Question How can you tell it is Thulium? To me they look all alike. A scope is only relevant when the subjects are visually distinguisable. Lycaon (talk) 21:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info It is labelled as Thulium and I have bought it as such from a reputable source. These elements may be similar, but they don't look exactly the same. Maybe you cannot tell for sure what it is, when you only see an image of them, but in my opinion this is not the point. It is important to know how an element looks like, even if there are others that look alike. Jurii (talk) 23:49, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose Unfortuantely, I have a problem with the color of the sample. According to en:Thulium the element should be silvery gray, which is also largely confimed by a Google image search but the the nominated image seems almost black. Thus, I am not convinced that it is a good illustration of the scope. Also I would like some more information on the image page concerning the origin of the sample, the size and weight of it. It is a pity because it is a very nicely detailed image of excellent quality, and the unusual structure makes the viewer curious to learn more. --Slaunger (talk) 18:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have added the informations you requested. The darkness of the metal is due to its rough surface. Elements usually don't have a well-defined look, much depends on their form. The smoother the surface, the lighter the color becomes, but also the more featureless and boring the image will be. So now you can decide, if a darker color is a hindrance for the illustration of the element's properties or not. Jurii (talk) 16:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not convinced. For organisms a scope can be valid when the organism is visually distinctive from other taxa. Here this metal can be anything. It is not a matter of believing, it is a matter of seeing the difference. A picture of a white powder, e.g. could be sugar, talc, or cocaine for that matter. Lycaon (talk) 09:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
