Mindat Logo

suggested glossary entry

Posted by Norman King  
avatar suggested glossary entry
May 24, 2012 12:49PM
There was a discussion recently about the mindat glossary, and how to find it. Well, right now I can't find it. Yeah, you really need to make it more accessible. I got to the glossary by noting the column on the Home page "New/Updated Glossary Entries."

"Pyritohedron" is currently such an entry. Under that term it says "See Also: rhombic dodecahedron" and then "Compare with: dodecahedron."

I do not see an entry for "pentagonal dodecahedron," which is what a pyritohedron is in general terms. "Dodecahedron" is an even more general term for any 12-sided solid. In mineralogy we deal with rhombic, pentagonal, and tetrahedral-pentagonal dodecahedrons. The third kind is uncommon, but it occurs in the tetartoidal class of the isometric system, has at least one mineral, ullmannite, listed in the Fourth Edition of Dana's Textbook and on Mindat (more may have been discovered), and some artificial compounds crystallize in it. Pyritohedron is preferred by mineralogists in referring to the pentagonal dodecahedron, but chemists wouldn't use that term. So, it seems to me that pentagonal dodecahedron should be in the Glossary also.

OK, here is a note that may cause some people to roll their eyes. But, the better you present this material, the better it will be received, and the more people will think this is a serious enterprise. As a former professional editor of sorts (years ago, I'm the one who signed off on the textual products submitted by my technical writing company), I can tell you that perceptive people will notice this, and they will shake their heads at the amateurism. Namely, if your format is "See Also," that's fine. But in the next line it says "Compare with." By itself that's fine also. But if it is "See Also" it should be "Compare With." If it were "See also" then "Compare with" is correct. "See also" and "Compare with" is proper here, in my opionion. But, at least make up your minds about format! This may sound overly harsh, but one might say that there is nothing wrong with producing professional-looking material (i.e., just because we are amateurs doesn’t mean we have to look like amateurs).
Re: suggested glossary entry
May 24, 2012 04:24PM
So you're saying 'make it all one or all the other', right? That makes sense to me. "See also' and 'Compare' are either redundant, or taking the reader in 2 different directions, though perhaps related. That may be picky, but I think accurate.
I hear the sloshing of vitreous humor as ones roll their eyes.
avatar Re: suggested glossary entry
May 27, 2012 02:42AM
In general terms, a pyritohedron is a pentagon-dodecahedron. It's certainly NOT a pentagonal dodecahedron, though.

Your Email:


  • Valid attachments: jpg, gif, png, pdf
  • No file can be larger than 1000 KB
  • 3 more file(s) can be attached to this message

Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically. If the code is hard to read, then just try to guess it right. If you enter the wrong code, a new image is created and you get another chance to enter it right.
Mineral and/or Locality  
Search Google  
Copyright © Jolyon Ralph and Ida Chau 1993-2014. Site Map. Locality, mineral & photograph data are the copyright of the individuals who submitted them. Site hosted & developed by Jolyon Ralph. Mindat.org is an online information resource dedicated to providing free mineralogical information to all. Mindat relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Mindat does not offer minerals for sale. If you would like to add information to improve the quality of our database, then click here to register.
Current server date and time: December 20, 2014 15:51:54
Mineral and Locality Search
and/or Locality:
Fade toolbar when not in focusFix toolbar to bottom of page
Hide Social Media Links
Slideshow frame delay seconds