Talk:Deicke and Millbrig bentonite layers

Feedback

O Town comments

first sentence: why say geologic structure? i think its implied.

Country/island -> Island Country of Papau...

...Due to the EXTREMELY young age... it seems a little strong, maybe something more like relatively young.

...basin may researchers.. many* ?

...Due to the extremely young age of the basin may researchers are interested to see how the basin will continue to develop over time, and how the plates will subduct since the new crust being formed will still be so young and warm unlike most crust that gets sub ducted due to being cold and dense... Dude, that sentence is runnin' away.

...The basin is an extensional basin that is actively spreading, and has a seafloor spreading center... extensional could be said in the first sentence, i think all of this could.

...which is when two tectonic plates come together and collide at an odd angle and not head-on... I don't this needs to be explained. just end it at convergence and blue link it

The Woodlark Basin is one of the only places on Earth where scientist can actively study this transition [3]. Cool!:)

Then about 1 million years ago, the spreading center in the western basin shifted to the Woodlark Rise... Are we gonna here more about him later? is the following sentence regarding the WR?

How are the normal faults thought to be rotated? Did the scientists explain this hypothesis any further?

Due to the Woodlark Basin being so young, the basin only started spreading around 3 million years ago, is that there is very little sediment in the basin. I think you can leave out the young or the age part, they're a little redundant and slows down the flow.

This is great for researchers because different features can easily be seen in satellite images of the basin. How is it great? the features seen are the faults? Isn't there at least a kilometer of sediment filled in the basin that you mention later?

The basin has a maximum thickness of 1500 meters of sediment fill in the deepest section of the North Moresby grabben, however most of the basin is covered in less than 1000 meters of sediment [3]. I think you should say this at the beginning, an then say that the relatively think sediment fill you can still see these active features.

general

It's a little fuddling at times but I understood most of what you were saying. Maybe you could add slip rates for the active faults, if there was any. You explain alot of processes that would be otherwise known by geologists, but I suppose this is good as it is targeted at the highschool crowd. Try to hyperlink more of the stuff that should be - like convergence. Do you have any more sources? There were a few sentences that needed them, or are you just kind of citing the paragraph?

-Outty 5000

Tasha Hoffmann

General

Good information, I just have a few issues with the flow and placement of some things. First, it seems that while you mention the Millbrig Bentonite, since there isn't much specifically about it, is it needed in the article? Why is it important to mention? Try putting the first mention of K-Bentonite in parentheses instead of between commas so people know what you are referencing later (convention I believe), and maybe explain to the reader exactly what bentonite is sooner. Lastly, reference #3 seems to be in a slightly strange part of the sentence, maybe move it to just before the list or right after.

Suggestions from An Li

(1) The Overview section is too long, can write a introduction paragraph at the very beginning of the article, briefly introduce why research on Deicke and Millbrig Bentonite beds are important. (2) Geology of Deicke and Millbrig Bentonite beds has not been well described. This part can be divided into several sub-section, e.g. tectonic setting, stratigraphy, petrology, field study etc. For tectonic setting (from Samson et al 1989), a tectonic reconstruction or similar image might be helpful. A image to show petrologic feature. A regional stratigraphy column to show which level Deicke and Millbrig Bentonite beds is at. (3) A new section about future research interests can be added. To summarize future research problems and targets of the Deicke and Millbrig Bentonite beds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geologyanli (talk • contribs) 14:45, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions from Graeme Bartlett

This article should probably be at least twice as large to match what others are writing here! Have you considered some other sources such as these:

• Correlation of the Ordovician Deicke and Millbrig K-Bentonites Between the Mississippi Valley and the Southern Appalachians (1) WD Huff, DR Kolata - AAPG Bulletin, 1990
• Composition of biotite phenocrysts in Ordovician tephras casts doubt on the proposed trans-Atlantic correlation of the Millbrig K-bentonite (United States) and the Kinnekulle K-bentonite (Sweden) John T. Haynes1, William G. Melson1 and Michael J. Kunk
• Correlation of North American Ordovician bentonites by using apatite chemistry SD Samson, PR Kyle, EC Alexander - Geology, 1988
• Gigantic Ordovician volcanic ash fall in North America and Europe: Biological, tectonomagmatic, and event-stratigraphic significance WD Huff, SM Bergström, DR Kolata - Geology, 1992
• ⁴⁰Ar/ ³⁹Ar dating of Ordovician K-bentonites in Laurentia and Baltoscandia K Min, PR Renne, WD Huff - Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 2001
• and quite a few more on Google scholar. Actually reviews are good

Other questions that could be answered here are what do these beds overlie, and what is on top of them (ie context), unconformities, have they been subjects to any tectonics (eg folding, jointing, tilting), what is mineral or elemental composition (we know bentonite and zircon), what are defining characteristics, who discovered them, and who found out the deposit was so widespread? Also we want to know more about the Millbrig Bentonite. Can you describe in more words about where the deposit(s) are?

