Talk:Molybdenum disulfide

Chemicals: Core Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This is a core article in the WikiProject Chemicals worklist.

References[edit]

Winer, W. O. (1967). "Molybdenum disulfide as a lubricant: A review of the fundamental knowledge". Wear. 10 (6): 422–452. doi:10.1016/0043-1648(67)90187-1.--Stone (talk) 11:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use in ski wax[edit]

Apart from the obvious, that ski wax companies do add it to ski wax, I am not sure what would constitute a reliable source. I included two references from Toko and Swix and I'm sure there are many chemistry articles. If anyone has reliable sources, please insert. Thanks tragedian (talk) 09:08, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use in instrument pads[edit]

A thin layer is also used in some flute and saxophone pads, for lubrication. Not sure what a valid source would be, perhaps the website of the seller? Check out gold Schmidt saxophone pads. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.244.165.83 (talk) 07:14, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

buildup of solids under pressure?[edit]

I have heard that powdered MoS2 applied as a lubricant has the trait of forming solid crystalline masses of MoS2 under pressure, with the result that over time the surface buildup can cause previously moving parts (such as ball bearings) to jam in place and cease moving. Which is the reason (supposedly) a lubricating substance so useful and so chemically inert isn't in universal use for everything from automotive wheel bearings to firearms to motor oil. Can anyone confirm this, and give documentation for this? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.61.156.96 (talk) 04:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that deHavilland Canada was worried about abrasion of metal parts in wing structures caused by constant flexing and investigated the use of lubricants to reduce this wear, building a test rig to measure this. They were surprised to find that when moly was used, far from the metal parts being worn away, they formed a surface coating that increased the strength of the structure. So in this case it was seen as a positive trait. I'm sorry I cannot provide any reference or source for this.94.173.221.115 (talk) 10:59, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Status report on literature[edit]

About 16,400 articles are cite-able on MoS₂, as of July 1, 2013. The area is heavily studied obviously. Today I started to replace some of the primary citations with more general ones, using recent-ness of reviews (>2009) or their citation hit rate. The reason that I am doing this is my concern that the article be bogged down with a lot of specialised literature. I guess this aspect is less of a problem since we instituted a "Research trends" section. If other editors are slightly concerned please leave a note and I will undo my deletions.--Smokefoot (talk) 02:47, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Updating refs is a noble task and I commend you for it. However, I don't think it makes sense to delete cited content that an editor thought notable just because the source is primary. Conversely, non-notable material should be removed even given a secondary source. Lfstevens (talk) 22:37, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. A few comments: The topic of citing literature is a huge issue with me, so I welcome your input. Here are some unguarded comments. If Wikipedia-Chemistry relied more on secondary references, many problems would be alleviated. Getting to your specific question, I ask which of the 16000+ publications should be cited in our article on MoS₂? Even 1% would overwhelm the article and make it almost useless. Should we accept citations suggested by infrequent editors? That approach seems both inviting (it's the Wiki-way and we get new perspectives) and potentially capricious. Based on my fairly assiduous efforts, infrequent editors are almost invariably citing their own work, which is hardly a criterion for inclusion. I am not trying to be nasty to you or them, and the removal of such contributions pains me each time (who am I to remove contributions from someone who I dont even know?). But the alternative is more painful: articles bloated with self-promotion and false claims that would delude the naive reader seeking basic info. I could go on, but your advice or comments would be most welcome. --Smokefoot (talk) 00:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To expand a little more, since potential or real abuse of primary citation is one I worry about vs their potential utility and the openness of Wikipedia. Take a look - in edit mode of my user page - for a partial list of COI editors. Pretty evident that these editors are not contributing to further mankind, but only the promote themselves. On the other hand, there are lots of edits of a specialized variety that I assist with or dont mess with. Some interactions from the last week include User:Sodiumtetrahydrateintermediate, User talk:Valeg96, and User:E.Thorsos. I dont necessarily agree with them on all details, but I defer on the side of open-mindedness. --Smokefoot (talk) 03:55, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: According to Chemical Abstracts, 1578 reports have appeared in 2014 on molybdenum disulfide as of Dec 10. About 30 reports per week. --Smokefoot (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed a lot of specialized literature today. Within the next 24 h I will add several general references convering electronics, H2 evolution etc. --Smokefoot (talk) 21:27, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think this page should be updated to reflect what is currently known about this material, in terms of the bulk and 2-d characteristics (i.e. indirect to direct bandgap transition, etc.) There's definitely room to expand this page quite a bit. --A dude, 09:42, 17 February 2017

The way to go is to pick a recent, highly cited review in a major journal, and draw content from that review. --Smokefoot (talk) 15:03, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Update on literature report: 6 journal articles per day for the previous 5 years[edit]

Here is the raw record from SciFinderScholar: Substance Identifier "1317-33-5 ">substances (1)>get references (38,011)>refine "Journal Review" (20,187)>refine "2014-" (11,165)>refine "Review" (299) --Smokefoot (talk) 12:10, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

142 reports so far in 2020 (133 papers, 9 patents), that is about 9 papers per day. The latest 10 journal publications:

