Jump to content

Talk:Aucanquilcha/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
GA passed SpinningSpark 22:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Spinningspark (talk · contribs) 23:14, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Lead

I'm generally ok with the lead, but it could do with just slightly expanding. I suggest that the reason Miño Volcano in singled out for mention is explained (is it the largest in the group?) and a few words, perhaps a new paragraph, on the rock types.

  • In retrospect, the only reason it was singled out is because it has a Wikipedia article. I've backed it out. I've added some material about the composition as well.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
infobox
  • The date of the last eruption is uncited, and the fact is not in the body of the article
    Citation is now in.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:27, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Regional setting
  • Is cu mi/Gs a standard unit in this field? It just strikes me as perverse to to quote cubic kilometres (an SI based unit) as per the very non-SI millenium, but then use Gs with the imperial measure of cubic miles. This comment applies also to numerous other sections.
    This was an issue with the {{Convert}} template; now it should display the normal time unit.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:33, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Local setting
  • "During the Cumbre Negra stage, a pyroclastic flow occurred..." This is the first mention of Cumbre Negra stage. It should either be explained here, or linked to a suitable section - in this article or elsewhere.
  • "flank vent". This term is not explained, please wikilink if possible. In Shield volcano the term is wikilinked to Lateral eruption.
  • "Redondo stage", unexplained term
  • minor pyroxene". What does minor mean in this context? I'm not seeing an explanation at the pyroxene article. Also, the space between "+" and "minor" should be removed for consistency.
  • "There is evidence of magma mixing and mingling. Rocks have a porphyritic texture". Is the mixing and mingling connected with the porphyritic texture? If so, this could be made more explicit, eg "The porphyritc texture of the rocks is evidence of magma mixing and mingling", if not, it may be best to have a paragraph break between the sentences. Either way, it needs clarifying.
    Links added and clarification is in as well. The sources didn't explicitly state that the porphyric texture was a product of mixing, so I've split up the paragraphs to alleviate any WP:SYNTH concerns.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:52, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Eruptive history
  • "centralization of the vents". Unclear what this means.
    The source was not terribly clear, either. I did change the statement to another one that is more understandable.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:04, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aucanquilcha cluster
  • pyroxene is linked for a second time
  • "...even if the avalanche deposit is buried..." Suggest that "but the avalanche deposit may be buried..." might be better.
  • The wikilink to agglutination does not seem to be relevant.
  • Miño Volcano. Why is this hatnoted at the top of the section? It insn't really relevant to the whole section. Wouldn't it be better to just wikilink it where it occurs in the text? It is a terribly short article.
  • "these two volcanos were probably one volcano before alteration set in". Alteration is wikilinked to Mineral alteration. It's hard to see how changes in mineral composition can split a volcano in two.
  • The term shelf is linked to Wiktionary, but they don't seem to have an appropriate definition. It's very surprising that we don't have an article for such a basic topographic feature.
    Delinked, rewritten, changed to a plain link and removed the hatnote, removed the alteration bit since the source doesn't explicitly state why they are split now, "shelf" appears to be a synonym for "tableland" so linked that instead.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:17, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aucanquilcha proper
  • Why does "blocky" wikilink to the ʻAʻā section instead of the Block lava flow section of the Lava article?
  • The age of the lava flows ranges from..." Why is this sentence in the paragraph concerning fumeroles? It seems more appropriate to the beginning of the section.
    The first was a problem with the redirect; I've repointed the redirect to the more appropriate source. I've moved the second sentence.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:24, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Glaciation and hydrology
  • "The Quebrada de Chaigüire originates at the foot of Aucanquilcha" From the context, I'm guessing this is a river, but it could be read as being a glacier, or even a road. In general, the Spanish names in the whole section make it difficult for an English reader to tell whether the features named are rivers, lakes etc. The text could be a bit more helpful in that respect.
    Added English terms to all the Spanish worded features.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:01, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Human activity and mining
  • "The last mining activity on the mountain was reported in 1994", suggest "The last reported mining activity on the mountain was in 1994"
    Changed.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:04, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Altitude and habitation
  • The altitude given for the sulfur mine is not in agreement with the altitude given in the previous section. Also, the conversion into feet is a suspiciously round number (17,500) which leads me to suspect that the source gives this number in feet, and that the conversion is actually the other way round into metres. If that is the case, then the metres figure (5,334) is overprecise. SpinningSpark 18:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    There seems to be some disagreement in altitudes (<OR>perhaps because the mine spans several metres of altitude?</OR>) but most sources say 5950m and the lone source supporting the other number does not seem to be extraordinarily strong, so I went with the lower number. The conversion was indeed the other way around; I've fixed it now.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:23, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to come back at you on a couple of issues. The units for lava flow rates are still not consistent. Cubic kilometres per millenium is being given in full on each occurence, but cubic miles per millenium is being abbreviated to cu mi/ka. They should both be treated the same, either in full or abbreviated. Perhaps the best solution would be to give both in full on first use with the abbreviations in brackets. I could just declare this not to be a GA requirement and pass it anyway, but I also have a question about the ka abbreviation. I had not previously come across this, is it normal in this field? It isn't consistent with mya which uses y for years. It's certainly rare enough to wikilink to kiloannus on first use. On the shelf/table change, to my mind a table is a landform that is generally flat and raised above the surrounding area, a shelf is generally flat and raised above the adjacent land on one side, but below it on the other. If you are taking your information solely from our Wikipedia article, note that it is unreferenced. SpinningSpark 18:22, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Spinningspark: I've decided to spell out the flow units, at least - the surface and length units should be accessible enough on their own and there does not seem to be consistent usage of ka versus millennium versus kiloyear. Mya is fairly consistently used and is linked at the first use so I decided to leave it in. As for the shelf/table thing, the source indicates a mostly flat structure so I'd leave it at "table" (there is also "platform" but platform (geology) has a wholly different meaning).Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed mya is in common use. I have come across this many times. SpinningSpark 22:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA passed SpinningSpark 22:20, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Aucanquilcha/GA1&oldid=690979032"