Mindat Mineralogy Messageboard - Best Minerals - General Discussion for the best of species http://www.mindat.org/msgboard-63.html Mon, 30 Nov 2009 00:40:02 +0000 Phorum 5.2.8-RC1 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,160211#msg-160211 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,160211#msg-160211 The message board is a nice open playground for shaping the content.
In the long (or not so long) run Scott's advice should be taken seriously imho.
Scott, could you make a flow chart that visualises your ideas and think about a way in which we can incorporate the data as it is now into it?
Thanks in advance!!

Harjo]]> Harjo Neutkens Best Minerals - General Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:58:31 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159905#msg-159905 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159905#msg-159905 I agree, we need better search protocols to be able to fully access the information in the Best Minerals articles. The recent alphabetical list of linked mineral names for which the first draft of articles have been completed was done in an attempt to make what we have thus far done more accessible to all. I have talked this over with a number of people and there are several ways or combination of ways this can be done and your suggestions will certainly be added to the list of possibilities. Right now, I have decided not to worry to much about implementing any of them because we have such a small percentage of the minerals completed even with a first rough draft. Considering how long it takes to write, implement and format the images for each article I think it will become some time before linking the articles with everything else and vice versa becomes much of an issue. I also think that the project is better off in the Message board format right now because it has a much better access to interested parties and can be contributed to more easily than if it were in any other current format available here on Mindat. I though we were doing a pretty good job on updating the articles when suggestions were made, but obviously we different opinions about that. If the people who contribute to best minerals could devote full time to working on the project I am sure faster progress could be made, but as it stands now, progress is and will probably always be limited to how many hours the contributors can spend working on it. Would you like to work on an article? There are a lot of minerals to choose from and we need all the help we can get. Perhaps you would be more responsive to updating the articles from suggestions made to you than we have been.]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Thu, 12 Nov 2009 09:43:51 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159896#msg-159896 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159896#msg-159896
One of my primary concerns over the current organization is based on cross-linking the data. Articles on mineral species or varieties can be linked directly from the mineral page to the article in the current system. But how does one approach an article using the example: Best Minerals, Quartz, Alabama to California [www.mindat.org].

A one page article works for a very rare species or variety, but in the above case, how do we link mindat articles with regional locality pages? It would seem prudent to at least break up the article in question to individual states at least, so that these articles would be listed under the regional locality page at a minimum. Another example is the name of each locality which is often updated on mindat, yet remains static in the Best Minerals forum articles. Dynamic updates for locality names based on the locality id numbers is the way to go.

Another example of the poor organization of the Best Minerals project in the forums is the current article list by mineral species which is organized by alphabetical order, yet is interspersed with individual species between categories, such as the categorical list of "Best Minerals - B", yet underneath and between "Best Minerals - C" is Best Minerals - Barite. Why isn't Barite listed under B?

I would to like to see article tags in the mindat markup language that would facilitate subsection linking to a Best Minerals article based on individual localities so that a hyperlink is available on that locality page to that locality within the Best Minerals article for the species in question. I would imagine this would be a list of hyperlinks generated under article entries, or a linked symbol next to each mineral listed under the mineral list generated for the particular locality, or something like that.

A hypothetical example would be if I'm on a specific locality page, I would want to be able to click on a link that takes me to the Best Minerals article describing the locality. If I can't do this, then the whole point of hyperlinking locality pages to articles is dead on arrival. Really, this would be my main concern, that those localities described in the Best Minerals articles would be only linked in one direction; from the Best Minerals article to the locality, versus being linked both ways.

Rock, when information is provided by other users for the Best Minerals project, the information does not seem to get incorporated. A longer list of users with editorial permissions would help get these articles updated, and would let contributors update locality data in their areas of expertise or familiarity.

I also find the occasional inclusion of price information without corresponding references are impossible to corroborate, and highly subjective. Pricing without reference become a needless point of contention without without reference to size, shape, clarity, rarity, beauty, etc. P. I would rather see a specific example for a well defined specimen that was sold for a given amount at a certain point in time.

