Talk:Unbiquadium

message: The old history of this page prior to its 2019 recreation may be found at Draft:Unbiquadium. Double sharp (talk) 13:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I'm confused. On all the pages about elements they say that Ununoctium is the highest numbered element discovered, yet here it implies that element 124 has been discovered. Is this claim true? --Ferocious Flying Ferrets 02:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm confused too. Scientists did experiments about the fission of element 124 with the half life longer than 10-18 seconds to study the stabilities of compound nuclei. I don't know if element 124 actually been discovered. BlueEarth (talk | contribs) 21:52, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For a new element to be established, it has to be confirmed by more than one laboratory to be certain. Consider the tetraneutron anomaly also 'discovered' at GANIL.--Plasmic Physics (talk) 00:36, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, shoudln't the article make this a little clearer? I was just as confused when I read it. Btw, is this whole Ubq thing just pathological science? Steinbach (talk) 13:27, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not. However, the way it's written is misleading. Compound nuclei (CN) with Z = 124 were found at GANIL. A compound nucleus is just a set of nucleons that have not settled into nuclear shells yet, and doesn't count as an isotope (and thus a discovery) unless its half-life is greater than 10−14 s (which gives time for the nuclear shells to form). Double sharp (talk) 07:15, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

text: Thanks for your quick reply. Well, I meant no offense; it just sounded a bit like pathological science to me: a single team eager to make a sensational discovery that noone shares and seems to be unrecognised. Anyway: could you make the text a little clearer and less misleading? Topics like these attract a lot of attention from interested laypeople like me, who don't necessarily know that a compound nucleus doesn't constitute a new element. Steinbach (talk) 08:12, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  Is this better? Double sharp (talk) 08:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

text: Sure, this is much clearer. Thanks a lot! Steinbach (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synthesis 

message: At the moment, I have set  infobox like this:
;Physica properties
: (And no more data in that subheader)
;Main isotopes
:No link to Isotopes of unbiquadium (is a redirect)
: -- suppresses tableheader
: -- text shown. Or something better?
The same settings are applied in  (E122).
Elements 119 and up have no wikilink to page Isotopes of ... in the subheader (those are all redirects).
-DePiep (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer to blank the isotopes section altogether if possible. There are many isotopes of E122 and E124 whose half-lives are predicted, though there are no agreed-upon values and favoring one would constitute a NPOV violation, so I do not support the addition of anything there. That said, I also suggest taking another look at the E119 and E121 infoboxes which also list one predicted value out of many - and perhaps treating them similarly. The other changes look good. ComplexRational (talk) 16:09, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Will do so for E122, E124. There will be no sectionheader either then. -DePiep (talk) 16:10, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

text: I'd rather not. We don't mention unsuccessful searches or incorrect claimed discoveries of other elements such as technetium, rhenium, and astatine in their infoboxes. ComplexRational (talk) 16:27, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: What? Is someone proposing that? Link please. -DePiep (talk) 00:40, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  No one is proposing to rework the other infoboxes. I just mentioned them because the idea to add attempts at synthesis (if I am correctly interpreting your comment above) to infoboxes for 119-126 is not reflected elsewhere and is therefore not really necessary. ComplexRational (talk) 02:05, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox settings