Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gemology and Jewelry articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

A note[edit]

I have added some topics and in the last edit I restructured the structure somewhat. If you don't like it, it is easy for you to reverse without deleting all the other new elements. I am not quite sure how else to go about it.. first discuss it on here ?

Gem-fanat 17:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Overlap with mineralogy[edit]

I couldn't agree more. Sapphires, Rubies, Diamonds and Emeralds, as well as some others have a very mineralogical/scientific approach to them which is perfectly fine, but there should be a gemstone/jewelry component added to them.

Also I think in the case of minerals like Agate and other so called semi-precious stones, if there were a conflict of interests, we should leave the lead more to the mineralogy community. In the end anything these days can be considered a gemstone, and anything can be considered a mineral (well not completely true but for the sake of argument). I would suggest we'd keep the lead a bit more when we deal with well established gemstones (and ok one can discuss if Agate is one or not) and at the same time leave the lead when it's a less well established gemstone.

Perhaps we need to create a template of what should be on a gemstone page, not destroying the work that has already been done by others.

Gem-fanat 20:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)


I am noticing a disturbing trend in references. One thing is to quote an article/book that is published on a website but which in itself is a reliable source. I think that is perfectly fine. With Pearls however I start to see resources being added in the form of footnotes that are not legitimate sources at all. In fact they are self published articles, circulated in a ring of e-commerce sites, which are then being quoted as sources. Whilst I think the added pieces are not bad, we should improve the sources and as a project take ownership of the sources/references.

Gem-fanat 21:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Gemology and Jewelry discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals[edit]

Articles related specifically to the study and trade of gems and jewelry are sadly lacking in need of guidance and direction. Wikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry is a meeting place for the development of articles in this field. Please join in and have your say. The framework for the WP is largely in place and participants who can help categorise articles and assist in assessment would be appreciated.
Interested Wikipedians (please add your name)
  1. User:SauliH
  2. User:F.N. Berg
  3. User:Tharanga Jayawardena

Well, this subject of gemology is quite interesting and i like to take over the guidance and directions ahead. having 13 years experience in high-end jewelery manufactiring using platinum and gold studded with diamonds and precious stones, from factory layout to end product Gemology is a broad subject that includes gem identification,crystallography,rare specimens,gem testing, colour grading, clarity grading, gem mining,valuing,treatments, this includes one of the key areas such as gem therapy as well. i have pasted on top only a small portion of the entire gemology subject as it contains a massive area cover. Any way i like to take the challenge and proceed.

please start the discussion soon, as i can be a part and help anyone to share my knowledge and to gather the entire knowledge for the betterment of the industry.

Tharanga jayawardena (Dip.Gem) Colombo, Sri Lanka —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello from the fashion project![edit]

In tagging and assessing articles for the newly-created WikiProject Fashion, I have come across a number of tags for this project, and since it seems like it's not much older than this one, I just want to let you know so maybe we can work together on a couple of things where our interests coincide.

I see that Jewelery, especially, has gotten a lot of attention. I have rated it top-importance within fashion as well ... perhaps it could be a collaboration of the week to get it up to FA status? I don't think it needs too much work. Daniel Case 04:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi...I am in the gem and jewelery manufactiring industry for nearly 13 years and i have come a cross from high end jewelery to fashion jewelery. I am from sri lanka where you can find vary rare gems to precious( I don't like to use the word semi precious as all gems are precious to me)Majority will think its easier to manufacturer jewelery and facet needs patience and passion, creativity with experience.

If you have any doubts we can share the knowledge and solve it for the betterment of the industry.

Tharanga Jayawardena (Dip.Gem)

Hello Back[edit]

I agree there is quite a bit of overlap, especially for the jewellery section, less so for the gemstone section. 10:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Presently workin on[edit]

I found a large number of inaccuracies/poorly defined comments in several high priority gemstone pages. Will also upload several url's as well as books I used as a reference. Topics: rubies, sapphire, emerald, gemstone, amethyst 10:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


Hey ya'll. I just wanted to get some opinions. I'm wanting to start a portal pertaining to this project, yet I'm unsure of the total scope and name(actually only the name, the scope should include both anyways). Options include:

  1. Portal:Gemology and Jewelry
  2. Portal:Gemology - Since you can't really have jewelry without gems. Well, expensive jewelry anyways. :)
  3. Portal:Jewelry - Since Category:Gemstones falls under Category:Jewellery.