Harjo, I really can't find fault with your articles. :)-D

Anyways, that's my thoughts on the subject for the day. Thanks to everyone for your input. I must admit that I'm exited to see how it will all work out in the long run.

Scott]]> Scott L. Ritchie Best Minerals - General Thu, 12 Nov 2009 07:18:34 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159253#msg-159253 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159253#msg-159253 Rob Woodside Best Minerals - General Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:28:30 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159245#msg-159245 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,159245#msg-159245 Ezekiel Hughes Best Minerals - General Sat, 07 Nov 2009 23:35:51 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,159134,159134#msg-159134 Fast navigation list for species that have had a first draft completed. http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,159134,159134#msg-159134
All the rest of the minerals have yet to be written about or the images to represent them selected and are just waiting for someone like you to come along and write the article. This project is scheduled for completion in June, 2384. (Rock, I thought we agreed on 2383.......)

Acanthite Rock Currier
Adamite Rock Currier
Aluminium Rock Currier
Anatase Harjo Neutkens
Andradite Rock Currier
Anglesite Rock Currier
Arsenic Rock Currier
Arsenolamprite Rock Currier
Atacamite Ralph Bottrill
Atelestite Rock Currier
Azurite Rock Currier
Azurite, Tsumeb Rock Currier
Azurite, Bisbee Rock Currier
Atelestite Rock Currier
Baryte-Australia Ralph Bottrill
Baryte, Belgium Harjo Neutkens
Boracite Alfredo Petrov
Borax Rock Currier
Calcite, Belgium Harjo Neutkens
Cassiterite (started with Australian locations) Ralph Bottrill
Cerussite David von Bargen
Cordierite Olav Revheim
Colemanite Rock Currier
Copper David Von Bargen
Covellite David Von Bargen
Crocoite (nearly complete) Ralph Bottrill
Datolite Rock Currier
Davidite Rock Currier
Dreyerite Roger Lang
Emerald Harjo Neutkens
Ferristrunzite Harjo Neutkens
Fluorite, Australia Ralph Bottrill
Fluorite Belgium Harjo Neutkens
Fluorite, United Kingdon Jesse Fisher
Fluorite, United States David Von Bargen
Gadolinite Olav Revheim
Galena David Von Bargen
Gold Rock Currier
Gypsum, Australia Ralph Bottrill
Hydroboracite Rock Currier
Inderite Rock Currier
Inyoite Rock Currier
Kamotoite Rock Currier
Kernite Rock Currier
Kurnakovite Rock Currier
Meyerhofferite Rock Currier
Millerite Harjo Neutkens
Mirabilite Rock Currier
Muscovite David Von Bargen
Nobleite Rock Currier
Pääkkönenite Rock Currier
Polybasite Rob Woodside
Prehnite Rock Currier
Probertite Rock Currier
Pseudomalachite (startup is made) Roger Lang
Quartz, Australia (nearly done) Ralph Bottrill
Quartz, Belgium Harjo Neutkens
Quartz, Canada Philippe M. Belley
Quartz,USA, Alabama to California Rock Currier
Quartz, USA, Colorado to Montana Rock Currier
Quartz, USA, Nebraska to Wyoming Rock Currier
Rhodochrosite Rock Currier
Rhodonite Ralph Bottrill
Ruthenium Rock Currier
Sampleite Rock Currier
Santafeite Rock Currier
Schalenblende Harjo Neutkens
Silver David Von Bargen
Stichtite Ralph Bottrill
Sulfur David Von Bargen
Szenicsite Rock Currier
Thenardite Rock Currier
Thortvetite Olav Revheim
Tincalconite Rock Currier
Tunellite Rock Currier
Turquoise Harjo Neutkens
Tungsten Rob Woodside
Ulexite Rock Currier
Vajdakite Rock Currier
Vantasselite Harjo Neutkens
Weddellite Rock Currier
Wulfenite Rock Currier
Zunyite Rock Currier]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Sat, 07 Nov 2009 04:27:40 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158816#msg-158816 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158816#msg-158816 I am not clear on what you mean by work on the data set on WA jade.Could you explain further what it is you would like to do? What is WA? What do you mean by jade. Jade is not a mineral but a general term that can mean Jadeite, nephrite or several other minerals.]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Thu, 05 Nov 2009 07:20:28 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158672#msg-158672 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158672#msg-158672 Ezekiel Hughes Best Minerals - General Wed, 04 Nov 2009 08:47:09 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158611#msg-158611 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158611#msg-158611
First of all, thanks for thinking along!!
Second...
Quote

