Talk:Agate

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 January 2020 and 7 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Devlin Vong. Peer reviewers: KaylaCarleton, Abbyfah, Fosterelliott, Ryan-is-Gneiss.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Image

The image is wonderful but I am wondering how to tell moss agate from tree agate. What is the difference? Boris B 04:58, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Image

Wikipedia needs to get hold of a different photo of "polished agates of various colors". At least half of the agates shown in the current version of that photo are of various colors because they've been dyed -- and blatantly, too. It's like illustrating a discussion of different types and textures of human hair with a photo of rainbow-colored dynel wigs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.146.16 (talk) 06:00, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Removed it - the image page states they were dyed. Don't need phoney pics. Vsmith (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Current ?

I notice that text on formation is lifted from the Encyclopedia Brittanica of 1910. Perhaps a SME could review the geology portion for accuracy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Freesesj (talk • contribs) 15:28, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

3d gallery

I've removed the recently added 3d gallery of agate slabs. I don't see the need for more images, especially in 3d of polished slabs. If we need 3d it surely would be for something with "depth" rather than a flat slab. Vsmith (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

if you can see the 3D you will see that we can see inside the rock, because it's a slab it permits light to go through well. To see the 3D you need to cross your eyes till you see 3 images, and than you need to focus on the middle image. Ronveron — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronveron (talk • contribs) 13:44, 12 March 2012

polyhedroid agate

"Polyhedroid" agate is a term commonly used on the Internet to describe a crystal which has grown with many flat sides or faces and which shows a distinct pattern of concentric polygons when cut across. I don't know whether it is an "official" description or just a popular one, but either way it appears common enough to need mentioning. Can someone add something appropriate to the article? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 13:16, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Seems to be just a "sales pitch" term by rock & gem sales sites. Doubtful that a WP:reliable source exists - let me know if you find one. Vsmith (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Google found some RS for me :-) so I added it to the article myself. I couldn't check the citations directly, but I found them on the University of Nebraska-Lincoln web site (which I added to the External links), so I hope that's OK. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:28, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

OTHER kinds of Agate

Hi,

I've come across the following kinds/types of Agate & would like to inquire WHY they are NOT mentioned in this Wikepedia's entry: Crazy Lace agate; Brown Lace agate; Pink lace agate (aka: Aragonite), Botswana agate; Tube agate. Dragon Veins jasper, Turritella agate, Dendritic/Scenic Dendritic agate, Agua Nueva agate, Montana agate, Mexican Fire agate, Plume agate, Polka Dot agate, Passion agate, Scenic agate, Crab agate, Tree agate; —  Preceding unsigned comment added by AK63 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC) 11

Same as on talk:jasper, WP:reliable source needed to verify the significance of these rock shop commercial names. Vsmith (talk) 02:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Agate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141227143847/http://snr.unl.edu/data/geologysoils/agates/index-agates.aspx to http://snr.unl.edu/data/geologysoils/agates/index-agates.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Agate Studio which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 06:33, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

The article is well organized and the sections flow nicely. Each section is straight to the point and has great supporting references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ZeinabFashwal (talk • contribs) 04:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• The Holy Grail of Valencia.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: ERTH 4303 Resources of the Earth

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 January 2020 and 17 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Devlin Vong (article contribs). Peer reviewers: KaylaCarleton, Abbyfah, Fosterelliott, Ryan-is-Gneiss.

— Assignment last updated by Naeim9146 (talk) 21:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

How much does this rock usually go for

How much does this rock usually go for 2600:8801:9C00:14B0:7DC0:6D2A:6FE:9700 (talk) 00:19, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Agate/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: I2Overcome (talk · contribs) 16:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Czarking0 (talk · contribs) 02:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

I'll take this one Czarking0 (talk) 02:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Suggestions

• specifically length-fast chalcedony fibers and sometimes quartzine (length-slow chalcedony fibers). Is this as clear as it can be? Czarking0 (talk) 04:41, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I have clarified this and replaced a source that wasn't really needed with a more helpful source. I₂Overcome ^talk 07:09, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

• FN2 gemdat.org is dead link. Is this a WP:RS ?Czarking0 (talk) 05:14, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  It is, but the site does not appear to be working right now for some reason. I₂Overcome ^talk 07:10, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  Can you make an archive link? Czarking0 (talk) 17:48, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  Try it again, it's working for me now. I₂Overcome ^talk 02:58, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  Yes looking good. 502 is somewhat normal when having website troubles Czarking0 (talk) 05:47, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• agates have never been successfully lab-grown This source is from 2001 which is probably too outdated for such a claim. Also googling for lab grown moss agate does give some results so this should probably be elaborated on. You might say but its not really agate! great but that is probably still notable for the articleCzarking0 (talk) 05:35, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  Can you find a reliable source that mentions lab-grown agates? It is the banding of agates that can't be replicated in the lab, because minerologists do not understand exactly how the chalcedony fibers form bands. Moss agate doesn't have bands (and therefore isn't agate), so it doesn't really matter if it can be imitated artificially. I₂Overcome ^talk 07:18, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  The article discusses moss agates and this appears to be the common name for the mineral. Maybe it would be better to narrow the claim here to specify that moss agates are not included? Czarking0 (talk) 17:48, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I added the word "banded" I₂Overcome ^talk 02:48, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

