Talk:Matlockite

Museum at Derby
There is a short article on Italian Wikipedia with a good image. Perhaps someone can link to these.

Recent edits have removed reference to the exceptionally large specimen acquired by the nearby museum at Derby. This now seems to make the reference to the two very large (and potentially matching crystals) at Derby and in America rather incongruous. The text also now suggests that the mineral is still available at Bage Mine. I know there have been many attempts to trace the exact source within the mine complex in the last few decades but, unless there has been a recent rediscovery (for which a reference would be essential), I was under the firm impression that both matlockite and phosgenite had still not been re-found here in the last 100 years. I don't want to undo these edits as I don't feel sufficiently experienced in the protocols of Wikipedia, but as the museum curator who purchased these specimens for Derby I can say that there will be a chance for Wikipedians to request access to Derby Museums' files on this subject for the 9th April 2011 GLAM/DER event and, if you wish, to photograph the specimen for CC-share alike use. Just lodge a request before the event, please.Parkywiki (talk) 02:32, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The removed Derby museum bit was sourced to a Wikipedia copy site which said nothing about a "large specimen". I've now removed the questioned and unsourced "still available" stuff per your comments. Seems there is/was a bit much unsourced about "large specimens" - removed the "not yet verified" stuff. As to the April Wiki meet - won't be there, but if you have reliable sources about the Derby specimens please provide them. Vsmith (talk) 03:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * OK, that makes sense. Can you advise: is it acceptable for a staff member at a GLAM institution to post "facts" (i.e. their interpretations) online, say as comments under an image at a GLAM-supported Flickr site, or on a blog site? I'm not at all sure if this would meet the criteria of reliable sources. Either I (or a Wikipedian) will probably have to check if I have correspondence from the Russell Society on my work files on this matter but, if I did, would a scan or image of that correspondence be suitable, and should it be uploaded to Wikisource? I think we in GLAM have an awful lot to learn about Wikipedia's requirements -and the practicalities of meeting them - and I'm very grateful for your help and guidance. Parkywiki (talk) 12:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I would be cautious regarding use of any unpublished material such as the correspondence you mention. Please read WP:RS carefully. Don't know anything about Wikisource. My personal feeling regarding who has the biggest specimen of a particular mineral is rather trivial and not really notable enough for inclusion -- but that's just my take on it and others are welcome to disagree. Vsmith (talk) 17:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll be uploading a photo of the Derby Matlockite specimen to Wiki Commons in the near future. I've now put the specimen on display there alongside some rather nice QR codes. Parkywiki (talk) 17:08, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Museum template
I've again removed the irrelevant Template:Derby Museum from the article as undue promotion. Matlockite is a rather rare mineral which has as its type locality a mine near Derby - that is stated in the article. The museum evidently has a rather large sample on display - so what? Should we have large and distracting museum templates displayed on every mineral article with samples on display in museums? The article on the museum doesn't even mention matlockite, therefore it must be of no real importance to the museum. Vsmith (talk) 12:10, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I've restored it - I think I'm the third, if nor more, editor to revert you on this. There is clearly no consensus for you to remove it Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:47, 3 November 2011 (UTC)