Template:Did you know nominations/Bultfonteinite

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 12:54, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Bultfonteinite

(

)

... that while bultfonteinite (pictured) was discovered as early as 1903, the mineral wasn't described until 1932?

Reviewed: Second of Siderastrea siderea, Siderastrea radians

Created/expanded by Chris857 (talk). Self nom at 17:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Article:The prose size was expanded from 199 to 2822 — more than enough to meet the 5x size requirement and the 1500 characters requirement. Expanded as indicated on 19 July, so that's okay too. It's neutral and cited. However, much of the History section of the article matches too closely with the phrasing in the original journal article used as a reference. Many sentences are nearly verbatim and will need to be changed before this article can be approved for DYK.
Hook: This is fine, and supported by reference.
Picture: The suggested accompanying picture has been copied from a website which says all pictures are copyrighted and not to be reproduced without authorization, so it should undoubtedly be removed from the article — and Wikimedia Commons! MeegsC (talk) 00:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the image, Rob Lavinsky donated all his images to Commons several years ago. Chris857 (talk) 00:19, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Oops! Sorry — I didn't scroll far enough down the page! MeegsC (talk) 00:51, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Here is my attempt at reducing the close paraphrasing in the history section. If you notice specific problem areas or have suggestions for improvement, tell me.

In either 1903 or 1904, a miner discovered the first specimen of bultfonteinite on the 480-foot level of the Bultfontein mine in Kimberley, South Africa. The mineral occurred in a several-hundred-foot-tall "horse" of kimberlite-enclosed dolerite and shale fragments. The specimen, mistakenly though to be natrolite, was given to Alpheus F. Williams. Several years later, additional samples were found by C. E. Adams in the nearby Dutoitspan mine and given to the MacGregor Museum in Kimberley. Shortly before 1932, the mineral was found about 100 miles (160 km) to the southeast of Kimberley at the Jagersfontein Mine in Orange River Colony.

After John Parry and F. E. Wright described the mineral afwillite in 1925, Williams recognized that his samples of bultfonteinite were not natrolite, but were likely a new mineral species. Chemical analysis by John Parry and crystallographic and optical determination by Wright proved it to be a new mineral. The mineral was described by Parry, Williams, and Wright in 1932 and named bultfonteinite after the mine in which it was discovered. Earlier that year in his book The Genesis of the Diamond, Williams had called the mineral dutoitspanite, a name which was "apparently discarded". When the International Mineralogical Association was founded, bultfonteinite was grandfathered as a valid mineral species.

Chris857 (talk) 02:57, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

This looks a lot better. One question: what's a "horse" in the context used above? MeegsC (talk) 02:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

On searching, I'm pretty sure it is Horse (geology). Adding. Chris857 (talk) 02:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)