However, rather than clustering all countries on a single page for an individual species, each country would be represented by a single page per species that would include a textual synopsis featuring one of the best photographs, and then provide a hyperlink list of individual localities segregated by geographical hierarchy in alphabetical order. Each individual locality page would include a textual synopsis featuring one of the best photographs, and a hyperlink to a child page that would display all of the individual photographs in a gallery setting.
True, the scrolling time can be a problem, but it's also possible to tackle that using this format. In my articles I use hyperlinks for every locality name (and more) and at the moment I'm planning the Beryl page (I already did the Emerald page) which will consist of a main page with all the colour varieties linked. Chopping up these into linked country pages would be a step too far for me, somehow I like it when it reads like a book ;-)
Quote

I've been thinking that perhaps the whole thought of using mediawiki software is too foreboding for most of the users here on mindat.
True, because we would like as many as possible knowledgeable people taking part we have to keep the threshold in regard to software knowledge as low as possible imho, the forum software can serve the purpose quite well and many have learned how to use it to some extend.
Quote

I think this improvement would be both mentally stimulating and visually appealing!
I don't know about the mental side....but on the visual side we agreed on a lay-out, I think it looks nice but I'm open to criticism, so please check out the articles I've done so far and please shoot at them, I'd be happy to improve them and all the help in that respect is greatly appreciated!
Here are some of the articles I did until now:
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]
[www.mindat.org]

You see, I agree with you :D

Cheers

Harjo]]> Harjo Neutkens Best Minerals - General Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:26:04 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158593#msg-158593 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158593#msg-158593 The way mindat usually works is that you must first gain support for your ideas and not assume that everyone will hop on board your band wagon as soon as it leaves your driveway. I might very well support your ideas, but you will first have to explain them to me and others so we understand what you are talking about. I know nothing about mediawiki markup language and I would think few on mindat do, but am gratified that apparently Jolyon and Ralph do. You site the Andradite article as good example of an Organizational and Editorial Quagmire. Please explain to me what you feel the deficiencies of the article are and what benefits the mediawiki software will add. I assume it is more than the extended download time that would make the use of a dial up connection almost impossible. Yes there are people who still use dial up. Si & Ann Frazer are among them, though they are weakening and I think will join the 20th century soon. Yes, I know it is already the 21st century.]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:59:06 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158585#msg-158585 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158585#msg-158585
Jolyon]]> Jolyon Ralph Best Minerals - General Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:22:01 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158582#msg-158582 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158582#msg-158582
I appreciate the lone voice of support. B)-

I've been thinking that perhaps the whole thought of using mediawiki software is too foreboding for most of the users here on mindat. I still think we can do better!

The mindat markup language as used in the articles framework is probably sufficient enough to accomplish the task of reorganization and altering the display format, and if not, I'm sure Jolyon could code a few routines to make any listing features that may be needed available to us.

In the long run, perhaps mindat markup articles are the best route to take, as compatibility and integration with mindat would be inherent in the design. If the mindat user article software were used to develop the individual mineral species regional and locality articles for the "Best Minerals", hyperlinks to these articles would be available at the bottom of those specific pages as well.

All I know is I've heard allot of complaints about the current format, even from people using highspeed internet connections. One only needs to click on the Andradite page in the Best Minerals forum to see the problems inherent with the status quo [www.mindat.org]. I can only imagine the frustration of a dialup user, if in fact there are any of them still online. ;)

I really appreciate everybody's input and work involved to date, especially Rock's dedication and forethought to get this party started. It's usually best to brainstorm during the infancy of the project, when changes are generally easier to implement.

