This  level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Geology Top‑importance This article is within the scope 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Rocks and minerals Top‑importance Mineral 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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Mining Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mining, a collaborative project to organize and improve articles related to mining and mineral industries. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, or visit the project page, where you can see a list of open tasks, join in the discussion, or join the project.MiningWikipedia:WikiProject MiningTemplate:WikiProject MiningMining Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Materials Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Materials, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Materials on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MaterialsWikipedia:WikiProject MaterialsTemplate:WikiProject MaterialsMaterials Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Section sizes Section size for Mineral (43 sections) Section name Byte count Prose size (words) Header Total Header Total (Top) 7,759 7,759 474 474 Definitions 17 16,239 0 651 International Mineralogical Association 6,286 6,286 203 203 Biogenic minerals 8,619 8,619 376 376 Mineral assemblage 1,317 1,317 72 72 Rocks, ores, and gems 3,292 3,292 349 349 Etymology 951 951 46 46 Chemistry 10,078 10,078 1,145 1,145 Physical properties 897 29,237 97 3,057 Crystal structure and habit 8,531 8,531 960 960 Hardness 3,083 3,083 156 156 Lustre and diaphaneity 1,839 1,839 243 243 Colour and streak 4,176 4,176 437 437 Cleavage, parting, fracture, and tenacity 4,464 4,464 591 591 Specific gravity 2,912 2,912 252 252 Other properties 3,335 3,335 321 321 Classification 20 40,917 0 4,445 Earliest classifications 918 918 69 69 Linnaeus 1,301 1,301 104 104 Modern classification 4,879 4,879 587 587 Silicates 2,687 19,063 226 2,085 Tectosilicates 3,838 3,838 491 491 Phyllosilicates 3,079 3,079 387 387 Inosilicates 3,317 3,317 348 348 Cyclosilicates 1,614 1,614 178 178 Sorosilicates 1,454 1,454 146 146 Orthosilicates 3,074 3,074 309 309 Non-silicates 21 12,436 0 1,465 Native elements 1,597 1,597 216 216 Sulfides 1,940 1,940 230 230 Oxides 2,025 2,025 222 222 Halides 1,015 1,015 117 117 Carbonates 2,221 2,221 273 273 Sulfates 1,755 1,755 198 198 Phosphates 1,190 1,190 142 142 Organic minerals 672 672 67 67 Recent advances 2,300 2,300 135 135 Astrobiology 3,344 3,344 126 126 See also 511 511 0 0 References 33 33 0 0 General references 892 892 0 0 Further reading 533 533 0 0 External links 1,076 1,076 0 0 Total 114,862 114,862 10,293 10,293

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball (talk), for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. The rationale behind the request is: Important.

	Archives: 1

May 24, 2022, 13:24 - «partial rv, the edit introduced outright errors or MoS issues»

@Maxim: What WP:MoS? I propose we partially keep previous edits. Especially {{see also}} link to abundance and formulas that correctly reflect on material: {{chem}}s links you have removed, which has clearly decreased this article quality. Minerals and their chemical composition is important. I suggest we revert and fix minor issues like unnecessary </nowiki> and mistypos. Best.

AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 13:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The {{see also}} link was between paragraphs; usually that template is used at the top of a section. I've placed the link on the top now. The paragraphs at the end are awkward and may need more editing. Where I stripped formulas in particular, was a discussion that made comparisons to silica tetrahedra and silicate minerals, before the substantial explanation of the concept in the following section. Because this article is likely to be read by someone with less knowledge in both mineralogy and chemistry, I think it would make sense to (1) lead with the common names of compounds as opposed to their formulas and (2) use chemical formulas sparingly, that is, not in an overwhelming way.

I worked from a full revert to fix the random <nowiki> tags, a loose "1", and there was also mention of an O²⁺ species. I acknowledge that I didn't do a particularly good job of preserving your edits, but I don't have strong objections to reinstating them with the previous concerns in mind. Maxim_(talk) 14:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

…someone with less knowledge in both mineralogy and chemistry Agreed, but the idea is to keep it for those who understands them to visually and quickly differentiate compounds. Or, in case they would search for it by an element name. I find it important to specify molar anions as in minerals they are chemically bondeded. This may not be obvious if we simply give an element name. Just to ensure for instance that oxygen allotropes like O
₂ are not confused for O²⁻
. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 14:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The line "In geology and mineralogy, a mineral or mineral species is, broadly speaking, a solid substance with a fairly well-defined chemical composition and a specific crystal structure that occurs naturally in pure form" should be changed to "In geology and mineralogy, a mineral or mineral species is, broadly speaking, a solid, inorganic^[1] substance with a fairly well-defined chemical composition and a specific crystal structure that occurs naturally in pure form" to include all of the major defining features of a mineral as given by the IMA and USGS Quartzite14 (talk) 19:41, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: I'm afraid just referencing "USGS" doesn't quite cut it for sourcing your change (which seems reasonable, by the way). Can you link to any reliable source that shows "inorganic" included as one of those major defining features? DrOrinScrivello (talk) 20:45, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]