User:Rhurlow/sandbox/Antigorite/TimNMcN Peer Review

Peer review

General info

• Rhurlow
• User:Rhurlow/sandbox/Antigorite (10/6/2020)

Lead

• Lead sentence is good; it summarizes the information concisely and is clear to even a non-expert.
• The only exception is the use of 'polymorph', which could be a new word to readers, I suggest linking to Polymorphism (materials science).
• I would also suggest fully spelling out "up to 13 wt.%" as "up to 13% water by weight" so as to be as clear as possible.

Reply: Great suggestions - added the link and fully spelled out the weight percent.

Content

• The content is very good as far as I can see (I am not a mineralogist or petrologist anymore).
• There are several fixes in regards to linking and units: "has a hardness of 3.5–4 (UNITS needed--Moh's Hardness scale? Mohs scale of mineral hardness) and its lustre (Lustre (mineralogy)) is vitreous to greasy. Antigorite has a specific gravity (Relative density) of 2.5-2.6 (UNITS needed)." (comments in bold)
• There are some other small fixes:
  • "Somewhat resembling jade, williamsite is often cut" (Capitalize williamsite)
  • The definition of "polysome" is unclear: see Polysome
• There are further places where external linking could be helpful, please review the entire article, I'm sure I missed some:
  • Serpentinite
  • Silicate mineral
  • Subduction zone metamorphism
  • Greenschist
  • Ultramafic rock
• Lastly, I would hope you could combine this article with Serpentine subgroup#Antigorite, as there is significant overlap. I would suggest removing the short section in Serpentine subgroup and simply link to your new article.

Reply: Thanks! I clarified that the hardness is Mohs, added a link to lustre. However, relative density is unitless. I will changed the small fixes and added in some external links to my page. When I make my article official, I will link to the Serpentine Subgroup page and remove the current Antigorite section.

Tone and Balance

• There are no issues with tone or balance. No changes requested.

Reply: Great!

Sources and References

• The sources are generally very good.
• I would nearly insist however that the books of JD Dana be cited, as they are the foundation of most crystallographic mineralogy.

Reply: Thanks! I will search antigorite in the JD Dana literature.

Organization

• The organization is good and guides the reader. No changes requested.

Reply: Thanks!

Images and Media

• The use of figures is visually appealing and useful.
• Figure captions are good.
• There is no issue with copyright etc.
• I would suggest removing the GPS coordinates from: User:Rhurlow/sandbox/Antigorite#/media/File:Antigorite from Poland.jpg as they point to the EPS department at UNM

Reply: Thank you. I had no idea that there were GPS coordinates attached to the photo - removed immediately.

For New Articles Only

• I believe this is technically a new article, as it has been adapted from a previous subsection.
• The article is useful, and notable, as antigorite is a relatively common mineral, and the serpentine group is very important.

Reply: Thanks!

Overall impressions

• At present, this is a useful and well-written article that will help some poor mineralogy students in the future I'm sure. It is much better than most mineral pages I remember reading in undergrad.
• There are some small language fixes, but no major problems.
• My largest suggestion would be to ensure that this article is linked to others as well as possible, as there are many very specific terms that a casual reader may not know.

Reply: Thank you! I hope this will be a potentially helpful page. I edited the language as best I can, but there is always improvements to be made. When I actually publish the article, I plan on linking more and more.