Scott]]> Scott L. Ritchie Best Minerals - General Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:10:14 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,136874,158526#msg-158526 Re: Work in progress in Best Minerals http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,136874,158526#msg-158526 Harjo Neutkens Best Minerals - General Tue, 03 Nov 2009 07:49:37 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158520#msg-158520 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158520#msg-158520 I can see the point in what you say, its worried me a bit and its good to have some skilled input into a new structure. I have not done very much with wiki markup language before but it did not seem too tortuous. If you can help set things up and be available for problems I am sure we can work with it.]]> Ralph Bottrill Best Minerals - General Tue, 03 Nov 2009 06:53:50 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,136874,158519#msg-158519 Re: Work in progress in Best Minerals http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,136874,158519#msg-158519 Ralph Bottrill Best Minerals - General Tue, 03 Nov 2009 06:47:58 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158501#msg-158501 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158501#msg-158501
What I am suggesting is a more refined way of generating lists based on the organizational system you are currently employing. However, rather than clustering all countries on a single page for an individual species, each country would be represented by a single page per species that would include a textual synopsis featuring one of the best photographs, and then provide a hyperlink list of individual localities segregated by geographical hierarchy in alphabetical order. Each individual locality page would include a textual synopsis featuring one of the best photographs, and a hyperlink to a child page that would display all of the individual photographs in a gallery setting.

The benefits would be reduced server load when generating listings, and increased ease of user access to data based on specific area of interest by reducing the amount of information needed to be scrolled through in order to locate site specific data.

I would propose building the wiki-based site in conjunction with the current forum-based listings so that you can continue without interruption, and then when you are relatively completed, switch over to wiki for displaying the project like a real encyclopedia. If you don't feel comfortable learning wiki markup, it's just a matter of delegating administrative responsibilities to a couple of competent users who are familiar with the scope of the project and have the programming skills needed to see it through.

Scott]]> Scott L. Ritchie Best Minerals - General Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:38:05 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,136874,158491#msg-158491 Re: Work in progress in Best Minerals http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,136874,158491#msg-158491 www.mindat.org] . Anyone interested in adding some other countries locs to it (Ralph, how about the Australian, I could mail Chris Auer if he would like to do Bleiberg, Austria and Mezica, Slovenia but who has the time to do the USA......Rock ;-) )

Cheers

Harjo]]> Harjo Neutkens Best Minerals - General Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:00:24 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158286#msg-158286 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158286#msg-158286 I think you will have to take that up with Jolyon and David von Bargen. I don't have access to the mindat server(s), and I have no confidence that I could learn enough about the wiki markup language so that if I did have access to the servers that I would not screw up what is already in place. In addition, and more importantly I don't understand your vision of the benefits this would bring. Is there something you can do to illustrate this for me?]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Sun, 01 Nov 2009 02:29:12 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158238#msg-158238 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,158238#msg-158238
I don't think this is an issue of limited or superior intellect or abilities, it's simply a matter of learning a small amount of wiki markup language and loading the software onto the mindat server. If it's something you are genuinely interested in doing, have Jolyon load it up, share administrative access with me, and let's start importing the data you have generated so far in the forum threads - and build a suitable design and structural format together. It's all about teamwork, really.

Scott]]> Scott L. Ritchie Best Minerals - General Sat, 31 Oct 2009 15:37:36 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157712#msg-157712 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157712#msg-157712
I could add to the debate but I think it is unfair to take more of your important time. There is one thing I cannot let go and I think it needs some explanation on my part and some understanding on yours.

I have amethyst cathedrals and splendid quartz crystals from Arkansas and Brazil.Yet the item illustrated means as much to me as any of them. If I had not collected this item the hobby might not have caught my attention enough to have carried on with it. I live in an area barren of all such minerals, being mostly London clay and fossils at Walton on the Naze.

