 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Megacrysts
edit- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- Not merged. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:47, 21 May 2018 (UTC) (non-admin closure)
Is there any difference between a megacryst and a phenocryst? If not, then that stub ought to be a redirect here. —SMALLJIM 13:41, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- A good question. This paper does distinguish between xenocrysts, megacrysts and phenocrysts, but after reading it I'm no clearer on the distinction. Mikenorton (talk) 12:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. Xenocryst is a redirect to, and is defined in xenolith as "an individual foreign crystal included within an igneous body". And I've just found https://www.accessscience.com/content/506500 which explains the difference between pheno- and mega- crysts (and porphyroblasts (which article also introduces the porphyroclast)) – simple! Anyway, the questions now are: 1. Can that Access Science definition be trusted? If so, phenocryst needs a bit of a rewrite; and 2. Do we need Megacryst as a separate article, or would it be best explained in Phenocryst? —SMALLJIM 16:07, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- I think that the reference is fine. It seems reasonable to keep Megacryst separate, almost like a disambiguation page for phenocryst, porphyroblast and xenocryst. I've added the above reference to the megacryst article as a start to this structure. Klbrain (talk) 07:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. Xenocryst is a redirect to, and is defined in xenolith as "an individual foreign crystal included within an igneous body". And I've just found https://www.accessscience.com/content/506500 which explains the difference between pheno- and mega- crysts (and porphyroblasts (which article also introduces the porphyroclast)) – simple! Anyway, the questions now are: 1. Can that Access Science definition be trusted? If so, phenocryst needs a bit of a rewrite; and 2. Do we need Megacryst as a separate article, or would it be best explained in Phenocryst? —SMALLJIM 16:07, 19 December 2016 (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.