Talk:East Kirkton Quarry

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on East Kirkton Quarry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101126145916/http://palaeos.com/Paleozoic/Paleozoic2.html to http://www.palaeos.com/Paleozoic/Paleozoic2.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

2023 additions

Congratulations @Fanboyphilosopher: - your recent additions to this article are substantive, edifying and factually impeccable. Thank you! Guy WF Loftus (talk) 05:27, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I might add a little palaeo-ecological context if you @Fanboyphilosopher: or anyone would care to review? Geneus01 (talk) 08:50, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Actually second thoughts - you have this covered pretty much - I might have added more citations but they don't add material value beyond what you have already contributed. Geneus01 (talk) 09:07, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:East Kirkton Quarry/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AFH (talk · contribs) 05:12, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

I can take this review session since I'm knowledgeable about fossils, though I know little about this period. This is my first article review. The article overall is very well done with just a few errors.

History:

• "In its early history, East Kirkton was noted to be a geological enigma, with intermingled carbonate (limestone) and rare silica (chert) beds." Change this to "In its early history, East Kirkton was noted to be a geological enigma due to its intermingled carbonate (limestone) and rare silica (chert) beds."

Rewrote and expanded the paragraph to explain the site's relevance to early geological debates. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• "Archibald Geikie (1861) noted that the limestone of "Kirkton" was actually two distinct sequences, one at the West Kirkton quarry and the other at East Kirkton." The word "actually" is not necessary here.

Altered phrasing. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• "The first geologist to study the site was John Fleming (1825), who considered both rock types to be Neptunian, precipitated out of from mineral-rich heated groundwater." remove the word "from"

Done. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• "He noted the presence of volcanic tuff at the site, and attributed the silica and carbonate to hot spring mineralization.[6]" The word "noted" is repetitive, use a word like "mentioned" or "described.

Altered phrasing. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• "He supported Hibbert's interpretation, considering the Kirkton quarries to represent large lakes influenced by hot springs on an ancient volcanic plain.[9] Muir and Walton (1957) investigated the nature of the carbonate laminae and spherulites.[7]"
  • Link the words "carbonate laminae" and "spherulites"
  • Also, the latter sentence is a bit short and does not go into any conclusions made by Muir & Walton (1957).

I've rewritten the paragraph, mentioning the relevance and premise of the MW1957 paper. Most details from their conclusions on limestone textural features factor into the Geology section. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• "That all changed in 1984, when Scottish fossil collector Stan Wood discovered a fragmentary tetrapod skull among the limestone slabs of the quarry's spoil heap.[10] He became aware of the spoil heap while refereeing a football match in a nearby field. Wood purchased the abandoned quarry from the West Lothian District Council the following summer.[13] Wood and University of Cambridge paleontologist Timothy R. Smithson began systematic fossil collection from the quarry from 1985–1990. With news of the discovery, a team of National Museums of Scotland geologists (headed by W.D. Ian Rolfe) initiated a stratigraphic investigation in 1987–1992.[14][1][8]"
  • Change the phrase "That all changed" to a different opener, as it is confusing as to what "that" is. Something like "However, in 1984 a new discovery was made by Scottish fossil collector Stan Wood when he unearthed a fragmentary tetrapod skull among the limestone slabs of the quarry's spoil heap"