I found this specimen on my first expedition to Cornwall, a 1000 mile round trip. To me it was gold dust because I had never found any sort of crystal before This together with the other items found on that trip were enough to hook me. I am sure other people have equivalent items that had the same effect on them. Do not disregard any collected item for it may have a story.

This story gets better as I was able to interest my oldest son and he took up the subject with more vigour than I did and got his doctorate in geology and he is now a senior university lecturer.My eldest daughter diverted her studies to marine biology, got her doctorate and now travels the world for UK government. All this can be traced back to this find in Cornwall that does not rank in your book.]]> malcolm chapman Best Minerals - General Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:09:10 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157697#msg-157697 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157697#msg-157697
I hope you will forgive me, I edited your post and responded to your various concerns right under the section of your post that expressed them.]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Mon, 26 Oct 2009 05:47:34 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157686#msg-157686 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157686#msg-157686
I do not wish to criticise you or your fellow contributors because each work will stand alone as a beacon of education. I have read your introduction many times and just to be sure I have read it again.

This subject is hard to grab because of its size and complexity.So I have tried to break it down so you can understand my concern.

For example, I have found a nice piece of calcite at a site in the Pennines so I wish to decide how good it is.

I can look up the location on the mindat database and select finds from that location, Here I can find the best calcite from the site and then go further and find associated minerals from that site, This information is extractable without creating more data.

I may wish to go further and compare with other Pennine sites. Again I can get this information without creating any new data.

I can go further and do the same for UK and now I am starting to get into some large numbers of sites and minerals. Now I have reached the stage I need help. I need to be able to view a selection. I need to select sites and specimens. Now I see your exercise as being useful and if the sites chosen and the specimens chosen are given a marker, which could be anything individual, they could still be selected from the main database with an interrogation program.

Yes, a better way to interrogate best minerals and the other data in mindat is necessary, but setting up such a system is not a simple matter. I have talked to Jolyon and David von Bargen, our level 4 gurus, about this and they have several ideas about how this can and may eventually be accomplished. I would like to see the "data blocks" as I call them be put into some sort of database structure with the ability to tag each block with as may tags, keywords, or whatever you call them and then to be able to sort on species, parts of the locality string and any of the tags/keywords that have been attached to the datablocks (Species/locality/images of the species from that locality and the text relating to that datablock). There are other ways of doing this with automatic tag generators etc. about which I know just enough to make myself look stupid when I try and talk about them to people who more about them than I. However for the purposes of Best Minerals I really don't have to worry about that anytime soon because there is such a huge amount of work to be done before we even have articles on half the known minerals.

What shall we look for in selecting a specimen? Your guidelines start by suggesting the largest then the best. But we are told that is not what you really meant. At the same time you refer me back to what you said. Very confusing.

Its not as bad or as hard as you might think it might be. For Best Minerals we use the images that have been uploaded to the Mindat image gallery and it is really not that hard to pick out the images of the best specimens there for a particular mineral out of the gallery. If you asked 20 people from novices to very knowledgeable people to pick out the best 10% of the images for any given species you would most likely find that there would be an 80% + agreement on what the best specimens were. If you asked just knowledgeable people to make the selection, the agreement would most likely be even higher than that. In addition as the articles are being written the authors who usually know more about the mineral they are working on than most can solicit better pictures of that species from the localities they know about and they will know where the weaknesses are when it comes to substandard quality specimens in the mindat galleries. In addition to all of that, because of the Wikipedia nature of this project, other knowledgeable people will chip in with suggestions and the offers of better images as the article is being written. If there is some image that is borderline and it is not obvious if it should be included or not, we often just include it because we know that somewhere down the line a better image can be had, and it can be replaced. If we know that an image or images that we use are really not very good compared to what is out there, we can say that in the text and put in a plea for someone to give us better pictures.

I do not have a problem with your first stated ideas and they would make a fine work to refer to. But it has got to be limited. You did the maths yourself at the time. 16,000 sites and 7,500 pictures for calcite. My suggestion is ten per zone. A zone could be a mountain or county, or country or continent or the world.

