Talk:Pietersite
trade name, not scientific name edit
I think this article should make clear that the name "pietersite" is a trade name made up for commercial reasons rather than a scientific rock or mineral name. The use of the "ite" ending gives it apparent scientific credibility that it doesn't deserve. --99.240.127.237 (talk) 14:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
To the most strict reader, the above comment is correct. However, it's not uncommon for minerals to be known by the discoverer's name. For the collector, naming minerals this way is a great assist in differentiating between specimens. Strictly, Pietersite is a variety of Chalcedony:
Chalcedony with embedded fibers of amphibole minerals with varying degrees of alteration. Blue-gray, brown and yellow colors. The fibers cause a chatoyancy similar to that seen in tiger's eye, but tiger's eye is not made of chalcedony, it is macrocrystalline quartz. <http://www.mindat.org/min-27262.html>
I have been a mineral collector for nearly 40 years, and I've found this unique variety of Chalcedony is better served by using Mr Peter's name. The original author's description of African and Chinese varieties is accurate based on my observation of material available from sellers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trieth (talk • contribs) 17:12, 29 June 2014
redirect to Tiger's eye edit
Redirected to Tiger's eye as this was nothing more than an unsourced promotion of a trivial rock collector trade name. Vsmith (talk) 14:31, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Should not direct to Tiger's Eye edit
Pietersite is not brecciated tiger's eye, nor is Tiger's eye made from chalcedony.
The linked article says Pietersite "...is a brecciated gem material created by fragmentary dissolution of precursor dolomite and replacement by silica. Subsequent reactions between silica and hematite in the presence of aqueous Na+ formed crocidolite."
https://www.gia.edu/doc/A-Microstructural-Study-of-Pietersite-from-Namibia-and-China.pdf
Perhaps including Pietersite under Chalcedony#Varieties would be more appropriate? I don't see the issue of having Pietersite have its own page while making it clear that it is a trade name.
In any case, having Pietersite included under Tiger's eye#Other forms of tiger's eye is just adding confusion. FropFrop (talk) 10:30, 3 September 2023 (UTC)