Talk:Joint (geology)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Too technical
Despite being a biology student and having studied some geology in undergrad, I don't understand this article, so I doubt that it is accessible to the general public. Could someone explain this in non-technical terms to make it more accessible? Thanks, IronChris | (talk) 22:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
- Agree, I'll shortly look at simplifying it. --Zamphuor 15:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- A bit simpler now (I hope). --Zamphuor 16:29, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Name change to --> Joint (geology)
A name change from "Geologic joint" to "Joint (geology)" would be in keeping with general wikipedia naming conventions. See my similar comment at Talk:Geologic fault. If nobody complains I'll do this soon (with appropriate redirections). --Zamphuor 15:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
- Good idea! No complaints here.Rolinator 01:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Normally I object to Term (discipline) article names for terms used in more than one discipline, but this (and fault) are used exclusively by geologists (and geological engineers). Also, there is also no more need to distinguish Geologic from Geological. I'll support the move of both articles to their proposed names. +mwtoews 01:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, name change done. I'll now fix the double redirects. --Zamphuor 13:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Expansion
I've had a go at expanding this article. There's clearly a lot more to do, particularly it needs something on occurrence and all the sections need expanding further. I'll try to find time to do some more here soon. Mikenorton (talk) 17:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

