Talk:Lithium

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lithium article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 12 months

	Lithium 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.
	Lithium is part of the Alkali metals 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.
Article milestones Date Process Result August 17, 2007 Peer review Reviewed November 9, 2010 Good article nominee Listed August 8, 2013 Good article reassessment Kept December 21, 2016 Good topic candidate Promoted December 17, 2025 Good article reassessment Delisted Current status: Delisted good article

This  level-4 vital article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Elements Top‑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. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. Materials Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials 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. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Occupational Safety and Health Mid‑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. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section sizes Section size for Lithium (41 sections) Section name Byte count Prose size (words) Header Total Header Total (Top) 4,063 4,063 318 318 Properties 17 15,554 0 616 Atomic and physical 7,651 7,651 135 135 Isotopes 7,886 7,886 481 481 Occurrence 194 24,702 17 1,255 Astronomical 5,867 5,867 334 334 Terrestrial 11,168 11,168 471 471 Biological 7,473 7,473 433 433 History 18,527 18,527 767 767 Chemistry 134 7,929 0 579 Of lithium metal 4,001 4,001 280 280 Inorganic compounds 1,025 1,025 111 111 Organic chemistry 2,769 2,769 188 188 Production 5,945 53,292 92 2,259 Reserves and occurrence 4,000 17,567 227 876 Lithium triangle and other brine sources 6,888 6,888 351 351 Hard-rock deposits 4,917 4,917 248 248 Other sources 1,762 1,762 50 50 Pricing 3,497 3,497 210 210 Extraction 9,664 9,664 389 389 Environmental issues 10,810 10,810 340 340 Human rights issues 5,809 5,809 352 352 Applications 449 33,591 15 1,602 Batteries 129 129 16 16 Ceramics and glass 1,696 1,696 70 70 Electrical and electronic 2,536 2,536 196 196 Lubricating greases 1,369 1,369 51 51 Metallurgy 3,728 3,728 129 129 Silicon nano-welding 1,317 1,317 34 34 Pyrotechnics 734 734 14 14 Air purification 2,203 2,203 126 126 Optics 2,799 2,799 150 150 Organic and polymer chemistry 2,864 2,864 100 100 Military 1,425 1,425 93 93 Nuclear 7,972 7,972 506 506 Medicine 4,370 4,370 102 102 Precautions 1,881 1,881 71 71 See also 320 320 0 0 Notes 45 45 0 0 References 35 35 0 0 External links 2,859 2,859 0 0 Total 162,798 162,798 7,467 7,467

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: Important.

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2024

i like fortnite

Review of brine based extraction methods.

The current section on Extraction ends with a mish-mash of maybe-technologies with primary and newsy sources. I think a review source like

• Abdullah Khalil, Shabin Mohammed, Raed Hashaikeh, Nidal Hilal, Lithium recovery from brine: Recent developments and challenges, Desalination,Volume 528, 2022,115611,ISSN 0011-9164, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2022.115611.

would be a much better approach. Section 1 of the review document the changing research scene and section 2 lists various options being explored. The conclusion is that no new method has reached production potential.

I would write such a summary but it would mean removing some existing content. Comments? Johnjbarton (talk) 16:21, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested citation additions for improved verification

I'd like to propose adding several citation sources to improve the verifiability and credibility of specific statements in the article. Below are the sentences, suggested locations, and reliable sources).

Sentence: “These uses consume more than three-quarters of lithium production.” Suggested location: At the end of the sentence in the section discussing lithium applications. Source: World Nuclear Association – https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/lithium Reason: This source provides quantitative analysis on global lithium usage and matches the percentage claim precisely.

Sentence: “A deposit discovered in 2013 in Wyoming's Rock Springs Uplift is estimated to contain 228,000 tons.” Suggested location: After the mention of the Rock Springs Uplift deposit. Source: Mining.com – https://www.mining.com/web/new-wyoming-lithium-deposit-could-meet-all-u-s-demand Reason: This industry report directly supports the estimated deposit volume and year of discovery.

Sentence: “Recovery of this type of lithium has been demonstrated in the field; the lithium is separated by simple filtration.” Suggested location: In the section discussing lithium extraction methods from brine. Source: Stanford Geothermal Workshop – https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/db/GeoConf/papers/SGW/2022/Aydin.pdf Reason: A peer-reviewed conference paper describing field-proven filtration-based lithium recovery.

Sentence: “Reserves are more limited than those of brine reservoirs and hard rock.” Suggested location: In the paragraph comparing different lithium sources. Source: MIT Climate Portal – https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/how-lithium-mined Reason: A reputable academic source that describes the limitations of certain lithium reserves compared to others.

Sentence: “Lithium and its compounds were historically isolated and extracted from hard rock. However, by the 1990s mineral springs, brine pools, and brine deposits had become the dominant source.” Suggested location: After the historical overview of lithium sources. Source: Stanford University publication – https://web.archive.org/web/20221101171008/https://large.stanford.edu/courses/2021/ph240/schwager1/docs/resources-07-00057.pdf Reason: Academic paper detailing the transition in lithium extraction methods by decade.

Sentence: “One method of direct lithium extraction, as well as other valuable minerals, is to process geothermal brine water through an electrolytic cell, located within a membrane.” Suggested location: In the section about advanced lithium extraction techniques. Source: University of Virginia thesis – https://libraetd.lib.virginia.edu/public_view/2j62s648f Reason: A scholarly .edu thesis documenting a membrane-based electrolytic lithium extraction process. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaroslav Radomír (talk • contribs) 16:13, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, go for it. (In future please use the Add Topic button to autosign comments) Johnjbarton (talk) 16:26, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaroslav Radomír Please note that the q= parameter is for direct quotation from the source only. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:39, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

reduced cortical lithium

A single 2025 study connects reduced cortical lithium with Alzheimers disease. Is it appropriate? This is a primary source, no review, odds are it will fail to be reproduced. Johnjbarton (talk) 01:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, per WP:MEDPRIMARY. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:42, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article review

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed the following:

• There are uncited statements, including entire paragraphs.
• There is an "expand section" orange banner at the top of "pricing": is this still valid?

Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment

Lithium

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Issues remain unaddressed, no ongoing effort to fix them. TompaDompa (talk) 22:58, 17 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. There is an "expand section" orange banner at the top of "pricing": is this still valid? Z1720 (talk) 01:37, 30 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article is in a sorry state, looks like the typical case of crust accumulation without any major rewrite or update to keep it as a coherent whole... I also see a lot of MOS violations, some duplicate refs, and other issues that I do not think can be remediated without major effort. Choucas0 🐦‍⬛⋅📬⋅📜 15:29, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.