Altered phrasing. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I might have inserted a little pointer of information here - in the late 1970s, the West Kirkton Limestone was studied in detail by Jamie Jameson, whose Ph.D thesis (1980) was based on West Kirkton (Depositional Environments in the Petershill Formation, Bathgate, West Lothian) can be found at the Edinburgh University <https://era.ed.ac.uk/handle/1842/7081?show=full>. He had also looked at East Kirkton to distinguish it from the Petershill Formation and told me about it in 1981. I visited the quarry in 1981 (which is where that field map comes from in the article) and as far as I can tell from my field notes, I took Stan Wood there in 1982 (inadmissible in Wikipedia). I don't actually recall if Stan already knew about the quarry before we visited it together but as always with Stan, it was a memorable visit (I wrote Stan's memoriam, one of my favourite biographies). So people were looking at East Kirkton Quarry (I have a small write up in my Thesis) but it took someone with Stan's vision to make something of it, aided and abetted by another irripressible field geologist, Euan Clarkson. Guy WF Loftus (talk) 05:58, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for letting me know about the thesis and your contribution to research in the quarry. I'll try to factor in what I can within Wikipedia's guidelines. Let me know if I missed or misinterpreted any other details. Thanks! Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 16:49, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• "Wood and his colleagues published on their initial finds in a 1985 Nature letter.[15][8][1]"
  • "Among the most notable of these early finds were the oldest known harvestman (later described as Brigantibunum)[16] and the oldest known temnospondyl amphibian (later described as Balanerpeton).[17]"
    • Rephrase this so there's more continuity or shift the latter sentence on the taxa named, something like "Wood and his colleagues first published on their finds in a 1985 Nature letter, which was followed by descriptions of notable discoveries such as the oldest known harvestman (later dubbed Brigantibnum)..."

Altered phrasing. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• Alternate between words like "dubbed" or "named" instead of using described for each taxon named.
• "East Kirkton Quarry has been designated as both a Local Geodiversity Site (LGS) of West Lothian, and a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).[26]" No comma needed after "Lothian"

Done. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Geology:

• "The East Kirkton Quarry preserves up to 19 m (62 ft) of strata from mid-lower part of the Bathgate Hills Volcanic Formation." Change to "of strata from the mid-lower part..."

Done. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• "Fossils and ironstone are more common, with the addition of scorpion cuticle and a greater diversity of plant and fish remains.[14][8]" Make "cuticle" plural

This poses an interesting question, is "cuticles" the correct plural form? I was always under the impression that "cuticle" was both singular and plural, like "skin" or "blood". Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• "The nearby West Kirkton Quarry is a slightly younger marine limestone deposit.[9][27] West Kirkton failed to produce any significant fossils, as it had been filled in and redeveloped by the time Stan Wood began his excavations in 1985.[13]"
  • Could be cut down to "The nearby West Kirkton Quarry is a slightly younger marine limestone deposit, though it has failed to produce any significant fossils due to being filled in and redeveloped before major excavation."
• "The rocks of East Kirkton dip westward, into the ground. Magnetometer and resistivity surveys reveal a north-south fault just west of the quarry. " These two sentences can be joined into one
• "Fossils, though abundant in a few layers, are limited in diversity and preservation. They mainly include fish scales, plant fragments, and ostracod shells."
  • -> Fossils of fish scales, plant fragments, and ostracod shells are found in a few layers, but are limited in their diversity and preservation.
• "Boreholes demonstrate that the tuff is overlain by basalt.[8][11]"

Reworded. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• • -> The presence of Boreholes demonstrates that the tuff is overlain by basalt.
• "The volcanic grains are coarse and rounded, sorted into discontinuous lenticular layers with graded bedding. This suggests that the volcanic material was not directly supplied by a pyroclastic flow, base surge, or ash fall. "
  • -> The volcanic grains are coarse and rounded, sorted into discontinuous lenticular layers with graded bedding, which suggests that the volcanic material was not directly supplied by a pyroclastic flow, base surge, or ash fall.
• "Fossils and ironstone are more common, with the addition of scorpion cuticle and a greater diversity of plant and fish remains."
  • More common than the Geikie Tuff? This phrasing is confusing

Yes, I've added that clarification. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• Link the word "ostracod"

Done, and defined for the average reader. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• " Hydrogen and oxygen isotopes indicate that the main chert beds precipitated from meteoric water heated to around 60°C (140°F), with a minor amount of mineral recycling subsequent to deposition." Change "subsequent to" to "after", as this sentence is verbose.

Done. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• "microbial acids allow fibrous calcite to accumulate " Unlink calcite

Done. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• "Fluctuating mineral concentrations lead to constant corrosion and reprecipitation of the calcite. Wave action breaks up these crusts into smaller grains, which are periodically washed into deeper parts of the lake. "
  • Connect these two sentences for better understanding. Maybe "...reprecipitation of the calcite which is followed by wave action that breaks up these crusts into smaller grains..."

