Talk:Tuff

Light microsope image

Is this not a /polarising/ light microsope image under un-crossed polars? Clarification would be awesome. 129.96.197.96 (talk) 00:18, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

File:Argishti monument.JPG Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Argishti monument.JPG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Argishti monument.JPG) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:25, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

How do you make this tuff?

I was reading the article and I noticed that there is no clear explanation for how tuff is made. I assumed that it comes fully formed from the volcano, but I get the idea that it is volcanic ash that coalesces through the eons in the slopes of the volcanoes. Could someone make a section in the article explaining how tuff comes into being? Even if there is more than one way to make the tuff it would be a nice introduction to the subject for someone who does not know much about vulcanology.

Thanks

Melquiades Babilonia (talk) 04:32, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tuff. 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/20110611074858/http://www.tu-dresden.de/biw/geotechnik/geologie/publikationen/download/Tuffe_IfS.pdf to http://www.tu-dresden.de/biw/geotechnik/geologie/publikationen/download/Tuffe_IfS.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 06:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Ambiguity regarding definition of "ash"

The article on volcanic tuff states: "Chunks smaller than 2 mm in diameter (sand-sized or smaller) are called volcanic ash." Then later "The ashes vary in size from large blocks 20 ft or more in diameter to the minutest impalpable dust." These two statements appear to contradict each other. Please clarify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lsummersb (talk • contribs) 22:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

I reworded the second passage to make it less ambiguous. The wording originated with the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:14, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Rerating as "C" class

I've raised the rating from Start to C based on several days of hammering on this article to make it more complete and properly cited. There's still a lot of EB1911 language here that I haven't quite got the heart to tear out, and much of it I've been able to support with more modern sources. The andesite tuff section is still weak; andesite tuffs don't seem to be "exceedingly common" in the literature. And while I've found some examples of crystal tuff, it'd be nice to have images, and I haven't found any good examples of lithic tuff that are properly sourced (we actually have some lithic tuff beds in my neighborhood, but WP:OR). --Kent G. Budge (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2020 (UTC)