Help mindat.org|Log In|Register|
Home PageMindat NewsThe Mindat ManualHistory of MindatCopyright StatusManagement TeamContact UsAdvertise on Mindat
Donate to MindatSponsor a PageSponsored PagesTop Available PagesMindat AdvertisersAdvertise on Mindat
Minerals by PropertiesMinerals by ChemistryAdvanced Locality SearchRandom MineralSearch by minIDLocalities Near MeSearch ArticlesSearch GlossaryMore Search Options
Search For:
Mineral Name:
Locality Name:
Keyword(s):
 
The Mindat ManualAdd a New PhotoRate PhotosLocality Edit ReportCoordinate Completion ReportAdd Glossary Item
StatisticsThe ElementsMember ListBooks & MagazinesMineral Shows & EventsThe Mindat DirectoryHow to Link to MindatDevice Settings
Photo SearchPhoto GalleriesNew Photos TodayNew Photos YesterdayMembers' Photo GalleriesPast Photo of the Day Gallery
bannerbannerbannerbannerbannerbanner

Uvite not on list of minerals found at Pomba Pit when adding Photo

Posted by John Stolz  
avatar
John Stolz May 20, 2017 12:49AM
See
avatar
David Von Bargen May 20, 2017 01:11AM
Yes, minerals are not listed if the mineral is listed as questionable from the location.
avatar
John Stolz May 20, 2017 03:54AM
Well, I looked up Uvite, and it took me to a page where they all came from that location.
avatar
Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 08:02AM
Why is it questioned?
avatar
Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 08:03AM
For now, John, best to list your photo as tourmaline.
avatar
Ralph Bottrill May 20, 2017 09:07AM
Uvite is no longer an IMA approved species as all samples analysed turned out to be Fluor-Uvite. ( Why they didn't just make uvite the F end member is another issue!). But this left all uvite photos, including those from this location, orphaned and considered invalid. Maybe we should globally rename them all to Fluor-uvite?
Memo to self : relabel my specimen!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/20/2017 09:08AM by Ralph Bottrill.
avatar
Ilkka Mikkola May 20, 2017 10:11AM
Hi Ralph
Uvite is an IMA approved mineral. See: http://nrmima.nrm.se//IMA_Master_List_%282017-03%29.pdf https://www.mindat.org/min-43561.html
https://www.mindat.org/loc-251888.html This was an OH-dominant uvite from Finland (EPMA).
Almost all of the unanalyzed uvites are fluor-uvites

Ilkka
avatar
Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 10:42AM
Really what we should have is hydroy-uvite and fluor-uvite, with the term 'uvite' being a generic term for unanalysed.

But that's too sensible I guess
avatar
Jolyon & Katya Ralph May 20, 2017 11:03AM
Ok. Please go have a look at the 'Uvite' page now.

This is another area where mindat.org has had to deviate from standard IMA nomenclature because the nomenclature doesn't represent the reality of what we have to deal with.


Uvite is now a synonym of 'Uvite series'

All photos of 'uvite' are now 'uvite series'

The IMA species 'uvite' which is hydroxyl dominant and pretty scarce is Uvite (OH-dominant end-member). We should NOT add photos to this category (or fluor-uvite) without analysis.

Everything else gets dumped into 'Uvite series'.


And we can also remove the 'questioned' from Uvite on pages where it has been marked questioned simply because of the 'OH/F' issue, as it will now show up as 'uvite series'
avatar
John Stolz May 20, 2017 04:22PM
Yikes--has the dust settled?

So Jolyon, is it appropriate to call the mineral "Uvite series" (in which case it should be a choice on the photo list) unless we know by analysis what end of the OH/F series it is? I see that the OH dominant which I think we're calling "Uvite" is not on the photo page, whereas the Fluor-uvite end of the series IS on the photo page....
avatar
Alfredo Petrov May 20, 2017 07:05PM
Really what we should have is hydroxy-uvite and fluor-uvite, with the term 'uvite' being a generic term for unanalysed.
But that's too sensible I guess.


Totally agree with that!
avatar
Ralph Bottrill May 21, 2017 12:09AM
Thanks Jolyon, I awoke this morning thinking we need to change Uvite to Uvite series and it's all done! I quite agree with hydroxy-uvite, I guess we just need to submit it to the IMA?
avatar
Ralph Bottrill May 21, 2017 12:18AM
Thanks Ilkka
Does anyone have analytical confirmation for the other "hydroxy-uvites"?
The only published reference for Pomba was a Min Record article in 1979, haven't checked it for an analysis yet.
avatar
Uwe Kolitsch May 21, 2017 03:02PM
"( Why they didn't just make uvite the F end member is another issue!)."
Simple reason - to be consistent with the established nomenclature: Dravite - fluor-dravite, schorl - fluor-schorl, etc.
avatar
Ralph Bottrill May 22, 2017 01:09PM
Yes I know but it's seems whenever the IMA try to make all the mineral names in a group consistent in style they just upset everyone. A thankless job, I know they mean well.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login



bannerbannerbannerbannerbannerbanner
Mineral and/or Locality  
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 1993-2017, except where stated. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us Current server date and time: October 20, 2017 00:20:50
Go to top of page