BTW, what's with the two L's? Is that british spelling? And which to use? I'm partial to being safe and using Portal:Gemology and Jewelry, but wanted to check for better options first. Any ideas or whatnot, most welcome. Thanks. Joe I 03:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, to late, I'm impatient. Anyways, feel free to stop by, I'm open for comments or help. Joe I 06:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

En - U.S. Yes, "jewellery" is old English, "jewelry" is American English. F.N. Berg (talk) 20:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Featured pics[edit]

I find it hard to believe there are no gem or jewelry FPs. I know there are a few that could make it. I'm gonna start looking into nominating a few soon. If anyone has any suggestions, please lemme know. Joe I 06:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Demantoid needs a photo. I'd add one of mine but it'd just get bonked. Then I'd have to add it again, and it'd get bonked again, etc. --Ragemanchoo 16:00, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

The GEM STONES should be categorize with its original spiciness name and EX - corundum specimen divide in to two categories such as SAPPHIRE and RUBY, and sapphire we can divide in to sub categories such as blue,yellow,white,green,orange,padparasha(King sapphire)magenta,star sapphire,purple, color change sapphire, Etc

Please comment

Tharanga Jayawardena (dip.gem) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Diamond Certification Laboratory of Australia at AfD[edit]

Please take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diamond Certification Laboratory of Australia. Your comments would be welcome. --Eastmain 01:51, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Essentially the issue is that its notability is unclear and the subject of the article wrote it - however, if the article can be improved from independent sources (or is capable of such) by knowledgeable persons, the AfD will probably close keep. Orderinchaos 07:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Color[edit]

I have looked through both Wikiprojects, Gemology and Jewelry; Rock and Minerals, and have found no consensus for a specific color for the infoboxes. At this point the large majority of Mineral articles that have infoboxes use the default ?lilac? purple. At the same time the Gem articles are rather sporadic and seem to follow the color of the Gem in question. I would suggest having a discussion regarding a specific color for all mineral articles, but seeing as how the R&M group is not very active, I think I'm about the only one that is doing anything, It is probably best for the G&J project to take the initiative for standardization. In the interim I shall change alternate color boxes back to default in preparation for an end result. (also cross posted to both projects talk pages --Kevmin 22:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Missing gem-related topics[edit]

Greetings. I wonder if anyone of you could be willing to have a look at my list of gem-related articles. Thank you - Skysmith (talk) 10:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme[edit]

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

  • The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
  • The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
  • A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 21:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)


Ammolite has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.

I could add also an English version for Ammolite. Just have a look on it on my site! F.N. Berg (talk) 20:49, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup[edit]

Currently, 387 articles are assigned to this project, of which 99, or 25.6%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 14 July 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. More than 150 projects and work groups have already subscribed, and adding a subscription for yours is easy - just place the following template on your project page:

{{User:WolterBot/Cleanup listing subscription|banner=WP Gemology and Jewelry}}

If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page; I'm not watching this page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 17:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Gemology and Jewelry[edit]

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:51, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


Don't this Wikiproject have any infoboxes? I recently made some articles related to diamonds, and I couldn't find one to include in them. I can make the infobox (or infoboxes, if several are needed) if you like, just tell me what to include. Cheers. Chamal talk 11:35, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group[edit]

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

FA cleanup needed[edit]

According to Wikipedia:Featured articles/Cleanup listing, the article Diamond is in need of cleanup. Hopefully, editors will get on it right away, or the article should be submitted to WP:FAR for review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:53, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

F.N. Bergs multiple treads on the same topic[edit]

Feb. 27 posts[edit]


Some lack of contents (especially links to resulted from blocking and deleting my added external links to my own project. Instead of calling me a "spammer" some admins should have inspected my site and would have possibly come to the wise conclusion that my links (worldwide) would have been helpful to find interesting photos and infos about a lot of gemstones and their minerals. Meanwhile I've started to create some gem pages on and because the German admins have whitelisted my URL!. Of course I could add English versions too because I do my website in English and German. More might easily come if the blacklisting of my site is pulled back so that I can act as a normal Wiki user / author, without the brand of being a spammer. See more on Meta here and on the Tourmaline talk page F.N. Berg (talk) 20:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Having the link on the blacklist only means that you can't link to your website (see our conflict of interest guideline), it does not mean that you can't create the articles, and fill them with content. You are even capable of referencing some of it to e.g. The knife cuts both ways, we get content, and you can show where your link could be of interest. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Dirk, would you "create" or add infos to a site whose admins think your own site isn't worth being linked? I filled German Wiki with content because its admins think my work is useful. Useful to be linked! "you can show where your link could be of interest" What does that mean? I cannot add a link to my site, except! F.N. Berg (talk) 13:37, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Show us how the link is better for the wiki projects worldwide then uploading the images to commons where all the projects can use them.--Kevmin (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Post 2[edit]

Well, as I said above: I once (from July until December 2008) added a lot of links to my gemstones project where the Wiki users would have found more than 2,000 photos of gems and their minerals. That "spamming" was not criticized until December... Then I was put on the blacklist being accused as a spammer! Now I'm doing my best to reach a revision. But that is somehow blocked by a few U.S. admins who therefore block the worldwide Wiki community to see the images on my site, leaving them alone - uninformed about all the different varieties. F.N. Berg (talk) 20:47, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

F.N. Berg, you have a lot of images available, why don't you ask for whitelisting on, and start uploading images from your site there (you can start before whitelisting, you can link the copyright info later on). They can then be used on this wiki. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2 post[edit]

Here are gem-related topics and actually 2,352 gemstone images... but this source has been blocked by an en. admin:! Since a few days I had time to add some new gemstone articles: Tugtupit on, Jeremejewit on and Benitoit on - unfortunately only on German Wiki because my URL is still blocked worldwide (except German Wiki because its admins are convinced that my site is worth being added as a link). F.N. Berg (talk) 21:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Other then "I have a lot of images" what arguments do you have for adding your site as a reference?--Kevmin (talk) 23:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
"...if it comes up to 3-4 bigger projects, then I would suggest total de-blacklisting ..." read more on Meta here. F.N. Berg (talk) 08:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
So summarized, your arguments are:
  • I have a lot of images
  • If I have enough support, I will be de-blacklisted
... --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Dirk, the main argument is: A Wiki gem or gem mineral article shows only 1 or perhaps a few more images of gemstones (usually a rough version - see the tugtupite or benitoite pages e.g.). If there would be a link to my site (like in German Wiki again) our international Wiki visitors could easily find a lot of varieties of a specific gem or gem mineral or collector gem. I repeat: every day before that blacklisting hundreds of Wiki visitors clicked on all the links I once have added (from July 2008 until December 2008 - without being accused as "spammer"). I could see that on my website traffic source. I think they often found what they searched for. Please overthink that a lot of Wiki users look for faceted gems, not for minerals.
  1. argument: Admins compared my humble site with Mindat or Webmineral. I never said that my site is comparable. It's totally different because I show faceted versions of fine minerals. One cannot find that on both other sites. Usually there are no links to commercial sites (as far as I have seen) which should be ok of course. Therefore my site provides the interested visitor with more than 2,000 different gemstone images, surely more (meanwhile) than other commercial sites show. And don't forget that my site is non-commercial, educational and private, only done by me - in my free time.
  2. argument: German mineral / gemstone interested admins have whitelisted my site again. Are they wrong? I don't think so imho. Apart from English speaking admins I haven't seen other comments re this blacklisting. Where is Japan, China, Brasil, Mexico etc etc...
That's it for now. Perhaps there might be more arguments to whitelist my links but one must not become bored with a too long text.
Let's finally talk about blacklisting of my site. Were there more / better arguments except from my "spamming"? If not, remember that from July - December 2008 I added external links without knowing that that was regarded as "spamming"! I did that to help Wiki users finding more images than on the Wiki pages. I did that not for advertisement because I don't have a benefit from that. I pay my webserver costs myself. The more visitors the more I have to pay. Selfless - one could say.
Re "I have a lot of images": Please have a look on some of my extra info pages: poldervaartite info, amber info, Libyan desert glass info, tugtupite info, and some newer addition to gemstone pages where I added Google maps so that visitors can find the deposit areas (e.g. Bixbite or Libyan desert glass or F.N. Berg (talk) 11:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Still, having certain nice examples would help, certainly on pages where there is not yet an image. That would already be a start. If people are coming here to look for facetted images, then why not start with helping them giving such images here. Even on Quartz and other pages there is still room for more images.
For users who want to see more, {{dmoz}} is a good alternative. Unlike wikipedia, they are a web directory.
No, I can't say that German wiki is wrong, their rules are different from ours. You have indeed not heard Japan, China, Brazil, Mexico. First of all, they haven't noticed that it is blacklisted (otherwise they would complain or whitelist!), second of all, you did not discuss with them.
That you have to pay for the web-traffic would just be more of a reason to discuss whitelisting on metacommons, add images there, and link them from articles here. --Dirk Beetstra T C 11:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC) is a perfect example of information which should be included directly into the Benitoite article with references (eg. Economic Geology, Mineralogical Record) not just linked to in an "External links" section.--Kevmin (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Dirk, thanks for your positive respond. In the meantime I have added a few thoughts to the text above. I cannot upload "my" photos because they are copyrighted by others. Why that? Because I can only get photos if I show their copyrights. Otherwise I couldn't have done this unique project to show faceted gems and their rough companions. OK?
But yesterday I wrote to South Africa, asking if the owner of a pic would give the image free so that I can include it in my latest article about jeremejevite (of course only on

