Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

╳Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

Groups

Recent Images in Discussions

Improving Mindat.orgGlaukosphaerite page head photos

10th Jul 2019 21:11 UTCClosed Account 🌟

Could the head-photos of glaukosphaerite please be changed for other photos because I strongly believe that none of the Km 3 photos show actual glaukosphaerite (https://www.mindat.org/photo-757861.html being a possible exception). Once I get the current work-related madness solved, I will have time to take a photo of an analyzed sample of glaukosphaerite from Lavrion which look totally different from the specimen currently in the Mindat database for Km 3.

Let there be no misunderstanding: glaukosphaerite does occur at Lavrion, but from my experience not like in those photos.

10th Jul 2019 22:29 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

Hi Brando, can you please tell us which ones are mis-labelled so we can flag them accordingly?

11th Jul 2019 08:12 UTCUwe Kolitsch Manager

The only head photo from km 3 is https://www.mindat.org/photo-60033.html

The caption says "analysed". Maybe the colour is not shown correctly?

11th Jul 2019 08:43 UTCClosed Account 🌟

When I looked at the glaukosphaerite page yesterday, there were three photos from Km 3 as head photos. So thank you for changing this!

The matter of glaukosphaerite has been discussed since the horrible publication by Hanke (1995) and his photo of what is definitively no glaukosphaerite. It was corrected by Schnorrer and Breitenbach (1996) and a photo of an analyzed glaukosphaerite which looks completely different from Hanke's. In Wendl and Markl (1999) the issue was raised again and again pointed out that the dark green balls all yielded analyses that prove them to be rosasite.

@ Ralph:

I think all Km 3 photos of glaukosphaerite are wrong with two possible exceptions:

https://www.mindat.org/photo-195222.html

https://www.mindat.org/photo-757861.html

@Uwe

Regarding https://www.mindat.org/photo-60033.html I would say that there is a possibility that the light green balls were the target for the analysis and they could indeed be glaukosphaerite. This should be mentioned in the caption accordingly. However the dark green balls are not glaukosphaerite, they are slightly Ni-bearing rosasite and in few cases slightly Ni-bearing malachite.

Cheers,

Branko

11th Jul 2019 22:51 UTCRalph S Bottrill 🌟 Manager

I changed the head photos but left the analysed one. This one appears to show light green balls partly overgrown by dark green material. It’s seems possible that the material may grade outwards from glaukosphaerite to Rosasite, and perhaps some only analysed surficially?

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: May 8, 2024 23:46:26

Go to top of page