Talk:Lithium aluminium hydride

Lithium aluminium hydride was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 14, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
May 30, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Chemicals: Core 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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This is a core article in the WikiProject Chemicals worklist.

Occupational Safety and Health Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health 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.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Sweeps Review[edit]

The article was last reviewed in October of 2005, so it's time to re-review again to see if this still meets the Good Article criteria. It continues to be very well written, and appears quite complete. The only significant concern I have is for verifiability. While there are good references, there are still many sections that are unsourced: e.g. 'Inorganic reactions', 'Thermal decomposition', 'Solubility data', and 'Thermodynamic data'. This information is actually hard data, and really needs to be sourced. Some of it probably came from the 'further reading' items, which were also previously listed as 'general references'. However, "general references" are unacceptable and cannot be used -- information should be cited directly by inline citations instead, so that it is clear where the information came from.

Other than this issue, I think the article continues to meet the criteria. So I will put this on hold for the next 1-2 weeks or so, so that this can be addressed. Dr. Cash (talk) 16:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

for a non-chemist the article would be excellent, but it is missing the following aspects that would be considered core for a chemist or a serious student of chemistry. The following come to mind:

discovery (by Schlessinger) with citation of the original paper
stoichiometry of its most importaant organic reactions (with amides, esters, water)
industrial prep (the one shown is not the one Ullmann's indicates)
modifications such as chiral derivatives
use in preparation of hydrides other than those of carbon (alane, silanes, copper, ...)
LiAlD4
relationship to hydrogen-storage

But again, this article is off to a good start. I hope to contribute to addressing some of the above.--Smokefoot (talk) 01:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As of May 30, 2008, too much of this article is uncited. There are also lots of very short sections, and the overall organization of sections is poor. The article has been delisted from WP:GA. It can be renominated at WP:GAN once it meets all six criteria. I have also reassessed this back to B-class for WP:CHEM, due to the organizational and citation issues. Dr. Cash (talk) 18:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IUPAC Name[edit]

Isn't the IUPAC name Lithium tetrahydridoaluminate not Lithium aluminium hydride? I'm no expert on nomenclature but I say this because the IUPAC name for NaBH4 is Sodium tetrahydridoborate not Sodium borohydride. APHST (talk) 21:03, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Melting Point[edit]

Wiki page states it 150^oC (decomposition). Looking through some other sources like, [1] [2] [3] as well as Knovel data table, they all list the melting point at 125^oC. I believe the Wiki page has listed an incorrect melting point, and would like to correct it if others agree with me. --Vishnu2011 (talk) 21:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Work?[edit]

I will try to address some of the critique raised in reviews as far as possible, as I only have limited time. For now I have added references to the "Thermal Decompossition" section as well as the "Thermodynamics" section. I will see if I can dig up refs. for the solubility data. Further I will try and write something about hydrogen storage. Andr (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Status

Added the original discovery ref. to Sclessinger, did a bit of restructuring, starting a section on "Hydrogen storage". Still need to find a few more refs. for solubility data. Andr (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Status II

I can't do more with the article at the moment. Hope that someone else would like to continue improving the article. Is it time to ask for a new nomination as a good article, or should more work be done?? Andr (talk) 20:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Need more references. Maybe they are already in the article and just need to be shifted or copied. If a reference covers the paragraph, it would better stay at its end. Dangling (unreferenced) ends of paragraphs don't look good. Also, if there is enough material on history, it is worth adding a subsection on that. After that, it is worth GA nominating, to receive further comments. Materialscientist (talk) 11:20, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article is really excellent, especially for materials apps but its real (and virtually only) use is for organic synthesis. To quote for Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry "Bulk lithium aluminum hydride is used almost exclusively for the reduction of organic

functional groups. The principal consumers are the organic chemical, pharmaceutical, and the flavoring and perfumery industries." The content of the article should reflect this reality, to some extent? My suggestions for missing bits:

mechanism of the main application, the reduction of organic compounds. Kinetics and mechanism (more pertinent than a TGA or XRD to the user group!!)
comparison with the corresponding borohydrides (how reducing power changes as one progresses through EH_4-x(OR)_x^- for E = Al vs B).
mechanism for protonolysis/hydrolysis.
spectroscopic characterization (NMR, IR esp)
solvation (of the Li+) upon dissolution.
LiAlD4 is important, but is not mentioned.
the inorganic section mentions a silly reaction, the prep of NaH, but this is not a real use.
purification of the gray commercial product.
The section on hydrogen storage is under "applications" but might be better placed under "research directions" and should definitely not be indicated in the lead, IMHO.
lacking is a section on the modified hydride reducting agents, again reflecting the fact that the article has somehow been converted into something approaching a materials science essay whereas its real reason for existence is generating C-H bonds. Kinda strange.

--Smokefoot (talk) 12:38, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad too see the prompt feedback and very constructive critique raised. I agree with the above suggestions, certainly, and I am mostly responsible for the materials science twist given to the article. My background is chemical engineering and research in solid state hydrogen storage partly with respect to LiAlH4. I do not have the organic chemistry background knowledge to improve in the direction outlined above, sorry. Anyway I found a reference from a commercial supplier chemetall with some useful info. I really hope the article will gain some momentum and that it could attract contributors in order to address the above items. Andr (talk) 18:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do agree. Salik sayyef (talk) 14:16, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

solvent data[edit]

why nothing for THF at 50c?

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Lithium aluminium hydride. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lithium aluminium hydride. 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/20060308045012/http://msds.ehs.cornell.edu/msds/MSDSDOD/A441/M220131.htm to http://msds.ehs.cornell.edu/msds/MSDSDOD/A441/M220131.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lithium aluminium hydride. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:12, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]