This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of minerals article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
I think it would be quite a good idea to standardise the various mineral pages so that they all present roughly the same information in the same way. An example of a layout that I think works is actinolite. If anyone wants to help go through the current list of minerals and tidy them up a bit... :) cferrero 17:35 Feb 27, 2003 (UTC)
I completely agree, there is currently no standardization in the articles. I also don't like the way that some mineral names have (not a valid species) next to them. It doesn't look right to me and conveys the idea that the list is full of invalid names for minerals......
Dlloyd 07:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
If someone wants to put in a list of only valid mineral names, then they can take the list from:
That gives a list of only valid mineral names. I would add it in, but feel that would be best done by the original creator of this page.
-- 217.169.9.126 16:46, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
The recent additions to the A list by Heron prompted the question: How many? So I answered it with numbered lists. Any comments? What about the invalid ones, synonyms, and group names? Move them to separate lists after each letter or at the end? - Vsmith 05:56, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I have been playing with the lists from Mindat.org and using a macro to semi-automate formatting for Wiki listing. Just uploaded some of my experimenting on my user page: User:Vsmith/experimental. Using the lists creates a lot (the majority) of red links as in the A listing. I'm thinking of having a double listing: the complete one with all that red and another list with only the minerals for which we have articles (blue list). A similar concept is in use at: Wikipedia:WikiProject Rocks and Minerals/Worklist. When a new article is produced - move or copy link to the blue list. - Vsmith 19:33, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Also I have started a classified mineral listing, Silicate minerals, and plan to expand this to include all the mineral classes following basically the Dana and/or Strunz systems. - Vsmith 19:33, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Complete mineral list is up. 3970 mineral names listed. Still needs a bit of fixing - later. Also have modified this list - moved varieties and others to end of each section. Plan more here as I get time to compare this with the complete one more, there are some that have an article not listed here. They show up on the big one. Later - gotta go grade astronomy tests now. - Vsmith 02:33, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Wow. Lots of minerals. I think there should be a key for synonyms and invalid species, etc. Perhaps as subcategories under the ones they are supposed to represent. -- DanielCD 14:28, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I found in the A section a mineral's synonym in the original list. However, a synonym was taken out later. Are the synonyms in or are they out?
Should this list be at the WP Rocks and Minerals or is it dead? the WP? Satu Suro 09:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm wondering if we could add potash to the list. According to Category:Potassium minerals potash is a mineral. I'm not knowledgeable in mineralogy so I'm not sure.-- Lorikeet ( talk) 03:07, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Why is this listed here when it is defined ...the aetites (singular in Latin) or aetite (anglicized) is a stone used to promote childbirth. The stone is said to prevent....? -- Tranletuhan ( talk) 05:38, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Where is Peridot? Not here for some reason. Mocha2007 ( talk) 14:31, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
I wanted to float the idea -- could we include a small representative image for all the minerals that have one? Currently the page seems a lot like a category listing with a few images floating around on the side. One possibility would be to do a somewhat more condensed, two-column version of List of sandwiches. There's a few obvious drawbacks -- some minerals have several very different-looking forms and we may not have images for all the ones listed on this page. Overall, I think it could be an improvement. Any thoughts? a13ean ( talk) 20:34, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
A list of articles in those subcategories of Category:Minerals where minerals should reside, but that are not currently in this list, can be found here. There shouldn't be any IMA-valid mineral species in the list, but there will be a few groups that could be added, and a fair few "varieties" of varying "notability" that, depending on how variety is being defined here, could be added. There's also a small number of poorly categorized articles in need of recatting. Dong, where is my automobile? ( talk) 09:38, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Protoenstatite, ferro-tschermakite, batagayite, greenlizardite, aurihydrargyrumite, hydrokenopyrochlore, katerinopoulosite, ferrobobfergusonite, ferrovorontsovite (and vorontsovite, from one of the previous newsletters), levantite, betpakdalite-FeFe (and all other betpakdalite-group species), garmite, schmidite, sharyginite, chlorellestadite, piccoliite; examples from older newsletters: odigitriaite, mendeleevite-(Ce), mendeleevite-(Nd) Eudialytos ( talk) 12:45, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
I suggest that mineraloids should be removed from this list article because they are not minerals. (They are, however, listed in the mineraloid article). Comments? GeoWriter ( talk) 12:01, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
Why is aluminimum/aluminum in this list of minerals? It's an element (atomic number 13), not a mineral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.233.56.35 ( talk) 21:40, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
This list is obsolete and with numerous systematics/nomenclature errors. For instance, antitaenite is listed even though it is not a separate mineral species (it's just a variety); apophyllite: non-existent as a mineral - this is a group; ampphibole is NOT a group - it is a SUPERgroup, within which there are numerous groups, and within them - subgroups. The correct data is to be found at https://mineralogy-ima.org/ and www.mindat.org Eudialytos ( talk) 00:02, 13 May 2023 (UTC)