Talk:List of copper alloys

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Metalworking

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Metalworking, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Metalworking 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.MetalworkingWikipedia:WikiProject MetalworkingTemplate:WikiProject MetalworkingMetalworking articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Chemistry Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Proposed merge from Brass and bronze ingot making[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was do not merge into List of copper alloys. Parts of the article are now being considered for a merge into ingot; please see the talk page there.-- Wizard191 (talk) 16:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article brass and bronze ingot making was originally nominated to be merged into metallurgy, however that proposal was rejected (see talk:metallurgy). Instead, I propose that the article should be merged here, because, as the article currently stands it is too small and un-notable to warrant its own article. However, the info is good (though, needing some references), and I feel it would fit well within this article. This article addresses both brass and bronze, so it shouldn't be a stretch to merge the two. Wizard191 (talk) 21:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct that we are talking about the same metals, but it does not really fit. This article is a list of alloys and the proposed merge is about a manufacturing process. I wouldn't merge it with anything in any case until it is better referenced. It has all sorts of problems, besides the ones it has already acquired templates for. The opening sentence The brass and bronze ingot making industry in this country has its mid 1850's roots... doesn't say what country the article is about (presumably Britain) and sets off copyvio alarm bells in my mind. Putting its problems to one side, there is a place for this article, its place comes between copper mining/copper extraction and articles on copper materials such as copper wire. I don't really go along with the idea that the article is too small and there is an awful lot of information available on copper that could be used to expand it. It just needs an editor to come along and take an interest. SpinningSpark 22:33, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you think there's enough real information out there to make it a worthwhile article, I'm all for leaving it sit where it is. It's getting a little bit out of my realm of expertise, but in my mind it seemed like a very specific topic for its own article. But seeing how you seem to more knowledgeable I'll defer to you. Wizard191 (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think "brass and bronze ingot making" really has the makings of an article - the process has no (?) real differences from any other ingot making article.

No to merge. Merge any useful info into Ingot.

Potentially an article Ingot making could be valuable - but I don't see any reason to separate Al, Au, Ag, etc ingot making articles in to separate pages.FengRail (talk) 15:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the info on ounce metal to the article, as well as updating brass. I will delete it from the "ingot casting article" as it is mostly irrelevent there.FengRail (talk) 15:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I've transferred across the info specific to types of alloys to this page, I've changed the merge to Ingot.

Apologies for not waiting for confirmation, but I'm sure I've completed the necessary edits in terms of merged material for this page..

Best wishes, thanks.FengRail (talk) 15:45, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Ingot

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.

Alternative Metal Composition Incorrect[edit]

"The best known traditional types are bronze, where zinc is a significant addition, and brass, using tin instead." Bronze contains primarily Copper and Tin, and Brass contains primarily Copper and Zinc. The quoted sentance is backwards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.200.215.15 (talk) 19:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Melchior[edit]

shouldn't beMelchior listed here too? 78.28.194.108 (talk) 10:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical composition of copper alloys[edit]

The table should be modified to further differentiate between silicon bronze and silicon brass by subdividing the silicon bronze row into one for silicon bronze and another for silicon brass, or remove the silicon brass alloys all together. References 14-18 show alloys C87400 to C87900 as "silicon brass" all with proportions of zinc greater than five percent. Alloy C87200, reference 13, is indicated as a "true" silicon bronze with a zinc content of less than five percent. I recognize the distinction between brass and bronze may not be definitive, however the suggestion to remove alloys that are more brass-like than bronze would improve the article's accuracy. DAB 24.222.45.26 (talk) 19:23, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Precious Alloy Compositions[edit]

This table is woefully incomplete. 38 of the 68 values for specific elements (56%) are unspecified, and 9 of the 20 rows (45%) have no elements' percentages specified at all. While it's true that the content of these elements are not specified, it's their typical values that differentiate the alloys. The table should include the range of typical values, with a note that they are typical rather than specified.Joe Avins (talk) 16:06, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Needs the ISO standarts for Copper[edit]

This article is not written for non-Americans, there is no ISO standard references list. cf. DIN EN 1263 (1998-04) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.19.132.227 (talk) 10:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arsenic?[edit]

What of arsenical bronze and arsenical copper and arsenical brass which is missing here -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 11:00, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Silver[edit]

There's no copper silver alloys listed. Lkingscott (talk) 10:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]