   Done Czarking0 (talk) 05:39, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• Instead of having sections with parenthetical titles, I recommend calling the first one Structural varieties and the second one Geography.Czarking0 (talk) 05:35, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I have renamed them Structural varieties and Regional varieties. I₂Overcome ^talk 07:26, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

• Talking about the name again in the Europe subsection is not great when there is already an Etymology section.Czarking0 (talk) 05:42, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I have removed that sentence. I₂Overcome ^talk 07:29, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

   Done Czarking0 (talk) 17:51, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

• The Geography section overall is mixing in trivia, history, and geology like These agates likely formed in tuff deposits of Late Oligocene and Early Miocene age I suggest making this a shorter more targeted section and moving topics to other, potentially new, sections Czarking0 (talk) 05:44, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I don't quite understand what you mean by this. The purpose of this section is to list and describe the varieties of agate that can be found in various localities across the world. This naturally includes details about when and how they formed (if known) and important historical details (if relevant). I₂Overcome ^talk 07:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I don't agree that this sectioning is so natural. I think a list of varieties and their geographies as like a look up table would be useful. Then you could have a geology section (or maybe just rename formation and properties to Geology) that has subsections for the variations to discuss these details Czarking0 (talk) 17:50, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  The general structural variations of agate are already discussed in Structural varieties. This section describes the unique properties and history of agates from different places. It doesn’t make sense to have a table of varieties and locations in one section and then put how old they are, what environment they formed in, what characteristics they have, etc. in a separate section. What I could do is create a table with columns for name, locality, age, geologic environment, description, photo (if available), and references. That would make this section shorter and easier to browse. I₂Overcome ^talk 21:44, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I think the table is beneficial Czarking0 (talk) 21:54, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

• c-axis is unexplained jargon Czarking0 (talk) 17:52, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I have attempted to further explain this. I₂Overcome ^talk 02:46, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

   Done though I think it could just be removed sufficient for GA Czarking0 (talk) 06:10, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• Maybe restructure the Uses section to start with the paragraph on the Stone Age and then you can remove the have long been which is unencyclopedic.Czarking0 (talk) 17:54, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I changed the first sentence to Agate is frequently used as a gemstone..., is that better? I like having that paragraph first as a broad overview before getting into the historical details below. I₂Overcome ^talk 03:12, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  I think this is an editorial style thing. What you have now is fine for GA. Czarking0 (talk) 05:54, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• Suggest swapping the cover image with the Brazilian agate with classic fortification banding image since the crazy lace sounds like a casual description and does not appear to be the best representation of the traditional banded agateCzarking0 (talk) 18:01, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

  I just replaced it with the Malawi agate, which is also a fortification agate but the image fits better. I₂Overcome ^talk 06:06, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

• article is a little light on the fact that not all banded chalcedony is agateCzarking0 (talk)

  I added an explanatory footnote in the lead paragraph. I₂Overcome ^talk 02:47, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

   Done Czarking0 (talk) 05:55, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Spot Checks

• Agates are broadly separated into two categories based the type of banding they exhibit.[17][4]: 24, 36  Wall banding, also called concentric banding or adhesional banding, occurs when agate bands follow the shape of the cavity they formed in. Level banding, also called water-level banding, gravitational banding, horizontal banding, parallel banding, or Uruguay-type banding, occurs when agate bands form in straight, parallel lines. Level banding is less common and usually occurs together with wall banding  Done
• Can you provide pages 22-25 of the Lake Superior Agates Field guide?Czarking0 (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  How? I₂Overcome ^talk 02:57, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  Not sure, I am looking into it. Do you have the book? Czarking0 (talk) 02:59, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  I have a physical copy of both books. I₂Overcome ^talk 03:01, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  I think you could upload pictures of a couple pages to imagur. And add the links here. People on the wikipedia discord suggest email but I don't like giving out my email. Czarking0 (talk) 03:20, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  Here are pages 22-25 from Lynch and page 30 from Pabian: I₂Overcome ^talk 05:09, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  Fortification agates have very tight, well-defined bands. They get their name from their appearance resembling the walls of a fort. Fortification agates are one the most common varieties, and they are what most people think of when they hear the word "agate".  Done Czarking0 (talk) 05:40, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• Also page 30 of Pabian, Roger; Jackson, Brian; Tandy, Peter; Cromartie, John (2016). Agates: Treasures of the Earth. Firefly Books.Czarking0 (talk) 02:58, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  Iris agates have bands that are so microscopically fine that when thinly sliced, they cause white light to be diffracted into its spectral colors. This "iris effect" usually occurs in colorless agates, but it can also occur in brightly colored ones. I think microscopically is a slight stretch of what the source says but still consider this  Done Czarking0 (talk) 05:44, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  I removed that word and rephrased it. I₂Overcome ^talk 07:42, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• with heating having been used for centuries to produce the rich red color of carnelian This doesn't specifically say that the red has been produced for centuries which I think the claim more heavily implies. I still suggest modifying this but for the GAR I consider it  Done
• Agate was discovered in Sicily by the Greek scholar Theophrastus in 350 BC. Ctrl+F on the source for Theophrastus yields no results so I think this is  Not done

