Talk:Manganese, Minnesota

Manganese, Minnesota is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 16, 2021.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 10, 2020	Peer review	Reviewed
September 16, 2020	Good article nominee	Listed
August 29, 2021	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

Ghost towns Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ghost towns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ghost towns 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.Ghost townsWikipedia:WikiProject Ghost townsTemplate:WikiProject Ghost townsGhost town articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Minnesota Low‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Peer review

Tom (LT) I would like to submit this article for peer review. Previously, you peer reviewed the article Elcor, Minnesota and helped elevate it to feature article status. Thanks in advance for your feedback. Gandydancer, John from Idegon and Coal town guy please feel free to chime in as well. DrGregMN (talk) 01:55, 3 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A few suggestions

An extremely well-written article! I do have acouple of suggestions regarding these two paragraphs:

After the armistice was signed, the demand for manganiferous ore decreased. With the advent of the Great Depression, mining operations ceased. The Soo Line tore up the track to Manganese in 1930. Little employment was left in the community, and residents relocated to find new jobs. The last shipment of ore from the Algoma and Gloria mines occurred in 1931; the Milford mine closed in 1932, although the Merrit mine continued to produce ore intermittently until 1943.[27][30] Residents gradually started moving their homes out of town for relocation to other communities in the region. Very few photos of Manganese are known to exist. Never a wealthy community, residents had no money for cameras, a luxury item during the Depression.

In 1938, a Wesleyan Methodist Church and Sunday school was founded. There were generally four Sunday school classes, based on the ages of the children. Occasional revival meetings were held, and guest pastors came in for services. The congregation came from Trommald, Mission, Wolford, and Perry Lake, in addition to Manganese. After World War II, the church was sold and torn down after the congregation was no longer able to appoint a pastor.

While armistice is linked, it seems to me that it would read a little better if it said something like: "After the World War I armistice was signed..."

The next paragraph ends with: Residents gradually started moving their homes out of town for relocation to other communities in the region. Very few photos of Manganese are known to exist. Never a wealthy community, residents had no money for cameras, a luxury item during the Depression. These two sentences seem to be a better way to close out the section and could perhaps be moved to end the next paragraph. I'm guessing that the "house moving" had already begun before the churches were built and that's why it appears in this paragraph. Perhaps the sentence could be moved to the final paragraph and instead read something like, "As the mining operations began to shut down residents had begun to move their homes..." followed by the sentence re the cameras/photos. Of course it may just be me and this could read just fine as it is. Gandydancer (talk) 20:17, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Gandydancer. Useful suggestions; changes made! DrGregMN (talk) 22:48, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Linking

A very interesting article. Just my tuppenceworth - does 'quagmire' need to be linked to Wiktionary? Are we in the business of giving the definition of every unusual word that is encountered on Wikipedia? Is it that difficult/unusual a word anyhow? I think it distracts from the article and suggests the readers are dumb. 86.137.147.216 (talk) 10:22, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your comment on the talk page today, sorry for the delay in responding. Thank you for your kind feedback! The word 'quagmire' was wiktionary linked as the word was similarly linked in the article Pithole, Pennsylvania. In the feedback of one of the FA reviewers, you have to consider that not everyone reading the article may be from the United States and is familiar with the use of the word. DrGregMN (talk) 02:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Township sections

I noticed that the article states that the town was platted in sections 23 and 28. This can't be right, since those sections aren't contiguous. It looks to me like it should be sections 21 and 28 - maybe the error is in the original source, but it should be checked to verify. --Olds 403 (talk) 21:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw your comment on the talk page today, sorry about the delay in responding. You are quite right, it doesn't make sense. However, in checking back for errors, I found another source which corobborates the first and added it to the article. It could be they're both wrong (perhaps one source was original and the second source cited the first). However, it may also be possible they are both correct: I can only source what is cited in the literature. Regards, DrGregMN (talk) 02:28, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Undue geologic details

There is a content dispute between User:DrGregMN and myself regarding the addition of the following geologic details of this town:

The Trommald Formation has been correlated with other iron formations of the Animikie Group,^[2] deposited during the early Proterozoic age,^[3] and is unique in the Lake Superior region because of the amount of manganese in part of the iron formation and ore.^[4]^[5] The stratigraphic column of the Trommald Formation ranges from 45 to 820 feet (14 to 250 m) thick and consists of at least two mappable iron formation facies, one thick-bedded and cherty, divided by an aegirine zone, the other thin-bedded and slaty with a tourmaline zone at its base.^[6]^[7] The facies are sometimes separated by a black laminated carbonate-silicate iron formation. Gray phyllite lies above and below,^[7] capped with topsoil consisting of overlying morainic material and clay-rich till.^[2] The characteristics of the Trommald Formation are complicated due to the great diversity of ore textures and the shape of the ore bodies.^[8] Considerable variation exists in the character and composition of the ores, varying greatly from 20 to 60 percent iron and 0.5 to 50 percent manganese.^[3]^[2]^[9] The ores contained on average about 43 percent iron and 10 percent manganese.^[10] Most manganese is finely disseminated as an integral part of the iron ore.^[11] Ores of the Milford mine were brown and manganiferous; ores from the Gloria mine were black and slaty brown manganiferous; ores from the Merritt mine were red brown to black and richly manganiferous; ores from the Algoma mine were ferruginous manganese.^[12]

References

^ McSwiggen, Peter L.; Morey, G. B.; Cleland, Jane M. (1995). Iron Formation Protolith and Genesis, Cuyuna Range, Minnesota (PDF). University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (Report). St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Geological Survey. Archived (PDF) from the original on September 9, 2015. Retrieved 9 August 2021.
^ ^a ^b ^c Cite error: The named reference Phase 1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ ^a ^b Cite error: The named reference RI-46 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Schmidt 1963, p. 57.
^ Morey 1990, p. 8.
^ Beltrame, R. J.; Holtzman, Richard C.; Wahl, Timothy E. (1981). RI-24 Manganese Resources of the Cuyuna Range, East-Central Minnesota. University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (Report). St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Geological Survey. Archived from the original on September 6, 2015. Retrieved 14 August 2020.
^ ^a ^b McSwiggen, Peter L.; Morey, Glenn B.; Cleland, Jane M. (1994). "The Origin of Aegirine in Iron Formation of the Cuyuna Iron Range, East-Central Minnesota" (PDF). The Canadian Mineralogist. 32. Quebec City: Mineralogical Association of Canada: 591. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 August 2017. Retrieved 30 March 2020.
^ Schmidt 1963, pp. 20, 55, 68.
^ Morey 1990, pp. 11, 22.
^ Klemic 1970, pp. 411–477.
^ Schmidt 1963, p. 48.
^ Schmidt 1963, pp. 67, 68, 69.

My concerns are:

WP:USCITIES outlines the structure which articles about US settlements (and former settlements) typically follow; this depth of detail and quantity of text is WP:UNDUE for a US settlement article.
MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE suggests that images be "significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative", and the topic of this article is a former town in a US state. For this reason, a diagram showing the stratigraphy of a drill hole beneath a mine located a mile from the townsite is out-of-scope.

My suggestion would be to create an article about the geology of the area, where readers interested in specific details can learn more. The input of others would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the exclusion of the image. Checking the source, it never mentions this subject, thus making relevance extremely questionable. Just because the article got through FAC does not mean it has no coatracked content that reviewers may have missed. (t · c) buidhe 02:23, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] McSwiggen, Peter L.; Morey, G. B.; Cleland, Jane M. (1995). Iron Formation Protolith and Genesis, Cuyuna Range, Minnesota (PDF). University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (Report). St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Geological Survey. Archived (PDF) from the original on September 9, 2015. Retrieved 9 August 2021.

[Phase_1-2] Cite error: The named reference Phase 1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[RI-46-3] Cite error: The named reference RI-46 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[FOOTNOTESchmidt196357-4] Schmidt 1963, p. 57.

[FOOTNOTEMorey19908-5] Morey 1990, p. 8.

[6] Beltrame, R. J.; Holtzman, Richard C.; Wahl, Timothy E. (1981). RI-24 Manganese Resources of the Cuyuna Range, East-Central Minnesota. University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (Report). St. Paul, Minnesota: Minnesota Geological Survey. Archived from the original on September 6, 2015. Retrieved 14 August 2020.

[Rruff-7] McSwiggen, Peter L.; Morey, Glenn B.; Cleland, Jane M. (1994). "The Origin of Aegirine in Iron Formation of the Cuyuna Iron Range, East-Central Minnesota" (PDF). The Canadian Mineralogist. 32. Quebec City: Mineralogical Association of Canada: 591. Archived (PDF) from the original on 12 August 2017. Retrieved 30 March 2020.

[FOOTNOTESchmidt196320,_55,_68-8] Schmidt 1963, pp. 20, 55, 68.

[FOOTNOTEMorey199011,_22-9] Morey 1990, pp. 11, 22.

[FOOTNOTEKlemic1970411–477-10] Klemic 1970, pp. 411–477.

[FOOTNOTESchmidt196348-11] Schmidt 1963, p. 48.

[FOOTNOTESchmidt196367,_68,_69-12] Schmidt 1963, pp. 67, 68, 69.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]