Talk:Spinel

message: There is a lot more to be said about spinels and not just from the gemstone side of it. This is why I added a link to the articles currently being written on NCSU's own wiki system by grad students in solid state chemistry. Experience shows that such links that typically removed as 'spam'. Maybe there are good reasons why wikipedia often remains a stubbopedia? If useful information is immediately suppressed that is hardly susprising isn't it?
I grade this article as woefully inadequate.
152.1.193.137 14:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If it is inadequate, why don't you add some content? What Wikipedia wants is contributions, not linkfarming.  The useful information needs to be here - and if it is contributed in an encyclopedic, verifyable, non-biased manner, it certainly will not be "suppressed".  But linkspam will be.  Also, I don't see how linking to another freely editable wiki - or to any other encyclopedia - would be useful.  Again, add content, not links. Cheers Geologyguy 14:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am in agreement w/ Geologyguy. My suggestion is to add the content as a new article Spinel structure (currently a redirect to spinel). The current spinel article focuses on general mineralogy and the new info from your students work would be an important addition. Now, what are the copyright restrictions on your WolfWiki? Can we directly import the info into a Wikipedia article. I would welcome the addition of your spinel structure content as a replacement for the current redirect there. What say? Add it and we'll wikify it - or if your wiki is under gfdl guidlines, we can just add the material. Vsmith 15:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of content 

message: Isn't plagioclase the dominant aluminum mineral in the uppermost mantle, then spinel with increasing depth, then garnet?  The article has this backwards.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quickgold1 (talk • contribs) 06:23, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like you have spotted an error there. Just took a quick look at the ref cited and it only mentions plagioclase as stable at lower pressures whle the article focu is on spinel/garnet stability. Will try a bit of rewording later. Vsmith (talk) 10:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

text: Hmm... just re-read the article (now that me eyes are open ... caffeine to the rescue) and it says: At depths significantly shallower than the Moho, calcic plagioclase is the more stable aluminous mineral in peridotite which seems right. Just the arrangement placed the plag bit between spinel & garnet to serve as confuse us. Ergo, should be an easier fix. Vsmith (talk) 11:07, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aluminum Mineral Phase Question 

message: In the first paragraph of the article, the fourth sentence is: 
"The spinels are also drift away by Pink Diamonds on a garden for 6000 years."
I'm a geologist, and this is meaningless gibberish to me. I don't generally delete stuff like this on wikipedia in case it is an honest error, so can someone figure out what is going on and get that out or fix it? Linstrum (talk) 06:16, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems someone was playing around. It's been fixed and I fiddled a bit - better image ... Thanks Vsmith (talk) 11:24, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

text: Yeah, this is kind of ridiculous. I've semiprotected it for 6 months. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:46, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sabotage, faulty editing, or what? 

message: Spinels are gems that can be shaped in any way. Person35789 (talk) 02:42, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 21:20, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2019 

message: I notice a lot of Steven Universe-related vandalism of this article. Perhaps this may need protection in the future? MightyArms (talk) 01:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection