Talk:Dolomite (rock)

Untitled

The AGI may be hung up on tradition and precedence and therefore wish to perpetuate ambiguity by the dual use of dolomite. However, I see no reason for wikipedia to confuse readers and prefer dolostone for the rock. Vsmith 01:03, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

After some searching, I find no evidence to support the AGI statement about dolostone. So I have removed the bit here pending a reference:

The term dolostone was introduced in 1948 to avoid confusion with the mineral dolomite. The usage of dolostone is controversial because the word dolomite was first applied to the rock during the early nineteenth century and thus has precedence. Although use of the term dolostone avoids ambiguity, it is not recommended by the tradition bound American Geological Institute.

I find AGI publications using the term dolostone and therefore am dubious about the not reccommended statement. Vsmith 01:45, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

dolostone

This may seem rather petty but the term “dolostone” is not recommended for the rock composed largely of the mineral dolomite. The American Geological Institute recommends that the term “dolomite” be used for both the rock and the mineral (Jackson, 1997). This is the opinion also of most European geologists and most specialists in carbonate sedimentology and petrology (see for instance Bathurst, 1971; Tucker and Wright, 1990; and see especially Zenger and Mazzullo, 1982, page 1). The term “dolomite” actually has priority for the rock. The mineral dolomite had already been described and was termed “pearl spar” when the rock, dolomite, was first described by Deodat Guy de Dolomieu in 1791 (see the discussion by Vatan, 1958).

I must also point out that Harvey Blatt (author of the text cited by Vsmith) is a sandstone petrologist, not a specialist on carbonate rocks, Bob Tracy, the co-author, is an igneous petrologist and did not write the section of the text referred. The authors cited above, with the exception of Jackson, are all carbonate petrologists and sedimentologists. Don Zenger is one of the world's foremost specialists on dolomite.

The American Geological Institute is a dynamic organization, supported by almost all practicing geologists in the United States through their numerous professional societies. They certainly are not "hung up on tradition and precedence".

Finally, I would humbly submit that I am also considered a specialist on dolomite with numerous scholarly publications to my credit on the subject. I am new to Wikipedia but I will try to post my bio and credentials shortly.

Bathurst, R. G. C., 1975, Carbonate sediments and their diagenesis: New York, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., 658 p.

Jackson, J. A., 1997, Glossary of geology, Fourth edition: Alexandra, VA, American Geological Institute, 769 p.

Tucker, M. E., and Wright, V. P., 1990, Carbonate Sedimentology: Boston, Blackwell Scientific Publications, 482 p.

Vatan, A., 1958, "Dolostone": Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 28, p. 514.

Zenger, D. H., and Mazzullo, S. J., eds., 1982, Dolomitization: Stroudsburg, Hutchinson Ross Publishing Co., 426 p.

The word is widely used in the geological community (including AGI publications) and it avoids ambiguity and confusion. Usage and clarity are the guide, not semantic quibbles by specialists. Vsmith 04:51, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

dolostone

I have made several minor editorial changes to the last editorial changes of VSmith, perhaps a compromise is in order. I believe that it is inappropriate to consider Geotimes a scientific publication although it is published by AGI. It is a designed to be a popular news magazine for geologists and those interested in geology. It is not a scientific journal and is almost never referenced in the scientific literature. The Glossary of Geology, another AGI Publication, is frequently cited in the formal literature and is generally regarded as a source of scientific authority (as far as there is any authority in science). AGI publishes no scholarly journals but its constituent societies do.

In the future, unless completely thwarted by my rather overwhelming workload, I would like to edit a number of articles that have to do with, in particular, carbonate rocks and perhaps contribute a few additional articles on geology. Pro bono publico! Jay Gregg 11:39 21 August, 2005

Frequent Use

After reading the discussion here I decided to do a bit of quick reconaissance on the use of the term.