  The source cited is Pabian, pp. 52-75. It is cited after Agates can also be found in Wales, the Czech Republic, Poland, France, because everything in that section up to that point is based on that source. Only the last part, and many other European countries, is based on Mindat's list of agate localities. I₂Overcome ^talk 05:07, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  Got it, disregard my above then. Can you provide an image for the page for the part in green here? Czarking0 (talk) 05:45, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

  No problem, here it is: I₂Overcome ^talk 07:39, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

   Done Czarking0 (talk) 01:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Coverage

I googled a few things and I could not find any significantly notable topics that are missing here.Czarking0 (talk) 05:56, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

• Possible things to consider, is the size range listed? I might have missed that. Also if there are any specific notable agates to mention. The chinese version of this page says 在一般的玛瑙的形成过程中，含有二氧化矽的水（有可能为熔岩本身中的矽酸鹽成分分解所产生）有可能会穿过岩石外层渗入其中，在空腔内部形成一层矽酸鹽壳。这种溶液的成分和沉积条件的变化会影响玛瑙的层状结构，所以条带状玉髓经常和石英晶体层交替出现。熔融的岩石中的蒸气空腔有可能会结合，形成更大的空腔，产生体积相当大的玛瑙。1902 年杜塞尔多夫工业工艺展览会上展出了一块巴西出产的重达 35 吨的紫水晶晶洞 which makes me think this might be referring to a particular agate that is worth mentioning?

Table

Thank you! I₂Overcome ^talk 06:03, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Addressed a couple comments I had above. Looks good now
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Countries should not be blue linked As far as the actual criteria go this is good. I would love that table we talked about for this article but I do not think it is needed for GA
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Looks good
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Pending that final source check but this looks good overall
	2c. it contains no original research.	Looks good
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig says it looks good
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	See above
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Boldy remvoed a little history but looks good overall
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	A few adjustments were made above which I think cover this
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Edit history looks good
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Does Minedat state their photos are CC license? This own appears to be their photo Typically, no, but this one does have a CC attribution license (see the image details at Mindat) I2Overcome talk 22:26, 18 September 2025 (UTC) I am struggling to find that click on the ^ at the bottom of the page and it shows the photo details I2Overcome talk 02:54, 19 September 2025 (UTC) You are right thanks for your patience I checked every other photo and they look good
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	It is slightly unclear to me which of these images present dyed agates. However I think the existing captions meet GAC.Czarking0 (talk) 05:58, 19 September 2025 (UTC)
	7. Overall assessment.	Great work. One of the easiest GA I have done. I hope to see more great work from you in the future !Czarking0 (talk) 01:45, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Chalcedony (Variety Agate)-262773.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:22, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by TarnishedPath talk 10:49, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that agate gemstones have been found on every continent, including Antarctica?

• Source: Pabian, Roger; Jackson, Brian; Tandy, Peter; Cromartie, John (2016). Agates: Treasures of the Earth. Firefly Books. ISBN 978-1-77085-644-8. p. 5: "Agates are probably the most common gemstones on Earth. They have been used to create ornaments for around 7000 years, and have been recorded on every continent and in several different geological environments."

Additional source for Antarctica: (page lists and displays a photo of an agate found on King George Island, Antarctica)

• • ALT1: ... that some agate gemstones have concentric banded rings, called "eyes"? Source: "About Eye Agate: Agate with concentric ring pattern, looking like an eye."
  • Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by I2Overcome (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

I₂Overcome ^talk 01:07, 24 September 2025 (UTC).

• New enough (nominated four days after GA promotion), hooks are sourced and QPQ is not needed. Page appears to be reasonably neutral, well written, well sourced and Earwig gives a "violation unlikely" result of 2.0% similarity. Cattos^💭 01:15, 26 September 2025 (UTC)