Talk:Nitrogen

Proposal: split out allotropes section

§ Allotropes is a well-defined subtopic, which has a discussion of physical forms of N2 and different chemical forms of other formulas, each of which has an own article. The full article here is 7998 words, which is just shy of when WP:Article size says we should start to think about splitting solely for size reasons. I propose splitting out a stand-alone Allotropes of nitrogen article, to join the other nine actual "Allotropes of..." articles. This section is 629 words, which is a reasonable size for stand-alone and could easily be enhanced for readability and with images of the different chemical structures to make it easier for readers to navigate. DMacks (talk) 12:02, 28 August 2025 (UTC)

 Done DMacks (talk) 01:42, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Nitrogen compounds into Nitrogen#Chemistry and compounds

Currently this article just hosts the exact same content as the section at the broad article, up to minor modifications. Either the broad article should be trimmed or this should be redirected. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:48, 10 September 2025 (UTC)

Considering trims that were made to Sulfur and Phosphorus, it is this article that should be trimmed to a summary, not the other one. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:44, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

cc @InterstellarGamer12321, who originally forked this section from the article. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:08, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

I originally split this into a new article because I felt that nitrogen compounds were notable enough to have their own article separate to the main one. I still think this is the case, and the main article should be trimmed as already suggested, and the Nitrogen compounds article should be retained and expanded. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 17:46, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

Concur with moving Nitrogen more towards WP:SUMMARYSTYLE and retaining the spin-out (consistent with my propsal in the preceding talkpage section:) DMacks (talk) 15:41, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

oppose merge as the compounds article should be expanded, as as per above, there should be not too much detail on the element page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. Many of these articles exist for other elements so there's no point in getting rid of this one specifically. ZKevinTheCat (talk) 05:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose, Nitrogen is already a pretty bulky page per WP:ARTICLESIZE. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 18:59, 28 November 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. No reason to merge here, mostly because lots of elements already have compounds of the element pages, and also per WP:ARTICLESIZE. atechperson@enwiki: ~/talk/ 11:00, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

I am going to mark this as closed with consensus against merging, since it has been a month and no-one has supported the merge. PeriodicEditor (talk) 08:01, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

"氮" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 氮 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 24 § 氮 until a consensus is reached. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 15:34, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Chemistriy

State the atomicity of the element give in the table below ~2026-41993-9 (talk) 22:15, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

The first paragraph of the lead contains the following sentence: At standard temperature and pressure, two atoms of the element bond to form N2, a colourless and odourless diatomic gas. This article doesn't just cover the N2 allotrope however - see the Allotropes section. Girth Summit _(blether) 22:23, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Ammonium dichromate decomposition

Could someone clarify the equation in the Production section? If you count the number of atoms on both sides of the equation they don’t add up… Thanks a lot! Adamekcz (talk) 19:13, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

The equation in question is:

3(NH₄)₂Cr₂O₇ → 2N₂ + 9H₂O + 3Cr₂O₃ + 2NH₃ + 32O₂

t's clearly not balanced with respect to oxygen atoms. However, this equation is as given in online abstract of the cited ref:

Mahieu, B.; Apers, D.J.; Capron, P.C. (1971). "Thermal decomposition of ammonium dichromate". Journal of Inorganic and Nuclear Chemistry. 33 (9). Elsevier BV: 2857–2866. doi:10.1016/0022-1902(71)80047-7. ISSN 0022-1902.

I do not have access to the full article. I wonder if the oxygen on the right is actually written as something like 3⁄2O₂, which would be balanced, and then that typography got corrupted in OCR to be 32O₂? DMacks (talk) 19:35, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

I think a friend of mine can access the actual publication...will check and update with what we find. DMacks (talk) 19:44, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Bingo. The original is exactly "3/2O₂" that then got mis-parsed headed into electronic databases. I'll fix the article. Thanks for noticing and reporting it! DMacks (talk) 03:46, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

I just checked the balancing yourself, and reached the same conclusion. Optical character recognition be damned. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:55, 19 February 2026 (UTC)