F.N. Berg (talk) 12:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

If you upload the image on commons, all wikis can enjoy and use it. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Dirk, when / if I get that OK from S.A. I will add it to commons of course. Can you tell me please what will happen now, after I have summarized my arguments (more or less) for you? Will you talk with those admins who once pressed the "red button"? Fine that you are "online" so to say, so that we could exchange our thoughts immediately. Seems that you are as old as I am...

F.N. Berg (talk) 12:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

(unindent)I'd like to wait for some more local editors, better knowledgeable in the subject than me, to have their say here. --Dirk Beetstra T C 12:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hoi Dirk, I don't think that this is a problem of a special subject. What if one starts a search for let's say "Deep Sea Animals"? If he/she finds an appropriate Wiki page (I don't know if such a page does really exist) he/she probably sees the usual text, pepped up with let's say 5 images. Don't you think that he/she wouldn't be interested in finding more pics of such creatures? And then he/she finds an external link which opens a wide door for many more images? Would he/she be not interested in viewing such additional pics? That's exactly the same prob! F.N. Berg (talk) 13:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
They might get the same answer ... --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
"Same answer"? That Wiki withholds interesting infos / images from its visitors? Infos and pics available from a non-commercial website? That cannot be in the sense of the Wiki founder - to mho. If your statement, dear Dirk, shall be the final one, I don't know why Wiki calls itself a worldwide encyclopedia, not speaking about its former (?) aim to support the world in finding what people search for.
I simply don't understand why a selfless contributor shall not be welcome here, on Wiki.en. The only mistake was my addition of too many links, without problems from July - December 2008, as I repeatedly said. It seems that Wiki.en is something like a separate kingdom, ruled by kings or princes who cannot revert their wrong decisions. You probably understand why I'm slightly upset meanwhile. F.N. Berg (talk) 14:42, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
The read can then click the link which says "Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Deep Sea Animals" which takes them to commons where there are many many images/videos/media/etc... to see. From what I can see you still have yet to provide a convincing reason why you cant ask the owners of the images you host to post them to common where EVERY WIKI can use them rather then forum hunting and wasting your time and ours asking the exact same question, which has been answered. --Kevmin (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

F.N. Berg. You don't seem to get it. We don't link to your website because you (as the site owner) says that it is good, appropriate, on-topic, useful, colourfull, nice. We link because local editors see use of the link to the project. I have, until now, not seen many users who see this. We are not an internet directory. I would suggest that you add your links to a directory service, and you can consider linking the directory from here. If you are so interested in improving the information linked to, the directory service is perfect, it gives people who visit wikipedia on link, leading to a wealth of links to even more information. But, being a wikipedia, encyclopedia's are about content .. not about linking to content. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:42, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Dirk, although being named "time-waster" meanwhile, and although I am usually not the type who prefers dancing on others' nerves or try to waste their time, I still want to add a final word re this topic to you: you are neutral (able to have a view from both sides), open-minded, very helpful, obviously well-educated, and therefore an excellent Wiki admin. Thanks for your friendly involvement. Sorry for wasting also your worthy time for dealing with my intentions and disappointment.

