Learning Center What is a mineral?The most common minerals on earth Information for Educators Mindat Articles The Elements The Rock H. Currier Digital Library Geologic Time

Minerals by Properties Minerals by Chemistry Advanced Locality Search Random Mineral Random Locality Search by minID Localities Near Me Search Articles Search Glossary More Search Options

The Mindat Manual Add a New Photo Rate Photos Locality Edit Report Coordinate Completion Report Add Glossary Item

Mining Companies Statistics Users Mineral Museums Clubs & Organizations Mineral Shows & Events The Mindat Directory Device Settings The Mineral Quiz

Photo Search Photo Galleries Search by Color New Photos Today New Photos Yesterday Members' Photo Galleries Past Photo of the Day Gallery Photography

Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

╳Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

Groups

Recent Images in Discussions

GeneralLimited number of localities

25th Jul 2017 01:52 UTCDieter Mylius

I have recently found that, when searching for a mineral on Mindat, only a limited of number of localities (of the total that on the database) are shown. Is there something I am doing wrong? Or is there some way to show the complete list? Much of what I am interested in are the more obscure localities in Australia. Thanks, Dieter Mylius

25th Jul 2017 02:31 UTCDonald B Peck Expert

Dieter, I believe that if you go to the bottom of any page and type the name of the mineral in the Mineral Search box and "Australia" in the Locality Search box, you will get a list of all Australian localities for that mineral. As far as I know it is not limited.

25th Jul 2017 02:44 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Please give us an example of one of your searches.

25th Jul 2017 06:23 UTCDieter Mylius

Thanks for your replies. An example I looked up today was baryte.

Scrolling down the localities it shows 58 significant localities out of 11,613 recorded on Mindat

It used to give them all at this level

It now only lists the Rosebery occurrence in Australia, not even the significant South Australian or NSW deposits.

Yes, if you type in the mineral and locality it will bring them up, but it is an extra step that formerly was not needed, and does not group them in the nice table with references I am more familiar with.

Is this something we have to live with because of the volume of information?

Regards

Dieter Mylius

25th Jul 2017 08:53 UTCKeith Compton 🌟 Manager

Hi Dieter

I just typed in Baryte and Australia in the mineral/locality boxes at the bottom of the page and the list produced shows around 254 entries.

Cheers

Keith

25th Jul 2017 08:59 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

Looking through the locality fields on a mineral page to find a locality has to be, for common minerals, the least efficient way of finding the information you want.

As others have mentioned, for very common species such as baryte, quartz, calcite, it becomes meaningless to try to list ALL localities on the mineral page, instead we are now concentrating on what are defined as 'significant localities'. If there are localities you feel should be regarded as significant but are not on the list these can be added.

Jolyon

25th Jul 2017 12:26 UTCDieter Mylius

Hi Jolyon. Thanks for your reply. In most cases I agree with you, that the lists of localities for common minerals such as baryte are huge.

However, the complete list was handy and convenient when trying to find a locality close to a claimed locality on a label. Case in point, I acquired two little baryte roses labelled as being from Winton in Queensland, which are not listed on Mindat, so was trying to see if there are any localities nearby that could be more correct.

This is now not as easy as you are "now concentrating on ... significant localities", which this certainly is not.

Never mind, there will be other ways to do the search.

Thanks, for all your work. Mindat is an amazing resource.

Dieter

25th Jul 2017 12:34 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

Go down to bottom of page. enter 'baryte' in mineral box and 'queensland' in locality box.

You then get the exact results you need without having to scroll through a long list on the mineral page.

Please trust me, using the mineral pages like this to find localities is BY FAR the most inefficient way to do it. Once you understand how to search the system easily you'll never look back.

25th Jul 2017 16:29 UTCDonald B Peck Expert

Jolyon, that process works fine, and I use it. But I would love to see those two boxes at the top of the pages rather than the bottom. Any chance?