From the AAPG online scientific paper search database (which searches over 14 peer reviewed geological publications):

780 out of ~70,000 items (articles and published abstracts) use the term Dolostone. Of which 271 items are exclusive uses (the word dolomite does not appear). Out of the 271 exclusive uses of the term Dolostone, 81 are published abstracts. From those 81 published abstracts, 3 were publised as a full length article (in one ot the journals searched, of course).

On the other hand, the word dolomite occurs in 9360 papers, of which 8830 are exclusive uses. Out of the 8830 exlusive uses for the term dolomite, 1750 are publised abstracts. Of the 1750 published abstracts 233 were later published as full papers (in the journals the database searched). As an interesting aside, 5946 of the 8830 items do not include the word mineral at all, 3552 of which are full papers.

I'll let you draw your own conclusions. Semantic battle aside, I cannot agree with the adverb "frequently" as a modifier to the appearance of the term dolostone in geologic literature. It's use is, at best, infrequent.

--RW, fellow geologist

Dolostone

A nice bit of research by RW and I imagine that similar results would be obtained for "Journal of Sedimentary Research" and "Sedimentology", so I must agree with RW on this issue. I believe that the word "frequently" was incerted at the insistance of VSmith. What about it VSmith? Can we drop the word "frequently?" Jay Gregg 15:46, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm not locked in to the frequently term (such a quantitative term) - dolostone is used by a significant number of researcher. Also need a bit of analysis - the 8830 exlusive uses for the term dolomite - were these articles about the rock or about the mineral? The dual use of the word leads to more confusion - and I like to avoid being confused. Vsmith 16:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Dolostone

RW points out that the word "mineral" does not appear in the majority of these publications. Typically AAPG references to dolomite concern the rock as dolomite is an important reservoir rock. Also, AAPG Bulletin usually does not publish mineralogical articles. Jay Gregg 21:53, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Explanation of Frequent Use

I dropped back by to answer some questions.

I didn't read the articles on dolomite that excluded the use of the word mineral (descriptions of dolomite the mineral in journal articles usually go something like this, "the mineral dolomite" although I think it is safe to assume they discuss the rock dolomite specifically. There is also no guarantee that articles that include the words "mineral" and "dolomite" discuss the mineral dolomite. In fact, only 57 articles contain the string "mineral dolomite." So any other investigations to the words' use would require a lot of reading that simply isn't necessary.

Another interesting search is one of our companies (and a few others we've acquired over the years) internal non-published research: no documented uses of the word dolostone at all. Incidentally, it is the largest library of non-published, proprietary geologic research in the world.

I'm not trying to come down on one side or the other here. I personally don't get upset over dolostones use (if it helps non professionals and new learners, great!). However, I think that the context of the word dolomite when it is used in literature is so unambiguous that I find it puzzling that some geologists believe it causes confusion--I don't think that is entirely true. I can see it causing a bit of a headache when searching for specific contextual uses of the word (as I have done) but that situation is unlikely.

While the term is used by some geologists, I think the disclaimer on its use is entirely appropriate and I'm glad it was placed there. Thank you, Dr. Gregg.

--RW

Caves in Dolomite Rock

Hi Vsmith

I think there is a real issue here. I wrote the section on "Caves in Dolomite Rock" to add to the overall Wiki knowledge on the subject. I specifically included the words "Dolomite Rock" in the section title, as this is the term used by the overwhelming majority of Speleologists and Geologists worldwide. This is so evident in the universal, world renowned book edited by Hill and Forti and published by NSS - The American National Speleological Society. This is also echoed in the publication "Encyclopedia of Caves" published in the UK with over 100 articles by world-wide experts.

