A fact from Illite crystallinity appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 November 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the illite crystallinity technique measures the formation temperature of metamorphic rocks?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/November. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Illite crystallinity.

Wikipedia

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Illite crystallinity 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.

Chemistry Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Feedback from sara8s001

Needs a title

In the introduction, it is stated that IC measures the thickness of Illite/Muscovite packets, so may-be briefly state what the difference in thickness of these minerals indicates. It is not clearly explained until the "Application" section, and readers will benefit from knowing it's relevance in the introduction.

Chemical formulas of both illite and muscovite would be a useful addition. Chemical differences are explained without the formula's for reference.

Include why the difference between the mineral thicknesses indicate metamorphic conditions.

I like your original figure, it is clear and concise.

Sara8s001 (talk) 19:16, 13 October 2013 (UTC)sara8s001[reply]

Nice page, I like the conciseness. I would try to expand a bit on the application, especially in the intro. Really make it clear why we care about IC. Also think about dumbing down the language, specifically in the methodology section. Non-scientists may have a hard time following that part. Also it might be worth expanding on your image caption to better clarify what it is explaining. Nice job!

Adam Turner Aturn4000 (talk) 13:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Overall it is a nice page. Need more word link to wiki. Also you used source 1 a lot need to find more sources. Sadeghm2010 (talk) 15:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the XRD methodology, you need to say the FWHM measurement is performed on 00l first order refection for illite using preferred orientation. Also illite rarely is pure and is often interstratified so it is a good idea to glycol solvate the mount prior to measurement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glyn carter (talk • contribs) 09:04, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New Reviews

I've been trying to find something wrong so that I could give you advice, but I can't find anything. Great page, I'm not sure how to improve it. Garrniel (talk) 18:21, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd probably move the second paragraph of the introduction down somewhere else in the article, it just sorta seems out of place right there. Also I'd revise the use of the word "we" and "us" throughout the article, it's a little too conversational. Maybe a pic of the sample preparation process would be useful. All in all the page looks good to me, I would say that it seems a little too complicated/complex for the average wikipedia user, but if you're looking up illite crystallinity on the internet, chances are you're not the average internet user. Amorse3522 (talk) 21:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Morabiac (talk) 05:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC)Try to avoid using personal pronouns, as it makes the article sound less professional. It maybe that I just did not read this close enough but I’m not sure what kind of technique IC is. Is it just a standard index that compares XRD data of a sample to the index? It might be helpful to average wiki readers to really spell it out...But like Andrew said, if you're reading this page you probably have a good background[reply]