Talk:Island of stability
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Island of stability article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 730 days |
This level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Island of stability is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 21, 2020. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
High-spin nuclear isomers?
[edit]Have there been any attempts to determine whether metastable nuclear isomers, similar to tantalum-180m, may exist in the superheavy region of the periodic table? If something like that exists, it would constitute a different type of island of stability. Ta-180m is observationally stable despite being an excited state, this is because it has spin 9 and thus its decay is highly forbidden. There might be others out there, but actually synthesizing such a nuclide might be extraordinarily difficult (as would locating them, since even if they occur naturally they would be extremely rare, just as Ta-180m is). The Yrast article seems to hint at such a possibility, FWIW.174.213.246.193 (talk) 03:43, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
I dont think 310126 is part of the island of stability
[edit]This image shows that 310126 is not proton-bound. As a result, I think it should be mentioned somewhere on this article. 24.115.255.37 (talk) 23:40, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Should also be mentioned on Extended periodic table 24.115.255.37 (talk) 23:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Use of narrow gaps instead of commas as thousand separators in science articles
[edit]According to the Manual of Style, you may use as a thousand separator either a comma or a narrow gap (obtained by using the template {{gaps}}).
Nonetheless, the Manual of Style also states that grouping of digits using narrow gaps is “especially recommended for articles related to science, technology, engineering or mathematics”. This is due to the fact that it's the normalized way in the international standards (ISO/IEC 80000 and International System of Units), and also it's the recommended style by ANSI and NIST.
Proposal: Change to format numbers with gaps (i.e. "1000000" instead of "1,000,000").
Note: I do the proposal instead of changing it myself because, since it's a featured article, I believe it's better to gain consensus beforehand.
Thanks. RGLago (talk) 18:06, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- FA-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in Physical sciences
- FA-Class vital articles in Physical sciences
- FA-Class chemical elements articles
- Mid-importance chemical elements articles
- FA-Class chemical element isotope articles
- WikiProject Elements articles
- FA-Class physics articles
- Mid-importance physics articles
- FA-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
- FA-Class Chemistry articles
- Low-importance Chemistry articles
- WikiProject Chemistry articles
- Wikipedia articles that use American English
- Wikipedia featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- Wikipedia Did you know articles that are featured articles