Talk:Lustre (mineralogy)

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Lustre (mineralogy) is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gemology and Jewelry Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gemology and Jewelry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gemology and Jewelry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Gemology and JewelryWikipedia:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryTemplate:WikiProject Gemology and JewelryGemology and Jewelry articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Definition

Is this too close to a definition for the Wikipedia?

I don't think it hurts... add a bit more if you think its too dictionarylike. KJ

Does anyone know whether luster/lustre is a qualitative property or a quantitative property? I feel that would be part of the expanded definition.

Lustre/Luster?

Shouldn't it be luster? That's what I learned in my middle-school science class. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.190.199.242 (talk) 21:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I thought the two were interchangeable; I wonder if there is a UK/US difference at work here. I'm going to change the first word in the article as the rest of the article uses 'lustre' and we need to be consistent. GideonJones (talk) 09:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- The '-re' ending is more often a UK thing, although the US spelling '-er' is more phonetic. Firefox's dictionary says the 'lustre' is acceptable with the 'English/UK' word-list, while 'luster' is correct with the 'English/US'. Granted for me, seeing the '-re', and silent '-me' endings on words interrupts my reading pattern. The mineral info box uses the American spelling, so I suggest we change this page to EN-US to fit with that, as the page uses a mixture of US and UK spellings currently. 130.39.188.24 (talk) 20:06, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but no. The article was written and titled using lustre. If you want to change it then seek consensus first. Vsmith (talk) 23:15, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Vsmith. I just checked the history -- it was fairly stably at "Lustre", and with British spelling in the rest of the article, for quite a while. But, 130.39.188.24, you can always ask that a "poll" be taken if you want. Personally, I don't see any good reason to change it. PeterH2 (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

explanations

If a knowledgeable person comes around, I'd like to see physical explanations for these qualities.enzo (talk) 22:31, 18 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An anonymous user asked the same question at Talk:Compact fluorescent lamp#Question Re Altered Response of Colour-Change Gemstones. An explanationis for colour change is given in the case of Chrysoberyl. Andreas ^(T) 00:42, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lustre/luster again

I've semiprotected for a week as an anon using various ips with 75... has decided to edit war rather than discuss. Please see WP:ENGVAR. We keep the page title and text consistent and as discussed above it has been at lustre since first started and we don't change w/out gaining consensus. I personally don't really care even tho I'm more used to 'er. Any user is free to request a move/rename, but until that decision is reached we keep the text and title consistent. Vsmith (talk) 14:56, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Schiller vs adularescence

According to this article, schiller is "similar" to adularescence, but according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adularescence they are exactly the same. Which is correct? Nikolaj1905 (talk) 19:34, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]