Talk:Carboniferous is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource 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.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
Added Pennsylvanian and Mississippian labels to stage names to show to which epoch stages belong; lowercased several "early" and "late" Carboniferous because early and late Carboniferous are not formal subdivisions (Early and Late Mississippian and Pennsylvanian are, however). --Geologyguy15:50, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this article is highly USA-centric. Where, for instance, is the Westphalian, possibly the most significant Carboniferous epoch in terms of European economic geology! Pyrope12:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Pennsylvanian and Mississippian are the internationally designated names for the two epochs of the Carboniferous. In the USA, Pennsylvanian and Mississippian are treated as full periods, but, appropriately, Wikipedia does not and simply makes note of the US usage. In this article on Carboniferous, it is entirely appropriate to use them, correctly, as the international Epoch designations. As for Wesphalian, it is connon usage in parts of Europe, but the internationally accepted Age designations are those listed here, Bashkirian, Moscovian, etc. If someone wants to add information about the Westphalian, in terms of its value and where it fits as an informal element of the formal time scale, that would be great - but it does not belong in the listing of the formal subdivisions. Cheers Geologyguy15:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Now, I am quite prepared to be wrong, but I am sitting here reading the above, in a university geology dept lab, sitting beside a big poster called the 'Geological Timetable' (published by Elsevier). It says that the Carboniferous period is split into Upper/Late, Middle and Lower/Early series/epochs. It also says that the Eurasian general names for the periods within it are stephanian, westphalian, namurian, visean and tournaisian, and that the North American general names are pennsylvanian and mississippian. Moscovian etc are listed under the Eurasia local/regional heading. So, is the poster wrong? It certainly doesn't claim anything 'international' about Pennsylvanian and Mississipian.Ewan carmichael17:59, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the Elsevier chart is out of date with respect to the International Geologic Time Scale published by the International Commission on Stratigraphy (2004-05), which is the reliable source agreed to by Wikipeidans for geological nomenclature. That does not mean that the usage is applied uniformly around the world, and there are still plenty of geologists around who use old terminology, at least in casual usage. So, strictly speaking, Europeans should be using Mississippian and Pennsylvanian as the epochs of the Carboniferous -- and Americans should use the name "Carboniferous" for the full period name and Moscovian etc for the stages. When you get to stage names, usage tends to be local anyway - but, at the Period name level, that's the now internationally accepted nomenclature. But I don't think you'll find americans not using Mississippian and Pennsylvanian as period names any time soon, nor Europeans using them as epochs of the Carboniferous. It is just a matter of common usage vs the official standard. There never had been an international standard until recently. But, that is what WP uses. Cheers Geologyguy18:25, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Breaking news; the Carboniferous is no more! The ICS have promoted the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian to full period status. They don't seem to have updated their website yet, though, and a quick search didn't turn up a reference - someone may wish to search for one. VerisimilusT15:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What a pain (at least as far as us updating a bunch of articles go!). Next you know, the International Whatever will make Pluto a planet again. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 15:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The link to the 2004 ICS chart is broken. More recent alternative is http://www.stratigraphy.org/upload/ISChart2008.pdf but I don't know whether this is the latest or best link. (And the Carboniferous is hanging in there!)
Rocks and Coal
Despite its title suggesting wider coverage, this section is almost exclusively devoted to the coal-bearing rocks of the period whereas (and I'm speaking largely from a UK perspective here) the Carboniferous Limestone and the Namurian Millstone Grit are of equal or greater importance when considered from the point of view of the modern landscapes they create even if they have not been of such economic significance - though a lot of limestone is quarried. Scotland has an important suite of volcanic rocks in the Carboniferous too. I may get around to adding something unless someone else wants to take this on. Geopersona (talk) 08:56, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