An exploration into potassium (K) containing MoS2 active phases and its transformation process over MoS2 based materials for producing methanethiol By Lu, Jichang; Luo, Yongming; He, Dedong; Xu, Zhizhi; He, Sufang; Xie, Delong; Mei, Yi From Catalysis Today (2020), 339, 93-104. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
RGO/MoS2/Ce0.75Zr0.25O2 electro-Fenton cathode with higher matching and complementarity for efficient degradation of ciprofloxacin By Mi, Xueyue; Yang, Mingze; Xie, Liangbo; Li, Yi; Sun, Yan; Zhan, Sihui From Catalysis Today (2020), 339, 371-378. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
Direct methanation with supported MoS2 nano-flakes: Relationship between structure and activity By Poh, Chee Kok; Ong, Sze Wei Daniel; Du, YongHua; Kamata, Hiroyuki; Choong, Kai Shin Catherine; Chang, Jie; Izumi, Yoshinori; Nariai, Kentaro; Mizukami, Noriki; Chen, Luwei; et al From Catalysis Today (2020), 342, 21-31. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
Capacitive behavior of MoS2 decorated with FeS2@carbon nanospheres By Chen, Xingliang; Shi, Tao; Zhong, Kailiang; Wu, Guanglei; Lu, Yun From Chemical Engineering Journal (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (2020), 379, 122240. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
Rational Design of Nanostructured Electrode Materials toward Multifunctional Supercapacitors By Yan, Jian; Li, Shaohui; Lan, Binbin; Wu, Yucheng; Lee, Pooi See From Advanced Functional Materials (2020), 30(2), 1902564. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
3D hierarchical local heterojunction of MoS2/FeS2 for enhanced microwave absorptionBy Xing, Linshen; Li, Xiao; Wu, Zhengchen; Yu, Xuefeng; Liu, Jiwei; Wang, Lei; Cai, Chenyuan; You, Wenbin; Chen, Guanyu; Ding, Jingjun; et al From Chemical Engineering Journal (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (2020), 379, 122241. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
MoS2-decorated 2D Ti3C2 (MXene): a high-performance anode material for lithium-ion batteries By Luan, Sunrui; Han, Minze; Xi, Yaokai; Wei, Kuo; Wang, Yuanzhe; Zhou, Junshuang; Hou, Li; Gao, Faming Ionics (2020), 26(1), 51-59. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
Fast and selective detection of mercury ions in environmental water by paper-based fluorescent sensor using boronic acid functionalized MoS2 quantum dots By Guo, Xinrong; Huang, Jianzhi; Wei, Yubo; Zeng, Qiang; Wang, Lishi From Journal of Hazardous Materials (2020), 381, 120969.| Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
Ternary transition metal chalcogenides decorated on rGO as an efficient nanocatalyst towards urea electro-oxidation reaction for biofuel cell application By Salarizadeh, Parisa; Askari, Mohammad Bagher; Askari, Nahid; Salarizadeh, Navvabeh From Materials Chemistry and Physics (2020), 239, 121958. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS
Fabrication of graphene/MoS2 alternately stacked structure for enhanced lithium storage By Yu, Xiaoliang; Tang, Jie; Terabe, Kazuya; Sasaki, Taizo; Gao, Runsheng; Ito, Yoshikazu; Nakura, Kensuke; Asano, Kazuko; Suzuki, Masa-aki From Materials Chemistry and Physics (2020), 239, 121987. Language: English, Database: CAPLUS

--Smokefoot (talk) 23:28, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

superconductivity in monolayers[edit]

Google finds lots of research since 2012 on gate-induced/Ising-protected superconductivity in Mos2 monolayers (eg. when in contact with ionic fluids, eg Tunnelling spectroscopy of gate-induced superconductivity in MoS2., Gate-induced superconductivity in atomically thin MoS2 2015, Electric-field-induced superconductivity at 9.4 K in a layered transition metal disulphide MoS2 2012). Can we summarise in Properties or Research ? - Rod57 (talk) 09:42, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See if you can find a review on the subject? I can help if you can do that kind of search. --Smokefoot (talk) 12:45, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like there's not a good reason to approach that subject in a wiki article that entirely, with the exception of this section, targets the bulk properties of MoS2. Monolayer properties of MoS2 should either be written about in an entirely separate wiki page or well segregated into a more thorough section than just superconductivity, which covers the whole suite of monolayer MoS2 properties (photoluminescence, Raman modes, structural transformation, LEDs, valleytronics, etc.) There are 10's of properties of monolayer MoS2, with 100's of papers on each one (just experimental, not even considering theory). Picking just superconductivity seems rather esoteric in my mind, in addition to it not even being the most spectacular part of its 2-D analog. Finally, field induced superconductivity in few-layered vdW materials is a general phenomena that is the result of a large number of carriers (~10^14/cm^2) induced by ionic liquids, it is not specific to MoS2 and in my mind hold no place in being on a page about MoS2. It is a result that could be contributed more to the experimental setup than to the material itself. 2607:F388:1082:FFF3:9CBE:59CB:1A87:B4D0 (talk) 23:02, 17 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]