Talk:Diamond/Archive 1

message: I logged onto this site to search Diamond realated industries in  & around South India, I must say that I had a very good SouthIndian tour. Very informative as to the culture,music,regions etc. Well, I was totally lost in going through the very minute detail.  Can somebody help me in providing the details of the Diamond related industries/research institutes.
Thanks & Regards
Keshava
hi im ashley a 15 year old freshman high school.  i had to pick an meneral for a science project and i chose diamonds. ure site was very imformative. thanks for ure help!!!!! i got almost everything i needed for my 3 page report!
 thanks again!
                                            ~oooohhhhhhbaby@aol.com
----
Mostly minor corrections, additions and copyediting.
#Added bit on nyf, additional common forms
#Added step-like to fracture description and elaborated on conchoidal
#Added info on Australian blues coloured by hydrogen, qualifying instances of "natural blue" with "most"
#Elaborated on Type IIa diamonds
#Changed "play of color" to "fire." The term play of color correctly refers to opal, not diamond.
#Added to Symbolism subsection with a bit on LifeGem (I think it's interesting enough to mention).
This article could be expanded tremendously, but I'm ignorant as to exactly how extensive an article Wikipedians desire. Hadal 12:43, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  thanks for the help!!!! 

message: This section has been moved to Talk:Diamond_clarity.
----
The current debate about cut-grading standards involves explicit assumptions about lighting and the distance at which a diamond is viewed.  The choice of 10 inches versus 14 inches explains some significant differences between two proposed grading standards, according to this PriceScope thread.
----
To anyone who cares to sort such things out:
The Diamond article seems to have three sections on color:
* Optical properties
* Composition and color
* Color (in Diamond industry)
----
Is "nyf" a word or an acronym? "gg:nyf mineral" turns up lots of mentions of NYF (niobium-yttrium-fluorine) pegmatite. -phma 05:09, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Is clarity grading done using a standard distance from eye-to-stone?

message: This article is recently added to the catagory of Chemical Elements.  Carbon is an element, but are Diamond, Fullerene, Graphite elements???
:Diamond, fullerine, graphite etc. are not chemical elements.  They are allotropic forms of the element carbon.  I've deleted the flase category.  Thanks for bringing this up.
:Acegikmo1 01:19, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Is diamond a Chemical element?

message: This article has gotten to be kind of an indigestible monster. I'm inclined to think that the "diamond industry" part would make a useful cutting point, or perhaps moving the fine points of quality to a sub-article. Stan 13:57, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length 

message: I'd like to add a "Purchasing a diamond" section, to debunk some myths about diamonds and to help people into making a wise decision when shopping for a diamond.  Do you think it should be part of this article, or a separate one?  Anyone willing to pitch in?  Reply here... MDesigner 23:17, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
:Go for it.  I added the orignal "4C's" material and that should be moved to your new article/section. Samw 04:10, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it.  Like the fact that a diamond's colour is impossible to accurately determine after it has been mounted: "Diamond Colour"  61.229.142.233 08:10, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Not impossible, but it's certainly trickier if the mounting is yellow gold. That said, a good diamond grading firm should be able to give you a reliable estimation, regardless of setting. -- Hadal 03:15, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purchasing a diamond 

message: Great article, congrats to its authors.  I have nominated it as a candidate for Featured Arrticle status.  Please follow links at top of this discussion page to comment on this proposal.  Paul Beardsell 21:23, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article Candidate 

message: I have added the information reported in the February issue of archaeometry that diamonds were supposedly in use already in 6000 BC, but surely no later than 500 BC. Link added (although only to a secondary source). Someone should verify and expand this. --Eleassar777 11:59, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I am wondering, should the history paragraph remain as it is currently is, considering what this BBC article asserts.   Wikipedia article say India had knowledge of diamond before everyone else (See the paragraph below, while the BBC article says Chinese had knowledge of diamond before everyone else. Both can't be true, so do we just include both stories or which version is going to be purged? "Diamonds were first recognized and mined in India, where significant alluvial deposits of the stone could then be found. The earliest written reference can be found in the Sanskrit text Arthasastra (completed around 296 BC), which describes diamond's hardness, luster, and dispersion. Diamonds quickly became associated with divinity, being used to decorate religious icons, and were believed to bring good fortune to those who carried them. Ownership was restricted among various castes by color, with only kings allowed to own all colors of diamond."
:The problem is that there is no known modern or historical source of diamonds in China, meaning that even if they were beng used in China 2500 BCE, they were probably coming from India anyhow.  I would suggest adding a phrase to the above noted paragraph going something along th elines of "The earliest written reference can be found... ...which describes diamond's hardness, luster and dispersion; however recent archeological evidence suggests the use of diamond as a polishing agent in China around 2000 years earlier." - Bryan is Bantman 22:29, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
::I added a new paragraph to address Lu's research, which I think resolves any perceived inconsistency. (I'll also note that the passage quoted above had already said "The earliest written reference...") I'm not at all convinced by the evidence at hand, but it's best to present all rational points of view. :) -- Hadal 02:57, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diamond history inconsistency