Template:V0.5

	Plutonium 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.
	Plutonium is part of the Actinides series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 23, 2009.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 5, 2007 Good article nominee Not listed December 31, 2008 Featured article candidate Promoted January 11, 2009 Peer review Reviewed September 29, 2014 Good topic candidate Promoted February 19, 2015 Featured article review Kept Current status: Featured article

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Elements FA‑class Top‑importance This article is supported by WikiProject Elements, which gives a central approach to the chemical elements and their isotopes on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details.ElementsWikipedia:WikiProject ElementsTemplate:WikiProject Elementschemical elements FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Physics FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Chemicals FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article has been listed as a featured article under the featured article criteria. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. California: San Francisco Bay Area FA‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as High-importance). Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. University of California FA‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to University of California, its history, accomplishments and other topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.University of CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject University of CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject University of CaliforniaUniversity of California FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States: Military history / Government / History FA‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States FA This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force. This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Mid-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as High-importance). Template:WP1.0

Archives

/Archive 1: Mar 2003 – Aug 2007 /Archive 2: Oct 2007 –

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

An editor has suggested that this article may need to undergo a featured article review, citing in particular the cleanup tags present in the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:48, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can find one inconsequential drive-by {{clarify}} tag and one rather trivial {{globalize}} tag in the entire article. None of which have been clarified on the talk page or even an edit summary. Kolbasz (talk) 01:35, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have been bold and have removed the tags. I don't think clarification is needed and agree that the "globalize" tag should have been followed-up by the tagger here. Graham Beards (talk) 09:51, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nikkimaria, please ask the editor to raise the concerns here. Axl ¤ [Talk] 13:23, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is plenty of uncited text; is anyone addressing it? It is time for the FAR to be reinstated. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:36, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to address as many of them as I can over the next few days. Double sharp (talk) 14:09, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I'll have to retract that statement: things are getting a bit heated in WP's coverage of polytopes... Double sharp (talk) 15:07, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@FAR coordinators: Nonetheless, this many weeks in, with uncited text, the FAR needs to be taken off hold and listed so others can re-evaluate. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

   Someone whose exotic-magnetism chops are less rusty than mine should express an opinion as to whether Study confirms, Plutonium has no Magnetism (currently cited under Science, but no subheading, on Google News) and/or other new Google hits indeed require updating our coverage on the accompanying article, which appears to me be satisfied (as of an unrelated edit an hour ago) with "Magnetic ordering [is] paramagnetic" (in the InfoBox) as the only magnetism-relevant fact.
   It also makes me wonder if the new result suggests the paramagnetism would extinguish at temperatures sufficiently low that thermal noise is lower than energy-level differences anomalously close between states differing (i presume) in more than a single quantum number ....? (I'd bet there are at least some editors who have a better idea than i about which related but more general quantum-magnetism topics are likely to have been edited by the most suitable editors for the task.)
--Jerzy•t 07:51 & 07:56, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

"Plutonium (specifically, plutonium-238) was first produced and isolated on December 14, 1940, and chemically identified on February 23, 1941, by ... by deuteron bombardment of uranium in the 60-inch (150 cm) cyclotron.." is incorrect - Plutonium was produced by neutron bombardment of uranium. The neutrons were produced by deutron bombardment of a beryllium target in the cyclotron ^[1]. Sentence is also unclear, mixing production/isolation/identification. Rtombs (talk) 13:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Y Corrected. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:30, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

doi:10.1038/35020248 states something different:

"The uranium sample that ultimately yielded element 94 was bombarded with deuterons in the Berkeley 60-inch cyclotron on 14 December 1940."

--Stone (talk) 22:12, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

doi:10.1007/1-4020-3598-5_7

"238 92U + 2 1H --> 238 93 Np + 1 0n + 1 0n "

--Stone (talk) 22:26, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The title of the seaborg paper looks a lot different to the text we have now in the article. "Radioactive Element 94 from Deuterons on Uranium". Phys. Rev. 69: 366. 1946. doi:10.1103/PhysRev.69.366.2. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)--Stone (talk) 22:31, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Hawkeye. Another original source is Phys Rev v57 p1185 [[1]] Rtombs (talk) 22:40, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I undid the changes. Even the new given reference states for the 14. December that a deuteron beam was used. To search for element 94. The proved that if you use the beryllium you only get element 93.--Stone (talk) 21:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, you'll get Pu alright; the Np will decay in short order to Pu-239. This is the reaction that occurs in a reactor. But deuterons will work too; you'll just get Pu-238 instead. That's what had me confused. I'm convinced that you're correct, and that deuterons were used. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:40, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Right and wrong, You get Np wich decays to a Pu which has a comparable long have-life which was not visible in the decay of the Np. So they only found Np. To get Pu they used heavier artillery. Do you want to have the 1941 publication?--Stone (talk) 18:26, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]