Talk:Monazite geochronology
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall Semester 2016. Further details were available on the "Education Program:University of Hong Kong/Regional Geology (Fall Semester 2016)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki. |
Review from Jeffrey
[edit]Hello Skylar, your article is really comprehensive with clear illustrations, there are only some minor modification needed.
1. In the section ‘Decay of U and Th to Pb’, you show 3 equations with their respective decay constant, which are clearly explained. I just want to suggest you to state also the half-life of each equation(if it is possible), in order to enhance the understanding of readers.
2. In section ‘monazite zonation’ you mention that age zonation does not necessarily correspond to composition zonation. Can you give some examples on how age zonation would not be composition zonation?
3. In the section ‘interpretation and application’, you mention the difference between hydrothermal monazites and igneous monazites. Can you add an image about homogeneous igneous monazites next to the microscope image that shows clustered hydrothermal monazites to illustrate more on the difference between the two and the meaning of homogeneous?
4. You add a lot of links to other wiki pages in your text. This is good but some of them are not working (they are not linking to any existing wiki page) so you may need to delete those links.
Cheers! Jeffrey. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffreyfung (talk • contribs) 08:53, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Review from Vincent --
[edit]1) In the part of Deformation metamorphic reaction, you may include some photos of your examples Legs lake shear zone, help us visualize, how it helps to determine the age of shearing. We need a real example showing creditability of this method. To show the errors of using this dating 2) I am also curious how this mineral is different from zircon which is normally used. Does this method compensate the shortcoming of using zircon? Maybe they are of similar closure temperatures. 3) Hard to understand the concept of domain age. You may elaborate it more --Hk vincentlai (talk) 14:26, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Review from Larry
[edit]The half-lives for 238U, 235U and 232Th in this article were incorrect. The exponential notation for the decay constants (λ) was interpreted as e-10 rather than 10-10. Calculating t1/2 values from λ values (see Wikipedia article on exponential decay) with base 10 rather than base e gives t1/2 values for 238U (4.4683 x 109 years) and 235U (7.0310 x 108 years) in reasonable accord with the values in the Wikipedia article for uranium.
The λ value given for 232Th (4.9475 x 10-10) gives a calculated half-life of 1.4010 x 109 years, differing from the Wikipedia value, 1.405 x 1010 years, by a factor of 10. The corrected λTh-232 value is thus 4.9475 x 10-11, yielding a half-life of 1.4010 x 1010 years Wmlparker39 (talk) 02:54, 9 August 2024 (UTC)