The point is that the wider community overwhelmingly use the words "Dolomite rock" or just "dolomite" on its own to indicate the host rock in which caves have formed. What I had written certainly ties in with the existing title of the wiki page. If anything the title of the page should be changed to read "Dolomite Rock or Dolostone" as it appears that neither the "American Geological Institute" nor the US "National Speleological Society" nor the rest of the world use this term "Dolostone". It appears to be very much a minority group using this term "Dolostone" and not universal as Wikipedia strives to achieve. Hence the sentences which you have deleted, was reinforcing that the speleological community use the term "dolomite" or "Dolomite Rock" when referring to the particular chemistry of the bedrock in which caves have been created. With all alterations to Wikipedia pages, it is easy to delete, but harder to write/add to the knowledge on a page. It also take considerable time to chase up references and add them to a page. Something which is sadly lacking on the Dolomite Rock page. I would urge you to reconsider the deletions and alterations which you have made. I look forward to your comments on this subject. Kind Regards Newcaves (talk) 07:13, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Seems folks like to promote confusion :) (per all the above posts) Anyway - I would not object to renaming the article to Dolomite rock, but there has to be a distinction between the mineral and the rock composed of the mineral. It is understandable, but unfortunate, that the geological community insists on confusion :) (but - hey its been going on for centuries :). Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 14:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Correspondence below included here for continuity of discussion/thread.

Hi Vsmith

I have read through the talk page of "Dolostone and Dolomite Rock" and it appears that this issue has been brewing for some years now - but no action. I personally know several speleologists who are very active in the Union Internationale de Spéléologie (UIS) and hold positions on the council of this international speleological organisation and they have always used the terms "Dolomite" or "Dolomite Rock" when referring to karst areas containing caves. This also fits in with the major literature books which are considered the bible of karst geology, caves and minerals around the world. Hence I think the move of changing the title of the "Dolostone" page to "Dolomite Rock" and the first line to "Dolomite Rock or Dolostone" is a good compromise which is long overdue. This is bearing in mind that the world wide geological community also does not recommend the use of the term dolostone. I don't have the expertise to start the ball rolling to change the page name, so would be very grateful if you could instigate this. I could then change the names in the section on caves which relates to the speleological community.

Much appreciate all your thoughts on this subject and would really appreciate it if you are able to change the title of this page - I assume that there would be links from some other pages which would need to be modified. Sorry this part of wikipedia's workings is far beyond my knowledge. Kind regardsNewcaves (talk) 13:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newcaves (talk • contribs)

Please don't use article space to quibble about the article name. Do you have any sources regarding the mineral dolomite occurring as speleothems? If so, then let's hear it ... and keep the name arguements out of the article. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 04:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Title of page - 'Dolostone' or 'Dolomite (rock)'?

As pointed out in the discussion above by various contributors, both the international geological community and the international speleological community do not recommend the use of the term ‘dolostone’. One can easily draw the conclusion that the term ‘dolostone’ is just used by a minority and is possibly localised in its use.

There are a considerable number of highly regarded international speleological publications that only use the terms, ‘dolomite’, ‘dolomite rock’, or ‘dolomite in the rock form’, when referring to karst areas of this rock. Despite this it appears that a minority of uncompromising Wikepedia editors remain committed to opposing any change of the title page to ‘Dolomite (rock)’. Dolomite (Rock) would be an unambiguous and satisfactory compromise and the term ‘dolostone’ could still be retained in the first sentence of the description.

Wikipedia should use title page terms, which are most widely used internationally.Newcaves (talk) 12:24, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed name changes

Although I am a complete layman in these matters, I have been on WP for some years. If I end up being more confused at the end of an article than when I started, there's usually something going on behind the scenes: and lo and behold! a naming controversy.

Having ploughed my way through these talk pages, (yay, Bender!) I wondered what other languages call the stuff. The French and Italians have different names for the mineral, fr:Dolomite, it:Dolomite and the rock fr:Dolomie, it:Dolomia, so no problem for them. Languages like German and English confusingly use the same word for both, but German WP sensibly has de:Dolomit (Mineral) and de:Dolomit (Gestein).

