Monohydrocalcite [www.mindat.org] is showing as Grandfathered, but with the Year of Discovery=1964. There are other conflicts like that -- they may be easily discovered by querying the DB. It may be helpful to introduce a UI validation rule for the Year of Discovery, so that a year later than 1959 could not be entered for a Grandfathered mineral. I was raising this issue some time ago [www.mindat.org], but received no response from the IT team. Maybe this time? ;-) http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260278#msg-260278 Mon, 20 May 2013 09:37:15 +0000 Phorum 5.2.15a http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,261004#msg-261004 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,261004#msg-261004 I would agree to that assumption for the pre-IMA minerals. But even then minerals were first found, then published, would you agree?
When we definitely know the year of IMA approval, the year of discovery MUST be at least the same year as the latest. But actually it shall be earlier, as it normally takes time to do all of the characterization required for IMA approval.

Another example: Franciscanite - mindat page says Approved 1985, Yr of Discovery 1986.]]> Michael Hatskel Mistakes and Errors Thu, 17 May 2012 19:03:49 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260833#msg-260833 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260833#msg-260833 Jim Ferraiolo Mistakes and Errors Tue, 15 May 2012 16:39:07 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260521#msg-260521 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260521#msg-260521 Marco E. Ciriotti Mistakes and Errors Fri, 11 May 2012 19:27:27 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260512#msg-260512 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260512#msg-260512 Franconite - 1984, although IMA1981-006. Looks like it was discovered earlier and approved in 1984, as it was published in 1984 (Jambor et al. (1984) - Can Min 22, 239–243).]]> Michael Hatskel Mistakes and Errors Fri, 11 May 2012 17:46:01 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260382#msg-260382 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260382#msg-260382 -------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks, Marco.
>
> Here are some more "Granfathered" minerals with
> the Year of Discovery showing later than 1959:
> Cuprostibite - 1969
> Zincocopiapite - 1964
> Uralolite - 1964


The same case of monohydrocalcite.]]> Marco E. Ciriotti Mistakes and Errors Thu, 10 May 2012 11:27:29 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260356#msg-260356 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260356#msg-260356 David Von Bargen Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 23:57:31 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260319#msg-260319 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260319#msg-260319
Here are some more "Granfathered" minerals with the Year of Discovery showing later than 1959:
Cuprostibite - 1969
Zincocopiapite - 1964
Uralolite - 1964]]> Michael Hatskel Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 16:32:13 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260311#msg-260311 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260311#msg-260311 -------------------------------------------------------
> Marco,
> If the Year of Approval is 1964, is it correct to
> show IMA Status = 'Grandfathered'? Maybe the IMA
> Status shall be 'Approved'?


Yes, the status should be "Approved".
Done!]]> Marco E. Ciriotti Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 14:02:17 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260310#msg-260310 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260310#msg-260310 If the Year of Approval is 1964, is it correct to show IMA Status = 'Grandfathered'? Maybe the IMA Status shall be 'Approved'?]]> Michael Hatskel Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 13:29:34 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260299#msg-260299 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260299#msg-260299
- Semenov, E.I. (1964): Hydrated carbonates of sodium and calcium. Kristallografiya, 9, 109-110.

- Swainson, I.P.. (2008): The structure of monohydrocalcite and the phase composition of the beachrock deposits of Lake Butler and Lake Fellmongery, South Australia. American Mineralogist, 93, 1014-1018.

About the approval the name is just in an IMA CNMNC file without number and was not published anywhere.]]> Marco E. Ciriotti Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 09:21:27 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260298#msg-260298 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260298#msg-260298 Alfredo Petrov Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 08:53:30 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260296#msg-260296 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260296#msg-260296 So the IMA list is correct: "Approved 1964".]]> Marco E. Ciriotti Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 08:19:34 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260286#msg-260286 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260286#msg-260286
Pekov gives a complicated history: first noticed1935, chemically analysed in 1948, described in 1959 (chemistry and x-ray data), but not named until 1964. So, as is not uncommon among pre-IMA minerals, the discovery was a long drawn out process and it's hard to say exactly when the species came into being. One could tell similar stories about other now well-accepted pre-IMA minerals, like magnesioriebeckite, for example.

I'll change the year of discovery to 1948, or perhaps 1959 would be better.]]> Alfredo Petrov Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 03:12:09 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260284#msg-260284 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260284#msg-260284 We'll have to check the date of first publication. :-S]]> Alfredo Petrov Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 02:57:36 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260281#msg-260281 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260281#msg-260281 I agree that the concept of "grandfathering" is not quite straightforward... But I am not rebelling against the definitions here - I am actually lobbying for adhering to the definitions.
All I am saying is that if 'IMA Status' = G then 'Year of Discovery' must be equal to or lesser than 1959.]]> Michael Hatskel Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 00:43:40 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260279#msg-260279 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260279#msg-260279 Alfredo Petrov Mistakes and Errors Wed, 09 May 2012 00:05:36 +0000 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260278#msg-260278 http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,7,260278,260278#msg-260278 www.mindat.org] is showing as Grandfathered, but with the Year of Discovery=1964. There are other conflicts like that -- they may be easily discovered by querying the DB.
It may be helpful to introduce a UI validation rule for the Year of Discovery, so that a year later than 1959 could not be entered for a Grandfathered mineral.
I was raising this issue some time ago [www.mindat.org], but received no response from the IT team. Maybe this time? ;-)]]> Michael Hatskel Mistakes and Errors Tue, 08 May 2012 23:28:51 +0000