I disagree It really does not need to be limited at this time. Even for quartz and calcite, though there are more than 10,000 localities for each and in reality the number of these localities is really many times that number. However the number of those localities for which people have uploaded pictures is vastly more limited. Just the effort of taking a picture of a specimen from a particular locality and uploading it to mindat is a very effective first filter on selecting what is considered a worthwhile locality. Probably the number of localities for calcite where images have been uploaded is substantially less than 10% of all the calcite localities listed in Mindat. Then when you go through all the images of calcite and select just those that produce decent specimens, the number of localities to contend with is cut down even further. When you beak down those localities of the "big" minerals like calcite and quartz into their individual countries, the mind numbing size of the project, that have you scared and initially myself as well becomes a much more practical thing to do. All the localities that I considered "worthwhile" for quartz and calcite turned out to represent only about 65 countries and many of those had only a few localities with decent specimens. There are about 200 countries total, so most of them are not represented on Mindat with pictures of calcite or quartz. So there are still plenty of places to dig for specimens that will supply the collecting community for years to come with new finds. For years I avoided quartz and calcite because of the daunting number of localities, but when I finally got into it and looked at it carefully, it was not nearly as bad as I thought it might be. In fact I recently finished the first draft of Quartz USA, although I had to break it into three topics in the Quartz forum because these fields only hold about 60K words each. I know that I must have missed including some localities that should have been included, but some of these were brought to my attention during the construction of the article, and I almost always included them along with images that were often provided the the people that brought them to my attention. This allows me a shot at recruiting them to help fill in information about the localities that I know little or nothing about. Some of these individuals have become moderates on Best Minerals and have gone on to write wonderful articles on their own and gone on to recute others to help with or write articles of their own.

Without taking that thought into its full depths I am coming back to my starting point. I have found a nice specimen in the Pennines of calcite. I may be asking myself the questions you suggest but the route I have taken up to now is only helpful if I have found something sensational. I should be making comparisons with ordinary specimens and this is set out in your text. Who wants to show off or select their ordinary pieces especially as the initial guidelines indicate largest and best?

Jolyon thinks Mindat should be able to accommodate images of even very modest specimens like the image of the one you include here in your post. Others complain that the database is getting too full of rubbish and want to go in and clean out a lot of stuff, perhaps including things like the specimen you show here. I think there should be a way to include both modest specimens and exceptional ones. You know from looking at the calcites in the Mindat gallery that your specimen is not very exceptional and if you were writing the article on calcite or quartz you would probably not include it in a Best Minerals article. For minerals like quartz and calcite we have to have more stringent standards of what to include because if we did not it would quickly become not manageable. It seemed to me that the only way to effectively show what the good specimens from a particular locality looked like was to do something like best minerals where a variety of a particular species from a particular locality were shown together and then talked about (the ten questions). I include where possible information about the largest because that kind of information can be useful to material scientists who might want to know if they should look for samples of natural materials or head to the synthesis lab for what they need. We all know that biggest is almost always not the best.

A good example is the contributions from Belgium for calcite. A really good and interesting piece of work that I spent some time enjoying. But those specimens are not the ordinary example I have from the Pennines. This information could be kept on the main database and extracted, again using a marker. The information about the sites including anecdotes could also be part of the write up on the main database.for each site, thus reducing the overall size of mindat database.

Good point. Before we put Best Minerals sight wide it was a single forum that only the managers could access and they let me work away on that for some months and during that time other managers started to chip in with their ideas, not only about what localities and images should be included but discussions about just where and how Best Minerals should be placed and accommodated on Mindat. I eventually convinced the managers in general that it should be placed in the message board because there it could easily be accessed by all those visiting Mindat and function as a sort of Wikipedia project and solicit help from a broad spectrum of the mineral community. Without the active participitation of many contributors, like Mindat in general, the site would not ever become what we would eventually like to see it become.

