Talk:Chrysocolla

Geology Mid‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Chrysocolla 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rocks and minerals Low‑importance

	Earth sciences portal Chrysocolla is part of WikiProject Rocks and minerals, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use rocks and minerals resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Rocks and mineralsWikipedia:WikiProject Rocks and mineralsTemplate:WikiProject Rocks and mineralsRocks and minerals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disputed status as mineral species[edit]

Thanks for the notes about that -- not something I was aware of. I recall from when I worked in Miami, AZ the 'gemmy chrysocolla' from Inspiration (Live Oak??) was chrys coated with a thin "skin' of clear chalcedony -- so it didn't crumble, dehydrate & didintegrate as most older chrys samples do, sigh. Interesting --Pete Tillman (talk) 17:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Formula bogus? x < 1? Expert needed...[edit]

The formula given is weird. It uses 2-x in two places (usually the larger expression appears once) and places an upper bound of x at 0.999. I'm pretty sure that's not right, but an expert should check

Riventree (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]