Submission declined on 5 July 2024 by SafariScribe ( talk). This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject) reliable secondary independent of the subject Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. If you would like to continue working on the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window. If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted. If you need extra help, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. Please do not remove reviewer comments or this notice until the submission is accepted. Where to get help If you need help editing or submitting your draft, please ask us a question at the AfC Help Desk or get live help from experienced editors. These venues are only for help with editing and the submission process, not to get reviews. If you need feedback on your draft, or if the review is taking a lot of time, you can try asking for help on the talk page of a relevant WikiProject. Some WikiProjects are more active than others so a speedy reply is not guaranteed. How to improve a draft Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia – a basic overview on how to edit Wikipedia. Help:Wikitext – how to use the markup Help:Referencing for beginners – how to include references Wikipedia:Article development – how to develop your article Wikipedia:Writing better articles – how to improve your article Wikipedia:Verifiability – make sure your article includes reliable third-party sources You can also browse Wikipedia:Featured articles and Wikipedia:Good articles to find examples of Wikipedia's best writing on topics similar to your proposed article. Improving your odds of a speedy review To improve your odds of a faster review, tag your draft with relevant WikiProject tags using the button below. This will let reviewers know a new draft has been submitted in their area of interest. For instance, if you wrote about a female astronomer, you would want to add the Biography, Astronomy, and Women scientists tags. Add tags to your draft Editor resources Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Easy tools: Citation bot ( help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs Declined by SafariScribe 14 days ago. Last edited by Graeme Bartlett 13 days ago. Reviewer: Inform author. Resubmit Please note that if the issues are not fixed, the draft will be declined again.

• Comment: The Tenny Davis reference is is good, with substantial content. Curt Wentrup reference does not mention this substance. Royal Society Of Chemistry, although it is on YouTube is OK as from reputable organisation, should mention the speaker. APC Forum is not reliable as it is user content. E. Fire's work is copied substantially here, but is released under a compatible license. Unless you are the same writer as the pseudonymous "E. Fire" you should be crediting the source. E. Fire's work is a preprint, and so also not counted as reliable. It looks as if there is more references available. So if you include them it should make the draft acceptable. Graeme Bartlett ( talk) 01:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Yellow powder is a fast-burning, pyrotechnic mixture of potassium nitrate, potassium carbonate and sulfur. Early records indicate an alchemic use back in the mid-1600. ^[1], making it co-existant to the much slower burning, but centuries-older gunpowder. Judging by the apparent detonation velocity of "Yellow Powder" and the first records of it, it appears to be the second high explosive substance known to mankind; only being pre-dated by fulminating gold ^[2]. Despite this centuries-old knowledge of the mixture, the exact mechanism of it's explosive properties are still unknown ^[3]

Though different mixtures also seem to explode, a popular composition seems to be 55% KNO₃, 27% K₂CO₃ and 18% S (by mass) ^[4]. Research suggests that the exact composition rate is not as important, as different mixtures around a composition of 3/2/1 show comparable explosive properties. Even a mixture of 1/1/1 showed a reasonable detonation time compared to a 3/2/1 mixture. ^[5]

Currently, there are three main theories regarding the mechanism of action: the formation and ignition of polysulfides, a reduction of nitrate to nitrite and/or the formation of sulfur nitride. Another possible theory would be catastrophic nitrate reduction. ^[5]