Paleoenvironment:

• "During the Dinantian, the Midland Valley would have been an lowland rift zone" change "an" to "a"

Done. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• "During the Dinantian, the Midland Valley would have been an lowland rift zone, dotted with a web of lakes and rivers diverted or dammed by faults and lava flows."
  • -> "During the Dinantian, the Midland Valley would have been a lowland rift zone that was dotted with a web of lakes and rivers diverted or dammed by faults and lava flows."

Rewritten. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• "Further east was Lake Cadell, a large lake or estuary system responsible for most sediments of the West Lothian Oil-Shale Formation. This body of water had a more brackish to marine character than the lakes at East Kirkton."
  • -> "Further east was Lake Cadell, a large lake or estuary system responsible for most sediments of the West Lothian Oil-Shale Formation, which was more brackish and marine than the lakes at East Kirkton."
• "Further west was the Clyde Plateau..." The word "Further" is repetitive

Rewritten. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• "East Kirkton was located close to the equator in the Viséan. The climate was warm and semi-arid, gradually becoming wetter as the Carboniferous progressed."
  • Combine these sentences, possibly "East Kirkton was located close to the equator in the Viséan, which caused its climate to be warm and semi-arid though it became wetter as the Carboniferous progressed."

Paleobiota:

• Unlink the words "amniote", "microsaur", and "ostracods"

Done. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

• Some of the sentences in this section also apply to paleoecology or paleoenvironment, so maybe rename the section to "Paleobiota and paleoecology"?

This is an interesting point. It's possible that this is the first GA-class article with an integrated Paleobiota section (that I'm aware of), so I don't think there's any set rule on changing the name of the section. I'm tentatively in support of renaming it to "Paleobiota and paleoecology", since I also discuss a few details of the East Kirkton food web and the distribution of organisms through the environment. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Very well done article on an important locale, thank you for your hard work!

Thank you very much! I've made some changes to the history section (including dividing it into subsections). The rest is soon to come. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Apart from the thesis provided by Dr. Loftus (which I still need to review), I think I've completed most of the edits requested. One major point of personal preference is whether some sentences are worth combining into longer sentences or not. We've briefly discussed this off-site (I'm mentioning it here for Wikipedia's sake), and it seems like most people are of the opinion that it does not matter much as long as good flow is maintained. For a while I've been in the habit of using long sentences connected by commas and semicolons, and I'm trying to wean myself off of the habit when writing articles. Flow and reading comprehension are almost always at the front of my mind. I'll reconsider my stance if you still feel strongly that some of the sentences need to be combined. Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Congratulations on the GA rating - well deserved. Don't bother with my thesis - it is about the Burdiehouse Limestone, the most broadly distributed of the fresh-water limestones in the succession. I can send you the two pages on the East Kirkton Limestone from the thesis to save you the bother, which don't add anything of value (so you can overlook them). There has been a subsequent Ph.D thesis on East Kirkton in 1994, however, which you may want to review <https://theses.gla.ac.uk/75826/1/13818562.pdf>. Guy WF Loftus (talk) 06:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

@Fanboyphilosopher: - just an after thought: the article is still considered low importance - you may like to consider notability - why should anyone be interested in the East Kirkton Limestone? I think if you made more of “Lizzie” and the impact Lizzie had on our understanding of the evolution of the earliest known community of land animals and plants on the planet, it may confer greater notability. Guy WF Loftus (talk) 12:33, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I looked through the first thesis and I saw only a single passing mention of East Kirkton. I believe that Wikipedia's policies is that theses should be included only if they are well-cited and add a significant amount of new information to the article's subject. McGill's thesis looks to be much more relevant, thank you for finding it! As for notability, I don't personally believe that "low importance" is a major issue. Wikipedia's importance system is fairly arbitrary and does not have many practical applications beyond encouraging article improvements. While I could see Westlothiana being reclassified as a mid-importance paleontology article, East Kirkton's broader relevance independent from Lizzie is fairly minor. That's not to say I don't think people would benefit from more awareness, but I would consider that the case for 90% of low-importance paleontology articles. Maybe I'll put in a DYK application for the main page. Thanks for your help during this process! Fanboyphilosopher (talk) 16:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)