Every paragraph should ahve at least one reference, eg the current research efforts section.

Other lesser things are there is no need to link the same term twice in the same paragraph. Also the less familiar words should be linked so that our readers can know more about them, eg Plinian, volcanic arc, convergent crust boundary, magmatic arc, pyroclastic air fall, pyroclastic flow, coignimbrite, ignimbrite, vent deposit, and weathering. (some of these are red, which means we need to write something on that topic!) Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:19, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions from Hongcheng Guo

Overall, the page provides pretty detailed information, the topic itself is good for me, and I like the last section which indicate the research condition and what still need to be done. However, I think it can be improved on how to convey the information. 1. More figure would be more friendly and would quickly make readers get into the topic. 2. The first paragraph seems keep introducing the topic, but It would be better if the first paragraph (I assume that this is the definition of the topic, because you have a background information section) exactly and explicitly tell the reader what the "Deicke and Millbrig Bentonite Layers" is. 3. I like your background information, it's pretty detailed, but it is kind of not well organized. 4. Also, there are many sections but does not have a good organization. They all give information, but they done not form a logic flow. For example, "Field Area" should be move to before or behind the "Stratigraphy" section. Hongcheng Guo (talk) 06:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions from Erinn Buhyoff

Overall I think the page is very informative, but not very concise or organized. The intro section is very brief and only provides the very basic information of the topic. I know you have a figure showing the area of the bentonite layers, but maybe you could add the coordinates of the boundaries, or which states it can be found in in the text portion. Also maybe add to the intro portion more basic info about bentonite layers. What kind of volcanism are they associated with? The next couple of sections are very informative and i don't think they need anything extra but there are a couple typos ("and" in the second sentence of the second section) and numbers that lack units. I would enjoy a strat column figure with the stratigraphy section in order to better visualize the stratigraphy. One thing you keep bringing up is the Potassium nature of the layers. How are these different from regular bentonite layers (differences in volcanism, differences in sources?) and why is this so important? Other than that i think the page is great and maybe just try and add a little more meat to each section, and cut away some fat from others. Good job overall!

Suggestions Ben Durel

Overview:
This section could use some work. For instance the first sentence is confusing due to the structure. I would introduce the layers and origin and then start a new sentence describing the basic composition (potassium bentonite bed). I would reference your papers as you reference the rest of the page and keep the authors name out of it ( Samson et al). Lastly you may consider naming the volcanic arc/ convergent crust boundary you mention. 

Background Info: Be more specific with your locations and occurances (which volcanos, eruptions, orogeny event plate members, etc). Other than that this section is good. Again don’t reference papers other than using the wiki references. (herrmann et al)

Stratigraphy: It may be useful to give a rough estimate of the distance between layers, thought it varies by location it would give some enlightenment to the time between deposition of bentonite layers.

Keicke and Millbrig K-Bentonite Layer: This section is your page correct? If this is your overall page it is probably unnecessary to have a specific section about theses layers. You should consider separating most of this info between your overview and stratigraphy sections.

Trace Element Concentrations: I thought this section was well done and easy to understand. What do you mean by grains (36 grains collected)?

Field Areas: When referencing place reference at the end of the sentence, see reference 12. The wording of this section is difficult to read. I would consider making another figure, which shows field areas.

Affect on flora and fauna: This section could easily be expanded with questions like how could this effect the biosphere? You say there is no evidence for an extinction event okay, well what is an irregular extinction event? May elaborate on what happened if some species “must have” rebounded.

Figures: Your figure 1, of the bentonite layer distribution, can easily be improved by separating the distribution of where the Deicke vs Millbrig beds were deposited, as well as where their source volcano is located.

Figure 2 is a very small chart which is even difficult to see when expanded so consider making the font size larger on the axis and title. Also you may reexplain the chart better in the about section of the figure!