Talk:Lower mantle

Review

ORGANIZATION (30%)

1) Were the basic sections adequate? If not, what is missing?
I would recommend add a section about mantle convection-- whole mantle convection or layered mantle convection.
2) Did the writer use subheadings well to clarify the sections of the text?
Yes
3) Was the material ordered in a way that was logical, clear, easy to follow?
Yes
CONTENT (50%)
4) Did the writer adequately summarize and discuss the topic? Explain.
Not fully, please refer to the word file I uploaded to canvas with specific comments
5) Did the writer comprehensively cover appropriate materials available from the standard sources? If no,
what's missing?
i. Spin transition on bridgmanite is not fully discussed.
ii. different proposed mantle compositions (depleted/futile pyrolitic/chondritic)is not fully covered.
please refer to the word file I uploaded to canvas with specific comments

CITATIONS (10%)
6) Did the writer cite sources adequately and appropriately? Note any incorrect formatting.
Yes
7) Were all the citations in the text listed in the References section? Note any discrepancies.
Yes
GRAMMAR AND STYLE (10%)
8) Were there any grammatical or spelling problems?
please refer to the word file I uploaded to canvas with specific comments
9) Was the writer's writing style clear? Were the paragraphs and sentences cohesive?
(Note relative importance of each set of comments. Content and organization are what is crucial to get right at this stage)
Yes.

---Hirooooooooo (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Response:
I would like to thank the reviewer for the very in-depth comment. I have reviewed both the comments above and the document. The suggestion for addition section discussing convection was considered and a small description was added discussing processes that could affect lower mantle convection. However, there is a separate wiki page on mantle convection which I could link to. I will also read up on the references provided.
Since there is a separate wiki page on mantle convection, I've included a section on the observed seismic heterogeneity under subduction zones and tectonic plates which has implications on mantle convection. I still need to add some references for this section. I've also made some minor edits clarifying some sections. However, there are some sections that I haven't had time to add, eg: the depleted/futile mantle composition. Darahok (talk) 05:43, 4 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

Welcome, and thank you for the contributions! When the course is complete it might be appropriate to rename the page to "Lower mantle (Earth)" per WP naming conventions of using title case. Also compare the title Transition zone (Earth) to Mantle (geology) where the latter is a general article on planetary geology and the former is specific to our planet. --mikeu ^talk 22:43, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

Incnis Mrsi tagged this page and Mesosphere (mantle) for a merger in October, but didn't start a discussion. Also, the tags don't choose which page to merge into, but the edit summaries indicate that this is the target. I agree, so I have modified the tags and I'm starting the discussion. The two articles deal with the same subject, but "lower mantle" is way more common in the scientific literature and textbooks than "mesosphere": Google Scholar searches give 4,490 results for "mesosphere" + "mantle" and 56,200 results for "lower mantle". I have been a geophysicist for decades and read God knows how many articles on the deep Earth, and I wasn't even sure what the mesosphere was. Also, the term "mesosphere" by itself almost always refers to the layer in the atmospere. RockMagnetist(talk) 02:15, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]