Talk:Clinton Group

Pennsylvania Low‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania 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.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Clinton Group is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

New Coordinates

Although the coordinates currently displayed on this page aren't incorrect. It seems like it would be more appropriate to display the coordinates of the type section of the Clinton, which is Dawes Quarry Creek in Clinton, New York. I'm going to go ahead and make this change, but let me know if there are objections. Nicholas B. Sullivan 16:10, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Improvements to the Page

It looks like this page has consisted primarily of a few odd facts thrown together. I've begun to make a series of comprehensive edits and additions to make the page more informative and to give it a better flow. This has included an entire rewording of the intro, and I added a task bar. More is to come. I apologize if I've been doing it pretty unilaterally, but not many other people seem interested in working on this. Let me know if you have an issue with something I've added. (Nsullivan742 (talk) 18:44, 26 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Comment

There appears to be a company named "Clinton Group". Drutt (talk) 15:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I saw that. This page is about a lower Silurian lithostratigraphic unit. I've never heard of the company, though if someone wants to make a page for them I guess I don't see the problem, though I don't know if it's notable enough. (Nsullivan742 (talk) 18:44, 26 February 2013 (UTC))[reply]

Economic Uses section

It makes no sense to say that an oolitic bed of hematite formed in a paleosol on the Gatesburg Formation (which is Cambrian, not Silurian) and somehow ended up in the Keefer Formation. The reference does not support it either (doesnt even mention the Gatesburg, nor does it mention a paleosol in the Keefer). I'm deleting that part. Jstuby (talk) 21:01, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]