Talk:El Tigre Fault

Argentina Low‑importance

	Argentina portal This article is part of WikiProject Argentina, an attempt to expand, improve and standardise the content and structure of articles related to Argentina. If you would like to participate, you can improve El Tigre Fault, or sign up and contribute to a wider array of articles like those on our to do list.ArgentinaWikipedia:WikiProject ArgentinaTemplate:WikiProject ArgentinaArgentine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:El Tigre Fault 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.

A fact from El Tigre Fault appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 November 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the El Tigre Fault in Argentina has an east-facing scarp up to 85 m (279 ft) high?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/November.

Wikipedia

Your page looks really nice. I like the section on controversy so you can explain some of the contradictory views. One thing I would change is making the black and white figure with the text a larger image. Right now you can't read the text at all unless you expand the image.

One other small point is that you might expand on why the particular fault is of importance during the introduction.

Adam — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aturn4000 (talk • contribs) 16:59, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sara, Your page is good. And her is what I think you should change: have a numbered figures. refer to the figures in the text. Sadeghm2010 (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The page looks great. The figures really draw you into the page. I would maybe play around with the placement of the figures though. Maybe break it up by alternating sides if you havent already tried that. It looks fine the way it is but its worth a shot. Also maybe think of moving the geology section below the different fault zone section. That may flow better after the introduction since the last sentence mentions the three sections it is broken into. There were also a few internal links you added which no page exists for so you may want to take those out. Maybe elaborate on why the area is of interest in the last section? Other than that, good job. Sosbor6 (talk) 02:52, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on El Tigre Fault. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121010112711/http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/south_america/gshap.php to http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/world/south_america/gshap.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]