In order to minimize confusion in the minds of lesser, non-scientific mortals like me and other average readers of WP, I propose that what is currently Dolomite be renamed to Dolomite (mineral), and Dolostone to Dolomite (rock). I'm posting this message on both talk pages. I leave you with the stunning alien landscape of the Cirque de Mourèze. >MinorProphet (talk) 14:35, 6 April 2019 (UTC)

• Agree with renaming the two articles to Dolomite (mineral) and Dolomite (rock). I do not like Dolomitic rock as a possible title for the rock type because its use is rare compared to "dolomite" or "dolostone". It would have been good if geologists could have widely adopted the term "dolostone" for dolomite (rock) several decades ago but unfortunately that did not happen and therefore the use of "dolostone", for the name of the rock type, is still not as widespread as dolomite. GeoWriter (talk) 15:59, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

@GeoWriter, Paul H., Anthony Appleyard, Ss112, MinorProphet, Pbsouthwood, Vsmith, and IntoCaves: Hello all- Just want to alert you to recent changes made, without discussion here, by an editor new to the article. Eric ^talk 03:13, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

No strong opinion as I am not a geologist. · · · Peter Southwood ^(talk): 04:41, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

• Revert. I still feel that Dolomite (rock) and (mineral) are the best possible terms to distinguish between the two forms. As I stated earlier I am not a geo- or speleologist, but this smells very like the previous discussions above. The person who made the changes has an interesting edit history, and last made an edit nearly a year ago. There is fairly obviously a faction at work here with an axe to grind (apologies if I'm wrong), and WP is not the place to re-write currently accepted terminology, especially without discussion. MinorProphet (talk) 09:02, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

• Agree with renaming the two articles to Dolomite (mineral) and Dolomite (rock). for the same reasons specified by GeoWriter. In addition:

First, I looked at the latest, online edition, 2011, of the standard glossary for geological terminology, the American Geological Institute's Glossary of Geology, which edited by Neuendorf, K.K.E., J.P. Mehl, Jr., and J.A. Jackson. They listed dolomite as the preferred term for the rock type. About dolostone, they wrote dolostone (do′-lo-stone) A term proposed by Shrock (1948a, p.126) for the sedimentary rock dolomite, in order to avoid confusion with the mineral of the same name. Not recommended; obsolete. The Glossary of Geology definitely considers the term dolomite as not recommended for usage and to be obsolete.

Second, I also looked other dictionaries and found: 1. McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Earth Science, Second Edition (2003) uses dolomite and does not list dolostone and 2. A Dictionary of EarthSciences third edition (2008), Oxford University Press, lists dolomite as the preferred usage over dolostone.

Third, in the Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, & Related Terms that was compiled and edited by the Staff of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and published by the U.S. Bureau of Mines, I found dolomite defined as ...c. A carbonate sedimentary rock consisting of more than 50% to 90% mineral dolomite, depending upon classifier, or having a Ca:Mg ratio in the range 1.5 to 1.7, or having an MgO equivalent of 19.5% to 21.6%, or having a magnesium-carbonate equivalent of 41.0% to 45.4%. Dolomite beds are associated and interbedded with limestone, commonly representing postdepositional replacement of limestone. Syn: dolostone; dolomite rock. Dolostone is defined as A term applied by some petrologists to rock consisting primarily of the mineral dolomite. Syn: dolomite. In this case, I would judge the term dolomite as the preferred terminology in terms of usage.

Finally, the United States Geological Survey's GeMS — Geologic Map Schema uses dolomite instead of dolostone for the carbonate sedimentary rock consisting chiefly of the mineral dolomite. The 2018 GeMS (Geologic Map Schema) notes: Although "dolostone" is the proper analog to “limestone”, it has not often been applied to dolomitic units; historically, the literature used "dolomite”. In its 2018 Geologic Map Schema, the United States Geological Survey clearly endorses dolomite as the rock name. Paul H. (talk) 21:18, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

• Restore Dolostone back to Dolomite (rock) – I like the logic of coining the term dolostone, but it seems that it just never took hold. Thanks to Paul H. for the research, though I must add as a caveat: I can say from long professional experience that the U.S. government, just as with its elected officials, does not as a rule vet material for scholarship -- nor for English fluency -- before it goes to press. Note the delightful "more than 50% to 90%" from the Bureau of Mines, which I presume was an attempt to convey more than 50%. Thanks to all for weighing in. Eric ^talk 22:58, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