My further engagement will happen on other national Wikis. I will not use such a directory service because my goal is helping people by providing infos which are not yet covered in Wiki articles - I have no obsession with my image and do not want to earn money.

Alle beste voor u! Mike / F.N. Berg (talk) 11:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts[edit]

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:11, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

New Infobox for Faberge eggs[edit]

Hello, I am just writing this to let the WikiProject know that I created an Infobox for Faberge eggs. This is available at Template:Infobox Fabergé egg (Template:Infobox Faberge egg is a redirect here). Feel free to add the infobox to any Faberge egg articles that I have not gotten to yet. I plan to add them as I have time to all the Faberge egg articles but won't have the time to do all of them in a short period of time. Thanks. The Seeker 4 Talk 21:10, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation[edit]

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 05:20, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


The article Alabaster concerns two different minerals, both sometimes called "alabaster". How about removing the content about the gypsum and merging it into Gypsum? --Una Smith (talk) 15:06, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement[edit]

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

30,000 images of minerals donated[edit]

(taken from Signpost; written by Phoebe and HaeB)

U.S. mineral collector Dr. Robert Lavinsky has released almost 30,000 photos of mineral specimens under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license, which will be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons soon. They consist of the (currently about 29,000) images from Lavinsky's picture database on, and of the images from his own homepage, the web site of his mineral business "The Arkenstone".

The donation came about after Dr. Lavinsky had been contacted by German Wikipedian and Commons user Ra'ike for permission to use a small number of these photos. According to his biography on, "The Arkenstone" was one of the first mineral businesses to move onto the Internet in 1996, and Dr. Lavinsky gave academic lectures on the "Impact of the Internet on the Mineral Hobby" in 2006 and 2007.

Help is needed in translating the image descriptions. Also, images from need to be screened and any misssing pictures uploaded to Commons. See Commons:Robert Lavinsky for more info. --Yarnalgo talk to me 00:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Missing gems topics[edit]

I've updated my page about topics related to gemstones - Skysmith (talk) 12:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Gemology and Jewelry articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release[edit]

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Gemology and Jewelry articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:04, 19 September 2010 (UTC)


This article is confusing.

There is a picture of NATURAL green prasiolite, but part of the article says that prasiolite is a type of amethyst which is made green by heat process.

There is also a reference to praseolite (note small spelling difference) which is apparently an entirely different mineral.

Clarification needed. ...and yes, in the cosmic scale of things, this is not very important.

MHR —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1atineb1 (talkcontribs) 22:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Shell jewelry anyone?[edit]

I am from Project Gastropods. I was wondering if there is any interest in creating an article about shell jewelry? OK, a lot of shell jewelry on the market these days is very cheap stuff, but it is still perhaps interesting, and there is some jewelry made of mother of pearl of various kinds which is more luxurious and expensive. At project gastropods we can help by identifying the shells used in the jewelry and explaining what is what. Project fish and fisheries might also be involved in terms of the sources used for the raw material for the jewelry. The historical aspect of the theme is also very interesting, because shell necklaces go back tens if not hundreds of thousands of years, archeologically speaking and thus are the earliest known form of jewelry. Perhaps an archeology project would also be interested in contributing. Anyone interested in helping with an article on this theme? Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 15:17, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to participate![edit]

Hello! As you may be aware, the Wikimedia Foundation is gearing up for our annual fundraiser. We want to hit our goal, and hit it as soon as possible, so that we can focus on Wikipedia's tenth anniversary (January 15) and on our new project, the Contribution Team.

I'm posting across WikiProjects to engage you, the community, in working to build Wikipedia not only through financial donations, but also through collaboration in building content. You can find more information in Philippe Beaudette's memo to the communities here.

