Talk:Volcanic sublimate

Merger proposal
This article and Fumarole mineral currently have overlapping meanings. I think it's reasonable to discuss merging them to a single location. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:04, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * *Support merge but still undecided about which direction. This Volcanic sublimate article accurately states that volcanic sublimates are formed during "discharge from a volcanic vent or fumarole". Volcanic sublimates can form without fumaroles. Although they are closely related and, as you mention, have overlapping meanings, volcanic sublimate is not always synonymous with fumarole mineral. Fumarole minerals can be regarded as a subset of volcanic sublimates. I expect that, in the near to medium future, Volcanic sublimate is unlikely to grow beyond its current stub status without a merge from Fumarole mineral. I think a merge is probably an improvement compared to the current situation of two articles. But a merge in which direction? A merge of Fumarole mineral into Volcanic sublimate would be reasonable because of the subset/set relationship. A merge of Volcanic sublimate into Fumarole mineral would be reasonable because fumarole mineral (or its variant fumarolic mineral) is probably the more widely used of the two names and could be justified by WP:COMMONNAME. A Google Scholar search gave me the following number of hits: fumarolic mineral = 136, fumarole mineral = 63, volcanic sublimate = 130. — GeoWriter (talk) 17:56, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Given the uncertainty as to the direction of the merge, I've merged to the (much) better-developed article, which also seems to be the more common name (accounting for the fumarolic variant discussed by GeoWriter); ✅ Klbrain (talk) 19:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)