• Disagree with restoring Dolostone back to Dolomite (rock) because Dolostone is the current term used in karst science textbooks and by the state geological surveys where dolostones are most commonly found. Even the USGS' own website redirects the term dolomite to dolostone in their searches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdecelle (talk • contribs) 23:19, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Cdecelle: I signed your post for you. Please take a moment to familiarize yourself with WP:SIGN. Plus, it would be better to simply list references rather than put them as footnotes. Eric ^talk 00:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I forgot to note that use of dolomite instead of dolostone in the United States Geological Survey's GeMS — Geologic Map Schema is of specific significance. The Geologic Map Schema was developed to create a standard digital database stucture and a standard terminology for use in geologic mapping that is conducted by either the United States Geological Survey (USGS) or geologic mapping by state geological survey and universities that is funded by the USGS, e.g. STATEMAP or EDMAP programs. This means from 2018 and onward, the use of dolomite instead of dolostone in USGS-funded geological mapping by higher education and state geological survey is not optional, it is mandatory as part of the Geologic Map Schema. This means that a state geological survey is mandated to use dolomite on any USGS-funded projects and deliverables. This is a deliberate choice to commit to the use of dolomite instead of dolostone in the foreseable future. Of course if a person looks at papers and maps published over the last 70 years by any organization, they will find a some people using dolomite and some people dolostone within it. Paul H. (talk) 15:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

The terms Dolomite (mineral) and Dolomite (rock) are/were unambiguous as Wikipedia article titles and I think they have worked without problems since they were renamed as those titles about a year ago. The redirect of Dolostone to Dolomite (rock) had also worked well. Unfortunately, they have always been vulnerable to the possibility of an editor wishing to rename to dolostone, as User:Cdecelle has done within the last 9 days. Changing the article title from Dolomite (rock) to Dolostone does not improve the readers ability to navigate to this rock type article nor find the separate mineral article.

A problem that affects finding which is the most commonly used term (to comply with WP:COMMONNAME) is that the term dolostone has some use in sedimentary petrology but it has had very little impact on the names of stratigraphic units (groups, formations,members) so we often get the unsatisfactory situation of some geologists who prefer dolostone, being forced to use the name dolomite when they mention rock unit names e.g. "the Geneva Dolomite Member is made of dolostone". Another problem is that searches for dolostone will give accurate usage frequency data but searches for usage frequency of dolomite are unreliable because many search hits will be for the mineral not the rock type.

The terms dolomite and dolostone, when used to describe the rock type, are definitely not obsolete. The claim of being obsolete is easily disproved in seconds because one only has to do a web search to find many recent academic articles and books that use either term.

Describing dolostone as the more accurate term or the current term (as User:Cdecelle has done in edit summaries and on this Talk page) would be valid only if it was supported by a reliable source reference stating that "dolostone not dolomite is the more accurate/current term" or words to that effect. Lists of examples of dolostone in recent usage do not show that it is more accurate or the current term, they merely show that dolostone is only a current term. There is, however, a source supporting dolomite rather than dolostone that has gone as far as stating that dolomite is correct and dolostone is incorrect. The source is "Dolomites", a book edited by Purser et al. (1994) which was published as a review of the mineral and rock type to mark the bicentennial of Dolmieu's discovery of both the dolomite mineral and rock type. This book almost completely ignores the term dolostone except to state that "Dolostone is in the literature and preferred by many, and will surely remain, but etymologically it is incorrect".

The "Encyclopedia of Sediments and Sedimentary Rocks" (2003) states on page 127: "Most carbonate sediments and rocks (including limestones and dolomites or dolostones)..."; on page 131: "Dolostones are carbonate rocks consisting of the mineral dolomite"; on page 234: "Dolostone is a rock that consist (sic) of >75 percent dolomite. Dolostones are also called dolomites, especially in the literature prior to about 1990, but the term dolomites should only be used for different types of dolomite ... the origin of dolomites and dolostones is subject to considerable controversy."; on page 236: "The most widely used classification of dolomite/dolostone textures is ..."; on page 237: "a wide range of geochemical methods may be used to characterize dolomites and dolostones." These phrases suggest to me that the authors of that encyclopedia regard dolomite as the mineral and dolostone as the rock and that dolomite should not be used for the rock type.