25th Jul 2017 18:15 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

No, we won't have two boxes at the top, but I've just changed the search so it works better from the top too.

If you now type in, for example,

baryte from australia

into the top box, you'll get a very useful search results page.

25th Jul 2017 19:12 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager

Would it be possible to add camera icons to such search lists, so we know which ones have photos?

25th Jul 2017 20:06 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

Yes, but it will slow it down.

26th Jul 2017 00:50 UTCStephen Turner

If you want a search from the top of the page click on 'advanced search'. Using baryte and Queensland you get a list of all the localities in Mindat with references and at the bottom all the available photos - just 4.

Easy as.

Steve

26th Jul 2017 01:08 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

even easier now with the new system

26th Jul 2017 03:12 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

The trouble is with "significant locations" is that its very subjective; there are a lot of baryte mines in Australia that were economically significant but never produced a significant world-class specimen, maybe some micros and/or samples of local interest. I have marked a couple more Australian locations as significant (at least to Australian collectors). Under the locentry you can mark significance as: None; Commercial; Dana location; Classic location; or Unusual form or association. Its not clear where a location producing a few lovely specimens would fit in this list? Maybe any site that made the Best Minerals lists could be automatically enetered - as a separate catgeory?

The location list changes may be sensible and efficient, but not always noticed: the "Significant locations for..." title above the map is very easily missed so will confuse many people, maybe a distinct button under the map for a full search would be more obvious?

When I search for baryte in Queensland I get location 1556 results, mostly not in Australia (eg. Greenland) - the bottom search bar still works best, just a little nuisance being at the bottom.

Dieter we could add baryte under the Winton shire if you like, I'm not aware of any specific locations in the area, but I have seen baryte roses in Permian sediments elsewhere in Australia, and its possibly similar there?

26th Jul 2017 04:04 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

Playing with that top search field:

A search on "Baryte Australia" gives one location (in Austria!)

Searching again on Baryte in Australia" now gives over 14,000 locations as stated above, mostly not Australian.

Searching on "Baryte from Australia" gives a good looking list, mostly Australian - but didnt give a number (~200?).

Thats why I use the bottom search bar, and it should be on top.

26th Jul 2017 04:08 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

Searching for "Brannerite, Australia", both top and bottom searches gives nice lists of locations but clicking on each location link all lead to the same page: https://www.mindat.org/loc-754.html (lizardite from Cyprus!)!

26th Jul 2017 08:29 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

>A search on "Baryte Australia" gives one location (in Austria!)

The syntax, as I explained above, is batyte FROM australia. Entering baryte australia, or baryte, australia won't work.

> Searching on "Baryte from Australia" gives a good looking list, mostly Australian - but didnt give a number (~200?).

> Thats why I use the bottom search bar, and it should be on top.

I don't think you've actually tried this, because both of these give IDENTICAL results.

26th Jul 2017 14:28 UTCTom Tucker

I get the same results Ralph reports, in Cyprus. Tom

26th Jul 2017 16:14 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

Fixed. Thanks

26th Jul 2017 22:06 UTCDieter Mylius

Hi Ralph.

Please do NOT add Winton to list of baryte localities, as I am not convinced the specimen is from there. Hence the reason for the start of this message in the first place. I was trying to find out if there are any known baryte localities in the area around Winton.

The responses (thank you everyone) to the original message seem to show that I will now have to use the bottom boxes for a search of a broader range of localities.

29th Jul 2017 08:21 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

No worries Dieter

Jolyon, I did try all options and got varying results but anyway the top search field may need a help button if its going to give wideley differing results with minor variations in searching syntax, else replace it with the bottom search bar. Thanks for fixing the brannerite problem.

29th Jul 2017 09:15 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

I'm not sure what problem is with minor variations in syntax.

The syntax is "XXX from YYY".

We can't use the comma because you would need to use that for locality searches, eg Cornwall, England

Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: April 25, 2024 04:17:59

Go to top of page