I think I know what you are aiming at. I have collected thousands of items from British sites. Each one has something significant that drew my attention in the first place. Like everyone else I want to identify what I have found. I tend not to use chemicals, hardness tests, or any of those other tests suggested although I have known about them for years. The reason is simply that I have another life and a science lab is not part of it. I therefore look into my very large collection of books to find out if I can identify a specific item.

I too have a lot of books, at least a couple thousand of them relating to minerals in one way or another. A two car garage full of them actually, but I bet that you are using them less and less and Mindat more and more. If so, then your experience parallels mine as well.

There are limitations and that can be illustrated by one sample:[attachment 18191 DSCN2900.JPG]



It is clear to me that haematite samples bear similarity to the specimen. There was an unbroken quartz crystal that fell out of the centre. That leaves a lot of questions. There is a lot of other stuff here, and some strange habits. can I identify any of them? Quartz crystals in classic shapes are there but what about the crystalline material that does not follow the classic shape etc etc etc.

Most books would not give me any more useful information as they all concentrate on good and not ordinary. That is the gap in information for newcomers and not so new. Knowing this comes from Cligga in Cornwall is helpful for I can look it up in mindat. But I may need information from other parts of the database.

The specimen you show here is not the kind of thing that we will likely show or address in Best Minerals. But that does not mean that Mindat will not address those questions you have about it. For me the specimen is in the leaveright category. You know the old joke about leaverite? Right after you picked it up you should have put it down again and just leave it right there. The reason for this is that the quartz crystals are obvious and undistinguished (I regularly buy and import them by the ton) and the "hematite", though it could be interesting, is not something easy to characterize and since I don't have the sophisticated analytical equipment needed to analyze it, and unwilling to impose on friends who are real mineralogists the work needed to analyse what will almost certainly turn out to be a very pedestrian suite of minerals, I accept that I will never really know what the stuff is. However, if I suspect for some reason that there might be something really unusual about the specimen, might request a proper analysis. But all that does not mean that you don't have friends and resources here on Mindat. You can show pictures of what you find here on Mindat in several places including the identification forum. You can upload the Image to the Mindat galleries. The people that answer your post will just be taking a guess, sometimes an accurate guesses as to what you have found, but better than that you may be able to find kindred souls that you can collect with or those with a particular interest in specimens from that locality and already know a lot about it. That is I think the true value of Mindat.

If that is the sort of information you intend giving then your contributors do not all understand this. and therein lies my confusion.]]> malcolm chapman Best Minerals - General Mon, 26 Oct 2009 00:03:20 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157653#msg-157653 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157653#msg-157653 Chester S. Lemanski, Jr. Best Minerals - General Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:06:27 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157643#msg-157643 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157643#msg-157643 Have you read the introductory remarks about Best Minerals in the Best Minerals-General forum under the topic Welcome to the Best Minerals Forums? My intent is not to sent standards about what the best minerals are or what the most desirable localities are, but rather to show people what the possibilities are and let them make up their own minds about what is best and in the process answer the really basic questions that all collectors want to know about and spend their lives learning about.]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:23:13 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,157634#msg-157634 Re: Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,157634#msg-157634 I am sorry you find Best Minerals to be an Organizational and Editorial Quagmire. I have done the best I can with my limited intellect and abilities but am always anxious to learn from those who possess superior knowledge and a better vision of how things can be done more efficiently and better. I hope you will share with us in more detail the ideas you set forward in your email and I would be particularly glad if you would provide us with an example of what you desire. Pick any mineral and show us what you have in mind.]]> Rock Currier Best Minerals - General Sun, 25 Oct 2009 11:08:28 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157535#msg-157535 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157535#msg-157535

1. Selecting the best examples worldwide for all minerals and some extra varieties.
2 As 1 but for a single country.
3. As 1 but for individual locations.
4. Descriptions of best sites on a country by country basis. and their minerals on an individual or group basis.
5. Description of best sites.
6. Description of best minerals from best sites.worldwide.
7. Substitute the word "good" for the word "best" in all the above

I have tried to encapsulate virtually all ideas of this subject above but there will be other variations.

