Talk:Type locality (geology)
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Reduced to Stub edit
Is this a worthwhile project: it only has five entries at present? There must be thousands more recorded type localities for minerals.--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 17:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Type localities and type sections edit
Many minerals and rocktypes do have type localities, which is normally the first place that they were found, although not necessarily how they were named. Chronostratigraphic units, stages, series etc. do not have type localities, the bases of each unit may have a designated type section known as an SSP (stratotype section and point) or GSSP if it is of global significance. However, these are rarely the locations after which the units are named. Formations, members and beds have type sections, or sometimes type areas, something required for their formal use in describing rock sequences. These are also not necessarily the same as the locations for which they are named. For these reasons, I think that this list needs to be revised. Mikenorton (talk) 18:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
- There being no response, I'm removing that section. If someone wishes to create a list of the locations after which stratigraphic units are named (there must be a snappier title than that), then these will remain in older versions, from which they can be copied into that new article. Mikenorton (talk) 14:51, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Clean up of rock types/minerals section edit
I'm currently going through the rock types/minerals section, removing those that do not have type localities, such as cobaltite or chemical elements that do not occur in native form and are not therefore minerals, such as erbium, or any that have type localities for which they are not named. I intend then to expand the list with others that do fit the criteria. Mikenorton (talk) 16:17, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
- I'm done with the igneous rocks, which I think are pretty much the only rock types with type localities, although no doubt some of the specific varieties could be added. The minerals are another thing all together - there are literally thousands of them - see List of minerals (complete), so I think I'll leave that for another time(s). Mikenorton (talk) 15:23, 14 June 2015 (UTC)