Organizing minerals and mineralogy
Mineralogy and Minerals exist as learning resources. Mineralogy on Wikipedia probably draws 10 to 100 times the readers as the resource mineralogy does here. Title duplication probably causes this because Wikipedia is in the top five of all internet properties. But, uniqueness of resource title here can up our readership ten to one hundred fold. Wikipedia generally cannot use an entry title of minerals, but we can.
If we make mineralogy a subpage of minerals, the few readers we get add to those we get from minerals. Crystals can also be a subpage of minerals. There are about 37 potential subpages for minerals including Ices which in turn may have Ices/Ice cores as a subpage. Ice cores does not occur on Wikipedia but ice core does. Glaciers does not occur on Wikipedia but glacier does. Glaciers could also be a subpage under ices.
Metals and metallurgy can be under materials or under minerals or both depending upon resource emphasis. In mineralogy, minerals/metals emphasizes their mineral origin, whereas materials/metals emphasizes their use in manufactured products.
Crystallography doesn't have a resource yet but is usually thought of in connection with protein structure, biochemistry, or mineral structure, geochemistry and petrology. For now I'd like to put minerals/crystallography. Again, both uses or more than two are within the flexibility of Wikiversity. For example, geochemistry/crystallography would emphasize solid solution series for various geochemistry settings. Proteins/crystallography would emphasize its use in understanding protein functioning.
What do you think? If no negative responses are stated, I'll probably start reorganizing. Alternatives are always possible and comments, questions, and criticisms are welcome. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 17:56, 29 March 2015 (UTC)