The British Geological Survey's sediment and sedimentary rock classification scheme (1999) states that "Sedimentary rocks which are composed dominantly of dolomite or ankerite are given the group name dolostone."

Encyclopedia Britannica redirects occurrences of dolostone to dolomite (rock).

If only the French word dolomie, the original non-English name for the rock type, had been translated into English as dolostone way back in 1794, this naming mess could have been avoided. The dolomite/dolostone debate will probably continue for many years. This naming topic is as clear as thick dolomitic mud.

I now have no strong objection to either dolomite (rock) or dolostone for this article's title. Dolostone is probably less confusing than dolomite. Dolostone is also less ambiguous and more elegant than dolomite or dolomite (rock) as a term to describe the rock type in the main text of the article and in the text of other related articles.

— GeoWriter (talk) 22:03, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

@Cdecelle: Since I don't have the textbooks which you quote to hand, I would be grateful for actual quotations and page numbers from the works you cite. If this were a trivial matter, a web page or two from a US State authority might well suffice. But you have made substantial changes to WP without first discussing them on this page, and it is up to you to convince everyone else here that your changes reflect the mainstream of current scientific thought. We have been here before. MinorProphet (talk) 23:45, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

@MinorProphet:Yes of course. Ford and Williams in their 2007 "Karst Hydrogeology and Geomorphology" state on page 9 that "There are two common, pure mineral end-members, limestone(composed of calcite or aragonite) and dolostone (dolomite). Most authors neglect ‘dolostone’ and describe both the mineral and the rock as dolomite." I unfortunately do not have Cave Geology on hand as it is in my office, which I am not allowed into at the moment... For what it's worth, the 1999 "Karst Modeling" edited by the same author as Cave Geology, Arthur Palmer uses the term Dolostone on pages 22 and 35. Ford and Williams', and Palmer's textbooks are very well known. Palmer's Cave Geology more for the layman (although still quite thorough) and Ford and Williams' for research/professional use.

I believe that if you look at many scientific articles you will see both dolostone, and dolomite used seemingly randomly. I assume this is because the USGS has seemingly done so for ages and researchers use whatever term is found in the geologic map which they have used for their research. To show it seems random and not geographically constrained, I can point to this USGS site which has many dolostones described as such (and the definition described at the top uses the term Dolostone). I believe the USGS has formalized dolostone as the preferred, and much less confusing term and mainstream textbooks use the term as well.

As a side note, I'd like to thank those who have been helping to show me some editing stuff and fixing some of my errors.Cdecelle (talk) 00:58, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I need to study this some more. As I am confused Paul H. (talk) 02:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

The heading currently shown as "Caves in Dolostone" should be changed immediately back to "Caves in Dolomite" as all the references in this section use the term dolomite (with no mention of dolostone). I totally agree with renaming the two articles to Dolomite (mineral) and Dolomite (rock). IntoCaves (talk) 03:01, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@IntoCaves: A quick search found articles related to speleogenesis and speleothems in the NSS Journal and others outside the country on the formation of caves in dolostone (the word they used) by Hydrogen Sulfide->Sulfuric Acid (Polyak and Provencio 2001). I added a sentence in the "Caves in Dolostone" section about this H2SO4 process. Another article "Climate and cave control on Pleistocene/Holocene calcite-to-aragonite transitions in speleothems from Morocco: Elemental and isotopic evidence" by authored by 9 researches from Germany and morrocco, where the word Dolostone is used instead of Dolomite ( Wassenburg et al 2012). Cdecelle (talk) 17:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Cdecelle, the quote that you have given from Ford & Williams (2007) ("Most authors neglect ‘dolostone’ and describe both the mineral and the rock as dolomite.") seems to support giving this Wikipedia article the title Dolomite (rock) rather than Dolostone on the grounds of WP:COMMONNAME, but you have used this source to do the opposite. Why do you think that Ford and Williams (2007) supports you action of changing Dolomite (rock) to Dolostone? —GeoWriter (talk) 19:27, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Cdecelle, the USGS webpage https://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc-lith.php?text=dolostone+%28dolomite%29 that you provided mentions dolostone 32 times but mentions dolomite 173 times. Is this supposed to show support for dolostone instead of dolomite? —GeoWriter (talk) 19:41, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

