User talk:Drhood2938/sandbox

Chang's comment
In the history and geography section, I think a map with the site marked and some highlight of this belt will be more clearer than giving out the coordinates. I suggest to put a map here and some tectonic evolution information. Try Geoapp or google map. it is free and give a map with good quality.

In the geology section, I suggest to use more pictures combing with the words on this part, showing different minerals and the banded formation. It would be better to insert a straitigraphy figure to indicate the geological history too.

In the first implication, this is a good part and makes the whole topic meaningful. Does this have a reference? I think some simple data should be put here to make it better. Other sites with the similar belt should also be mentioned here. This will be more convincing that it could represent a global scale paleoenvironment.

The second implication, that is an interesting part. I think more detail information could be added about the formation from geochemical and geomicrobiological view, like what kind of bacteria, sulfate reducing or iron reducing?

Comments from Graeme Bartlett
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:40, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * There is already an article called Nuvvuagittuq greenstone belt which you have partially copied and expanded with Geology and Implications sections. Are you intending to add to the existing article?
 * The age of zircons is given as 3825 Ma, but that is not from the Hadeon eon. Is there more information about dating this rock(s)? [
 * Is there any information about the dimensions of the outcrop on the earth's surface (or its size that may be buried)?
 * How thick is it?
 * What is its relations to other rocks around the area?
 * What is the metamorphic and structural modification history? (The picture looks as if it has been folded).
 * Compared to the existing article there is a different idea about the banded iron formation. Both ideas should be included to have a neutral point of view.  That is unless you can find secondary publications that show that one idea has now been rejected.