Talk:Ruthenium

Elements High‑importance

	Chemistry portal 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 articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Russia: Science & education High‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the science and education in Russia task force.

Ruthenium has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 20, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 730 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

References

Chemistry of precious metals by Simon Cotton
Elements of Metallurgy and Engineering Alloys by F. C. Campbell
The radiochemistry of ruthenium by Edward I. Wyatt, Robert R. Rickard
Electronic Materials Handbook by Merrill L. Minges
doi:10.1007/BF00701448 An evaluation of some commercial thick film resistor materials for strain gauges

Chemical combustion.

I read a while ago ruthenium will ignite methane gas. Any article to solidify this claim would be great. A fascinating property if it does. 24.244.23.239 (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few articles at https://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=ruthenium+methane+combustion&oq=ruthenium+methane+c - a start to answering your question. Ben (talk) 16:54, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some issues with the origin of the name Rutenium.

@Mellk reverted five edits with a brief and, well, obnoxious edit summary "Complete nonsense". I returned the 5 edits and ask for a proper explanation. Johnjbarton (talk) 03:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source refers to the name of a medieval polity and not about ruthenium. The part about naming refers to the 19th-century. Please read the policy on WP:NOR and self-revert. Mellk (talk) 03:05, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We already have a source to support the statement that "he chose the Latin name for Russia used back in the day, Ruthenia, as the basis for his name". Why do you insist on using a source that refers to the naming of something else? The name did not refer to Ukraine in the 19th century, this is indeed complete nonsense. Mellk (talk) 03:08, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it did, see:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Austria_hungary_1911.jpg

or

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Linguistic_and_political_map_of_Eastern_Europe,_Casimir_Delamarre,_1868.jpg Shahray (talk) 15:33, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ruthenia is an ambiguous term, but Claus specified the meaning by saying that he named the element after his motherland (Russia). (sources: [1],[2]) No source seems to discuss Ukraine in this context, so neither should we. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 05:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are other sources that were cited, while it was meant as Latin name for Russia, generally it refers to the territory of Ukraine. Shahray (talk) 15:30, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Shahray The other possible meaning of the name are not relevant here. The sources clearly point out that the name chosen by the discoverer was intended to mean his "Motherland", Russia, and that he chose the Latin name for that purpose.

The word "Russia" does derive from "Rus" which does refer to the people from the area around modern Kiev, Ukraine. But that line of connection is not what the sources on the naming of Ruthenium refer to.

Please don't change the article to the "Ukraine" version now that three editors have agreed to the "Russia" version. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:40, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very well, I agree. Still as this term generally refers to territory of modern Ukraine, will it make sense to add a brief mention of this in history segment? Shahray (talk) 15:46, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion: Only if there are reliable sources that discuss the element and consider that the name Claus chose is somehow incorrect. Otherwise it seems too tangential. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a good summary of this topic by this source. Quote (from Ukrainian):"So why, then, do many Russian and Soviet publications claim that K. Klaus named the element in honor of Russia? The roots of erroneous definitions in Russian and Soviet encyclopedias are contained in the publications of tsarist Russia. In the same Encyclopedic Dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron, we find the following: "... the name of ruthenium is derived from Ruthenia, which means Russia". However, it is known that in tsarist Russia, Ukrainians were not recognized as a separate nation, and everything that concerned Ukrainians also applied to Russians.

From what has been said, it is clear that the statement spread by Kremlin propaganda that ruthenium is named after Russia is not true. First, Karl Klaus did not name ruthenium in honor of Russia, but kept the name that was given by Ozann. Secondly, the words Rhutheni and Rhuthenia were used in Latin to refer to the Ukrainians/Rusyns and their country, and the widely used Latin name of Russia was and remains the word Russia, not Ruthenia." Shahray (talk) 10:06, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a reliable source. Please review WP:RS. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 10:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was already viewing wp:reliable source to figure out if that's considered a reliable source, but didn't seem to find anything. Can you please explain more specifically? Shahray (talk) 10:27, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is it, a blog post? In any case, it seems self-published. Jähmefyysikko (talk) 10:52, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem to be that, it's an informational web platform, and this segment is specifically about "Articles/Education". Neither it looks like user-generated content, so I didn't find problems with it. Shahray (talk) 11:20, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jähmefyysikko Thanks, I used those refs to fix a similar issue in Template:infobox ruthenium. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:35, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing this out, I condensed the infobox entry further a bit. (diff) Jähmefyysikko (talk) 05:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the 19th century was there to focus on the time that Claus made his choice, but condensed is better for the infobox. Johnjbarton (talk) 14:36, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Marshall and Marshall (2009) quote Klaus as saying specifically I named the new body, in honour of my Motherland, ruthenium. They reference Pitchkov (1996), who attributes this quote to Klaus' 1845 paper in Gorn. Zh.

I have not been able to access this paper; however, the primary sources I could access are consistent with this account. In an 1845 paper describing his discovery (doi:10.1002/prac.18450340114), Klaus only mentions that he followed Osann's naming:

Ich will dieses Metal Ruthenium nennen, weil es in geringer Menge in dem von Osann erwähnten weissen Körper vorkommt, der grösstentheils aus Kiesel-, Titansäure, Eisenoxyd und Zirkonerde besteht und von Osann fur ein eigenthümliches Metalloxyd, das er Rutheniumoxyd nannte, gehalten wurde.

In the 1828 Osann paper where he introduces the name ruthenium, he writes

Das Gerücht von Auffindung eines neuen Metalls veranlasste Vorschläge zur Benennung desselben, unter welchen der, es Ruthenium zu nennen, gewiss der passendste ist.

Why would he find this name particularly appropriate? The most obvious answer seems to be that he was analysing samples from the Urals (the title of his paper makes that clear), but that would imply that Osann thought Ruthenia referred to the Russian Empire, as the other meaning would not refer to that region. Evidently Klaus thought the same as Osann. Double sharp (talk) 14:47, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]