The point I'm trying to show with the USGS page is that Dolostone is a well used term and is now the preferred term by the USGS shown by how they use it as the default term at the top. That webpage is their page for all Dolostone in the USA and if you try and get to the page via dolomite or typing it in, it always redirects to saying Dolostone. Dolomite may have more in the USGS page (due to historical use), but is not correct according to both Ford and Williams, and the USGS/ state surveys.

I believe that the term Dolostone, compared to dolomite (rock) would also better fit Wikipedia's five Good title characteristics. Dolostone is clearly more precise of a term, while also being more concise. And I believe the term is just as recognizeable and natural as dolomite (rock). (The other category is consistency, but I don't believe it's relevant because there are no other rocks which have titles referencing Dolostone/dolomite (rock) Cdecelle (talk) 05:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Cdecelle, I agree that using dolostone in Wikipedia instead of dolomite may have merit as per Wikipedia:Article titles, but I think that the source references that you have cited to support your claim do not actually support your claim that dolostone is the correct term.

— GeoWriter (talk) 20:30, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Cdecelle, I would interpret the United States Geological Survey's GeMS — Geologic Map Schema as indicating you are completely wrong in claiming that "dolostone" "is now the preferred term used by the USGS." The USGS Geologic Map Schema, which all state surveys are mandated to follow in USGS-funded geological mapping, clearly indicates that starting in 2018 "dolomite" is to be used for all geologic mapping submitted to the USGS. That a legacy, pre-2018, web page uses "dolostone" just means that it was the preference of the person, who prepared the web page at the it was created and the USGS editors and geologists have better things to do with their time than edit thousands of web pages for consistency of terminology. That "dolomite" instead of "dolostone" is specified in what has become the standard for all geologic mapping conducted by the USGS and by the state geological surveys for the USGS, is a clear indication that in 2018 the USGS decided on mandating the use of "dolomite" instead of "dolostone" in their geologic mapping as the preferred term. Paul H. (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Cdecelle “Cave Minerals of the World” Hill, C A and Forti, P, published by NSS is considered by speleologists and geologists to be the world wide bible of speleogenesis, speleothems and cave formation. Your 'dolostone' search of NSS Journal (which publishes articles from many authors) is not considered to be the NSS view as to the name of a rock type. There are also authors which use the term Dolomite. I would consider the search of NSS Journals to be bias and not reflecting the most recognised world wide term which is Dolomite or Dolomite rock. Wikipedia is suppose to reflect international consensus not just a term used by a minority.IntoCaves (talk) 01:50, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

I will point out that a dolomite appearing in Cave Minerals of the World, would make sense, since dolomite is the correct word for the mineral. Cdecelle (talk) 01:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

'Cave Minerals of the World', refers to "Dolomite" in the context of 'caves are formed in dolomite', which is used in the same contested as 'caves are formed in limestone', so using the logic that the book is referring to just the 'mineral' does not stand up. The book does NOT refer to 'dolostone'. 'Cave minerals of the World', deals in detail with cave development in various host rocks, including dolomite, the chemistry and everything through to speleogenisis. It is definitely considered world wide, as the most informative and accurate publication of its type. But the use of the term 'dolomite' used as a general term to describe a rock type (not just its chemistry) is widespread around the world and references to it in all manner of publications, far out number such references to dolostone.IntoCaves (talk) 04:54, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Summary so far

