Talk:Argentite

redirect
Why is acanthite redirected to argentite? acanthite is the stable form at room temp. and is the mineral that is used as silver ore and for specimens. THe redirect should be from argentite to acanthite Kevmin 03:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


 * That's right. I think, I have some important informations: Please look at de:Argentit and de:Akanthit. Both are independent minerals and recognized from the IMA. greetings -- 87.164.58.223 10:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC) (de:Benutzer:Ra'ike)

''The name 'argentite' refers to the high-temperature form of silver sulphide, only stable over 177 °C. Under this temperature any samples of 'argentite' convert to acanthite. The name argentite is therefore used (confusingly) by some to describe pseudo-cubic pseudomorphs of silver sulphide (acanthite) where the original crystal form of the high-temperature cubic argentite has remained. The correct way to label such specimens would "acanthite, pseudo-cubic" or "acanthite, pseudomorphous after argentite".'' This article is really wrong and needs to be fixed to correct its problems (beyond my skill/knowledge/time). For starters it needs to be called Acanthite —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.34.251.109 (talk) 03:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No they aren't. Acanthite > IMA status: Valid - first described prior to 1959 (pre-IMA) - "Grandfathered" (http://www.mindat.org/min-10.html); argentite > IMA status:	Not Valid (http://www.mindat.org/min-326.html)


 * Acanthite no longer a redirect. Vsmith (talk) 00:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

another redirect
And why does Argyrose redirect here?? --BjKa 13:58, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Swastika
Did anyone else noticed that the illustration titled "the unit cell of argentite", when rotated, forms a Swastika? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.231.52.233 (talk) 06:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)


 * okay wow it's been 13 years 2600:6C47:A03F:C443:9C4C:D769:E2E7:E37E (talk) 06:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Less than useless article text
Just because some random scientific association (the International Mineralogical Association) has refused to accept the subject of this article as a fully valid "mineral", this does not turn it into a non-item, and it is certainly less than useful to completely replace a description of the subject by a summary of their rejection.

The most obvious comparison is the heavenly body "Pluto", which still exists in the real world even though another influential scientific association has decided it is no longer worthy of carrying the name "Planet".

If I can find it, I will try to restore whatever proper content used to be here, and leave that non-recognition as a minor section near the bottom. Jbohmdk (talk) 23:50, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

remove the swastika on this page
can we... reorient the unit cell view so it's not a swastika? just askin. would be nice not to run into swastikas 2600:6C47:A03F:C443:9C4C:D769:E2E7:E37E (talk) 06:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Nope, it's not a swastika, neither it's a Hakenkreuz. That's too much of a stretch for our imagination to see swastikas everywhere. A09 (talk) 14:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)