This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Shouldn't it be <50%. >50% doesnm't make sense in the context.
Ironstone is used in china: 148.13 million tons of ironstone and refined iron ore in 2003 ( http://www.stats.gov.cn/English/newrelease/statisticalreports/t20040303_402133921.htm). Kdammers 06:36, 26 March 2006 (UTC).
The Google source is incorrect. The term "ironstone" is used all over the world within the scientific literature concerning sedimentology, pedology, and other aspects of Earth sciences. Paul H. ( talk) 18:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Merge with Banded Iron Formation? 67.201.137.169 ( talk) 20:04, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Comparing the Ironstone article with Iron-rich sedimentary rocks article, it seems that 1. the Ironstone article unnecessarily duplicates part of the content of the Iron-rich sedimentary rocks article, 2. there is significant overlap with the content of these pages, and 3. the Ironstone article has minimal content that is covered in more detail within the Iron-rich sedimentary rocks article. Paul H. ( talk) 12:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
the Ironstone article has minimal contentWP:SOFIXIT. Why is it (still, after twenty years) that the first response to articles is to how to make things worse, not better? Andy Dingley ( talk) 00:07, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Shouldn't it be <50%. >50% doesnm't make sense in the context.
Ironstone is used in china: 148.13 million tons of ironstone and refined iron ore in 2003 ( http://www.stats.gov.cn/English/newrelease/statisticalreports/t20040303_402133921.htm). Kdammers 06:36, 26 March 2006 (UTC).
The Google source is incorrect. The term "ironstone" is used all over the world within the scientific literature concerning sedimentology, pedology, and other aspects of Earth sciences. Paul H. ( talk) 18:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Merge with Banded Iron Formation? 67.201.137.169 ( talk) 20:04, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Comparing the Ironstone article with Iron-rich sedimentary rocks article, it seems that 1. the Ironstone article unnecessarily duplicates part of the content of the Iron-rich sedimentary rocks article, 2. there is significant overlap with the content of these pages, and 3. the Ironstone article has minimal content that is covered in more detail within the Iron-rich sedimentary rocks article. Paul H. ( talk) 12:53, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
the Ironstone article has minimal contentWP:SOFIXIT. Why is it (still, after twenty years) that the first response to articles is to how to make things worse, not better? Andy Dingley ( talk) 00:07, 28 September 2023 (UTC)