To be included any mineral must be in Mindat in the form of a picture and a description of location.

I get the idea that this may be a problem due to copyright or secrecy of locations but any item encompassed by this cannot appear anyhow.

I have looked at existing facilities on Mindat and find most of the above is already covered by the search facilities already there.

I am told that the description in 1 above is not what is really required. It would not be available, if wanted, unless extra markers are put in place to identify the best.

When looking at 2 the same goes as 1 but for many countries the listing for each mineral would contain relatively few items and could be looked at by selecting the mineral and the country.

For 3 the selection of the site and mineral would give a relatively short list.

Best sites for specific minerals as in 4 could be found by selecting the mineral and the country. As the listing of sites would mostly be small it would be easy to look for existing results.

For 5 any group of best sites would have to be selected with more definition. Most people seem to have written sites up by mineral and by zone which is mostly country. There are a number of lengthy volumes which really would be better standing alone rather than being included in a database.

The selection for 6 giving the best in the world would need markers for sites and minerals so they can be selected from the main listings.

Interpretation of the best is open to a great deal of controversy. Should it be based on size, or rarity, or colour, or appearance, or number of crystals, or just because it looks good? There are many other discerning characteristics that could be used.

If those problems occur with trying to select the best then the problems are multiplied many fold if you are selecting good rather than best as in 7.

At the end of the day I do not know what is wanted. Listings already existing would with interrogation facilities existing provide most requirements. What is not provided for is listings of the very best as in the title but now it is said that it is not a competition and that was not the original intent, in which case, what is it all about?

Work already carried out should not be lost but before any more is done someone should decide exactly what is required and check existing facilities to see if it can be dealt with already.]]> malcolm chapman Best Minerals - General Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:58:10 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157520#msg-157520 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157520#msg-157520 good material, organized by locality so that for example a beginner can compare how his/her material stands up to other good specimens, or a potential buyer can see how the "fabulous" specimen being offered compares to others from the locality and, we hope, can also get information on how much of the material is available. The editor of the "Best Minerals" section, Rock Currier, originally wanted to call it "The Good Stuff", which doesn't imply any competitive ranking or limit on number of localities and specimens. Perhaps we should return to that name, because "Best Minerals" seems to be causing confusion.]]> Alfredo Petrov Best Minerals - General Sat, 24 Oct 2009 13:08:32 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,157487#msg-157487 Best Minerals - An Organizational and Editorial Quagmire http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157487,157487#msg-157487
I would like to see mediawiki software employed, as is currently used for the mindat user manual, in order to better organize the information going into the Best Minerals. The project would displayed more effectively using more hyperlinks to individual pages organized by country and region etc. Dynamic editorial controls and notations on individual pages would really improve things. For the encyclopedia of best minerals, I think this improvement would be both mentally stimulating and visually appealing!

Scott]]> Scott L. Ritchie Best Minerals - General Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:56:16 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157482#msg-157482 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157482#msg-157482 Dave]]> David H Garske Best Minerals - General Sat, 24 Oct 2009 01:51:10 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157473#msg-157473 Re: Scope of subject http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,63,157450,157473#msg-157473
Having in mind the scope of the subject I do not know if anyone has thought of the objectives of the exercise. With ten of each item you will have the largest database in the world of high quality minerals.How much further would you wish to go?I think this could be extracted by interrogating the main database.

I would not want to lose any of your work on cordierite or the 80 samples but they would rank as a specialist work and stand alone.

I accept the difficulties. I have been fortunate enough to have collected good samples of flouryte in blue, violet,clear and green. I would have a huge problem choosing the ten best in my shed but to do the same selection for the whole world is beyond anything I would like to consider. Yet a number has to be chosen. Is 100 right or perhaps 1000? What it comes down to is the user and for someone scanning a range ten seems about right.

Mindat already has specialist items and they could be aaded to where numbers exceed ten.

I have only been looking at this subject this evening and there could be something I have not taken into account, but this is as I see it.]]> malcolm chapman Best Minerals - General Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:52:15 +0000