front of the word "Icosahedral" in the sentence:
Icosahedral C60H60 cage was mentioned in 1965 as a possible topological structure.
This will make the sentence above gramatically correct.
Corrected versions:
The Icosahedral C60H60 cage was mentioned in 1965 as a possible topological structure.
An Icosahedral C60H60 cage was mentioned in 1965 as a possible topological structure.
71.164.110.157 (talk) 14:08, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Added the to the start of the sentence. --Stickee (talk) 14:24, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 71.164.110.157, 4 September 2010 

message: This part of the article doesn't say much on safety and toxicity.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.49.125.215 (talk) 16:29, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Safety and Toxicity

message: "Nanobuds have been obtained by adding fullerenes to carbon nanotubes."
As far as i can tell from the rest of the article, carbon nanotubes are fullerenes, so that statement makes no sense. Unfortunately, the main article on nanobuds has similar verbiage. Can someone more knowledgeable fix this, or at least leave some comments here? thaks Doceddi (talk) 13:50, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed. The terminology is misleading (to me) as most scientists do not mix nanotubes and fullerenes (meaning fullerenes=buckminsterfullerenes). Materialscientist (talk) 11:14, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "fullerene" vs. "nanotube"? 

message: The article links the word "superaromacity" to the "aromacity" article... but in the "aromacity" article, superaromacity isen't mentioned! 77.212.171.42 (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "superaromacity"? 

message: the claim "In 2012 it was revealed that oral administration prolonged the lifespan of rats by nearly 100% without showing toxic effects" does not point to any study/reference.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.220.13.14 (talk) 04:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess this is the relevant article : http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142961212003237 , of which subsection 3.3 states: "The estimated median lifespan (EML) for the C60-treated rats was 42 months while the EMLs for control rats and olive oil-treated rats were 22 and 26 months, respectively. These are increases of 18 and 90% for the olive-oil and C60-treated rats, respectively, as compared to controls."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.49.235.4 (talk) 12:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of reference 

message: What are properties of that allotropes? What is they appearance? Does pure fullerenes have some metallic luster? What about band gap? I saw a book in which there was written that C60 (or C70) has electrical conductivity of 1014 ohm/m (not 1014 ohm/m, which I saw on some pages in Internet) and it has relatively narrow band gap (1,9 eV (in some pages in the Internet there is about 2,3 eV for C60)). Can more nonmetallic elements (especially sulfur) form "fullerenes" or nanotubes or the element or compound must be at least a near-metalloid to form such complex, polyatomic structures? What are boiling, melting and sublimation points of fullerenes (at standard pressure)? Fullerenes look less metallic than diamond, which is NOT so clearly nonmetallic (crystalline structure like Si and Ge, transparency and low electrical conductivity are not only properties of a typical nonmetal, diamond has many metalloidal properties (very high melting, boiling point, extreme hardness and thermal conductivity, very high density), in fact diamond has mixed properties of a metalloid and a nonmetal, both very strongly marked!, it is even "bad metalloid", not a "just nonmetal").
95.49.108.48 (talk) 22:53, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Properties of PURE fullerenes 

message: Of nanotubes:
: … and relative chemical inactivity (as it is cylindrical and "planar" — that is, it has no "exposed" atoms that can be easily displaced).
As a nanotube has no hidden atoms, all are exposed in the ordinary sense of the word; how about replacing "exposed" with "outermost"? —Tamfang (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  flatness of graphenes 

message: The usage of Buckyball is under discussion, see talk:buckyball -- 65.94.40.137 (talk) 09:36, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "{{noredirect|Buckyball}}"

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Fullerene. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.solina.demon.co.uk/c60.htm
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://machinedesign.com/ContentItem/60618/Anewbuckyballbouncesintotown.aspx
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://lunainc.com/technology-development/materials/organic-photovoltaic-technology/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:41, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fullerene. 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/20100618165649/http://invsee.asu.edu/nmodules/Carbonmod/everywhere.html to http://invsee.asu.edu/nmodules/Carbonmod/everywhere.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090628180538/http://worldandi.misto.cz/_MAIL_/article/nsapr99.html to http://worldandi.misto.cz/_MAIL_/article/nsapr99.html
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) 19:53, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As part of removing the section "Solubility" to fullerene solubility, I also moved three sections of this talk page to Talk:Fullerene solubility:
*solubility
*It is the long experience of pharma
*Solubility table data - refs and signif figures
--Jorge Stolfi (talk) 02:50, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved entries to [[:Talk:Fullerene solubility]]

message: The "Preparation" section of buckminsterfullerene says "It was first generated in 1984 by Eric Rohlfing, Donald Cox and Andrew Kaldor[2][3] using a laser to vaporize carbon in a supersonic helium beam. In 1985 their work was repeated by Harold Kroto, James R. Heath, Sean O'Brien, Robert Curl, and Richard Smalley at Rice University, who recognized the structure of C60 as buckminsterfullerine[sic]".  But the "History" section of that article and this article does not mention that 1984 result.  Is that correct? --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 16:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doscovery: Kroto 1985 or Rohlfing 1984? 

message: The lead sentence and one other sentence allows rings of length 7, but the IUPAC definition does not allow them. Who allows rings of length 7?  A citation is needed. McKay (talk) 06:43, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  rings of length 7 

message: It's hard to know what this section is saying, since the layout and references are completely messed up, and the syntax is very confused, but it seems to be going into excessive detail about cancer treatment (detail that might be appropriate in articles on that subject) without any discussion of further applications if there are any. Some of the confusion seems to have been caused by changes made on 5 Feb 2024 by 106.51.83.72 who appears to be a persistent vandal - I don't know how to revert these edits without losing later genuine contributions. But anyway the section needs to be rewritten by someone who knows about the subject (I don't - that's why I came here in the first place). Newburyjohn (talk) 08:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Applications 

message: From what I've read so far (disclaimer: not yet any of the refs in this article), fullerene seems to refer only to closed structures like C_60 and C_70, not nanotubes or graphene, with buckminsterfullerene referring specifically to C_60 itself. Have I got that wrong? I realise the terminology might not yet be entirely standardise though.
Edit: I see I'm not the first to say this. In which case, I think the article should be split. Musiconeologist (talk) 15:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terminology