Please visit the Contribution Team page and the Fundraising page to find out how you can help us support and spread free knowledge. DanRosenthal Wikipedia Contribution Team 18:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Cardinal gem[edit]

Cardinal gem, is this significant? Picture is only on that page. Thanks, Marasama (talk) 23:19, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

The Natural Sapphire Company[edit]

This article is up for deletion, with the involvement of some single-purpose accounts that have an extreme conflict of interest muddying the waters. Neutral opinions would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Natural Sapphire Company (2nd nomination). Thank you, First Light (talk) 01:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination as a United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month candidate[edit]

The Hope Diamond, an article within the scope of this project, has been nominated to be a future United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month. All editors interested in improving this article are encouraged to participate. You can vote for this or other articles article of the Month here. --Kumioko (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Recommended for deletion: your opinion is requested[edit]

Mark schneider design, Cathty waterman, Diana Vincent and others.

Hi. I noticed a number of commercial designers on jewelry designer. When researching further I discovered a whole page of Mark Schneider (designer) design.. yes an award winner but like him there are 100nds more. Worse yet, one of the very few references in paragraph 1 is to an editorial of an organization this same designer is in the board of. The whole wikipedia article was written by 1 person who claims to be a professor but whose ONLY contribution has been this particular article. Here is his page:

The same happened for another designer: cathy waterman which was created mostly by whose only contribution also seems to be just that particular article and nothing more.

A third designer listed on jewelry designer was diana vincent which was added in jewelry designer by someone who only added that name. Her entry was created in 2007 by someone who, -- besides some talk pages -- mostly just produced that particular article.

Whilst it cannot be denied some of these designers have some notoriety and won awards, there are literally many hundreds of designers on different continents of that level and stature nor are they really known to a larger audience than a small, limited group of jewelry lovers. It seems to me there's some serious SEM work being done by one (a group of) person(s) who first created a wikipedia entry, then cross linked it from other wikipedia pages + links to the website of the designer (plus tons of other links usually).

I would like to know your opinion on what to do with those pages. I personally do not think they fulfill the requirements in I think they do not fulfill the requirements as presented in and were meant to be purely self promotional or for search engine marketing purposes and should therefore be recommended for deletion.

I already deleted the link to them on the jewelry designer page.

Gem-fanat (talk) 11:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

AfD notification[edit]

I have nominated the article Brilliant 10 diamond, which appears to be within the area of interest of this project, for deletion. Discussion is here; comments are welcome. Deor (talk) 11:21, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

The Pearl of Allah.jpg[edit]

image:The Pearl of Allah.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- (talk) 06:27, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Missing topics page[edit]

I have updated Missing topics about gems - Skysmith (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Holly Yashi, Inc.[edit]

On my trawling for stuff to do I found this one: Holly Yashi. Looking over its edit history it was tagged for speedy deletion, then when that was apparently sufficiently contested it was tagged as having the tone of an advertisement. That was removed with little justification so I reinstated the pertinent tags as due procedure even if I'm at the same time looking for suitable sources. Trouble is as I've generally dealt with articles on extinct animals, where notability of a scientific name is assumed by default, I'm not entirely sure what qualifies as a proper source in this area even after going over the pertinent guidelines so I'm deferring to your expertise in this regard. Here's what I found:

  • General
  • Specialty

I'll add more if I do chance upon them and if it is needed. Do note that I'm good for doing the edits myself it's just that I'd rather they weren't for naught. Dracontes (talk) 10:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Link[edit]

Hello Everyone,

I was reading this article and after reading it I saw the wikipedia page related to topic, in my point the article have some fresh information to add on

Does this article qualify to add as reference link on this wikipedia page? because this page has some depth information about the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lesliechang (talkcontribs) 07:18, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Lesliechang. This appears to be a blog post on a commercial website, the author is uncredited. So I don't think it would pass muster as a suitable source, as it needs to be published under a verifiable, third party source and not self-published without editorial control as so many blogs are. Mabalu (talk) 09:20, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Mass image upload[edit]

There are over 17,000 new images in Commons:Category:Images from Fellows (auctioneers). Please make use of them! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Gemology and Jewelry at Wikimania 2014[edit]

Project Leaflet WikiProject Medicine back and front v1.png

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 16:50, 26 June 2014 (UTC)