InfoThe rock was found at Kola Peninsula, Russia. Ikaite is a rare mineral that occurs in nature at temperatures up to 7°C in alkaline, phosphate-rich marine and continental waters. Although ikaite has generally been replaced by calcite (this replacement is called glendonite), it has preserved its original crystal shape. Because of the rather restricted conditions under which ikaite/glendonite forms, it serves as a marker for near-freezing water temperatures. Hydrohalite, a form of salt, precipitates at low temperatures from highly saturated brines. It is not well-preserved in sediments because of its high solubility, but its former existence can be inferred from the presence of halite or other minerals that preserve the shape of the original crystals.
Oppose The scope is far too narrow, and appears to be a detailed description of this particular image. I would suggest re-starting with some broader scope such as "concretion stone". --MichaelMaggs07:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for your vote, MichaelMaggs. This rock is less about concretion and more about being rare and interesting Calcite after Ikaite var. Glendonite. Of course I agree with you that the scope is far too narrow, but I do not think I would re-start the nomination as a concretion stone. Like with most of my nominations my goal is to share the knowledge about rare objects, phenomenon and places with as many people as possible.Instead of re-starting the nomination on Wikipedia I submitted the image to EPOD, which is the site sponsored by NASA. The image was accepted and will be featured there in few months.--Mbz121:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am on thin ice here due to my lack of mineralogical domain knowledge, but if I understand this correctly, the pointy and coloured things sticking out is the mineral Ikaite (or a pseudomorph variant thereof), for which there exists a quite extensive Wikipedia article, which for me indicates that this is interesting topic for those interested in mineraology. BTW, that article does not have a photo of the mineral. Thus, I would not say the scope is too narrow (if the scope is Ikaite). Had the scope been Glendonite, it would perhaps have been borderline. (If a Durham salmon fly can be VI, then why not this?) A question from the ignorant here: In its pure form it seems Ikaite is colorless, whereas the spikes shown here are brownish. Why is that? Is it because it is the pseudomorh Glendonite? A final comment. I think this image could be better categorized. Perhaps you should add it to Category:Calcite or create a more specific Category:Ikaite subcat? One thing I can say for sure is that it was instructive to read the Wikipedia articles about the subject. Interesting. -- Slaunger20:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I really like to thank you, Slaunger, and not for your support vote, but rather for the recearch you've done! I also should admit that I did not do my job right. I should have done the recearch that you did myself. Yes, you are right, Ikaite was replaced by calcite, preserving only the shape of original Ikaite crystals. I added the image to w:Ikaite. IMO it adds the value to the article.--Mbz119:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
With respect to Michaels comment about the scope I do think he has a point as the scope is very special. Perhaps, if it was changed to simply "Ikaite" or the more specialized "Ikaite var. Glendonite". That the image also shows a concretion stone should perhaps be kept out of the scope of nomination? -- Slaunger09:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and, I do not think we need to restart the nomination to do this. We should just drop Michael a note and ask him to re-review under a new scope (I bet he has this page on his watchlist already). -- Slaunger09:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the imafe would be fine in the articles it appears in. Thank you one more time, Slaunger for doing the recearch for me.