Just over a year ago in April 2019, I, MinorProphet, proposed renaming Dolomite to Dolomite (mineral), and Dolostone to Dolomite (rock). There was no dissent, and so I made the changes, although I managed to screw up royally in the process. In April 2020 Cdecelle changed the title of this article back from Dolomite (rock) to Dolostone without discussion. Although there is a certain level of approval for this title, a number of editors (@GeoWriter, IntoCaves, Paul H., and Eric:) have spent a considerable amount of time in refuting Cdecelle's arguments by adducing a body of evidence that Dolomite, and not Dolostone, seems incontestably to be the preferred term in current English-language reliable sources. In defending his/her edits, Cdecelle has even quoted works which appear to contradict his/her own position.

Unless Cdecelle has any more pertinent comments (or if we just need something to keep us going through lockdown), I suggest that we attempt to wrap up this interesting and fruitful discussion with a summarising vote and make a decision to keep Dolostone, or rename to Dolomite (rock) for the foreseeable future. Thank you to everyone for your contributions.

• Rename to Dolomite (rock) as per wholly convincing arguments by the above-named editors. MinorProphet (talk) 12:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Rename Definitely should be changed to 'Dolomite (rock)', to fit in with internationally recognised terminology used by the majority of bodies/institutions and publications IntoCaves (talk) 23:35, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Rename to Dolomite (rock) per WP:COMMONNAME and various arguments made above. Mikenorton (talk) 09:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

The glaciers melt apace, but WP moves infinitesimally swifter. 'Ware move... MinorProphet (talk) 15:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

So moved per overwhelming consensus. Mikenorton (talk) 15:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

• Comment - Just to be completely clear, I personally prefer the term "dolostone" but, in terms of current usage, I have no doubt that this article is now at the title it should be. This page should not be moved back to "dolostone" without clear consensus, which looks highly unlikely to happen in the near future. Mikenorton (talk) 09:25, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

• Resolved
  MinorProphet (talk) 10:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

References

Dolomite rock

@Eric: Do you suggest the article should be moved to Dolomite rock? Or why did you revert me? The current title is Dolomite and the disabiugator is (rock). If the mineral didn't have the same name, this article would be moved to "Dolomite" without the (rock) par. Christian75 (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Christian75: Have you looked over the above discussion? Several people were involved in wording the lead. Eric ^talk 17:05, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Looked through it. And more caregfully now. I can't see anybody arguing it should be named Dolomite rock. One argues it should definitely not be moved to Dolomite rock. The titles "Dolomite (rock)" and "Dolomite rock" are not synonyms. The former would be moved to Dolomite if there wasn't any article with that name. The latter wouldn't. Christian75 (talk) 17:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I get your take on it. I just thought the wording as it read was the result of long debate and negotiation. If I were king, it would read something like "The term dolomite, when used to describe a type of rock, is a..." But that sort of formulation of the first sentence is not well received by the Lords of Ledes. Eric ^talk 18:33, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Eric: You obviously haven't been sacrificing enough goats. Mais où sont les neiges d'antan? MinorProphet (talk) 13:42, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Justement, M. Villon! Eric ^talk 13:55, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

J'aime bien le son du cor, le soir, au fond des bois...

d'ailleurs ... Je flambe dans le brasier... MinorProphet (talk) 20:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Physico-chemical importance of Mg ion

This section strikes me as a good poster child for giving undue weight to a minor aspect of a subject. The same may be said for the entire "Caves in dolomite rock" section of which it is part; this makes up much too large a percentage of the overall article. I'm inclined to reduce the Mg ion section to a single sentence, if that, and then take some of the material out of the overly large lead and expand it into proper sections (Description, Occurrences, etc.) to give the article a little better balance.

I'm wondering, though, if there is a place in Wikipedia where the detailed material would be more appropriate and could be moved rather than simply discarded? --Kent G. Budge (talk) 22:04, 4 September 2021 (UTC)