Talk:Geological history of Borneo

Review from Jeffrey

Hi Beth this is Jeffrey from regional geology class. Your page is quite interesting and organized but it may need a few amendments, apart from obviously filling in the empty sections and doing a spelling check (ophiolite is spelled wrongly in the overview section while magmatism is spelled as magnetism in Mesozoic subduction section, which makes a huge difference:p).

1) perhaps links to other wikipedia pages would help the readers to understand better, as not everyone has the basic knowledge to some of the geographical and geological terms here, such as kalimanton (i would not know where that is without looking it up in wiki or google) , ophiolite, tonalite, and maybe also Borneo to show the approximate current geographical position of the place (or maybe you can show that by creating a small inset diagram in your second diagram)

2) it seems that the sub-section 'Subduction Model for South China Sea Spreading' is one of the 3 models for Cenozoic south china sea extension. Therefore, i think it should be placed under the section 'Cenozoic south china sea extension' instead of 'Late Ceneozoic Magmatism and the Mount Kinabalu Intrusion'

3) the diagrams can be improved by more labeling and perhaps some more description in the caption. For example, the red line is not defined for in your second diagram (I'm guessing that it means to be the line of magmatic arc), and the meaning of blue area in your third diagram is also unknown. The subduction zone is also poorly mapped in the 2nd model of the third diagram, particularly the subduction boundary along the proto-south china sea.

4) I would suggest a comparison between the 3 models for south china sea extension, both the features, mechanisms and plausibility.

Cheers!

Jeffrey

Suggestions from Jupiter

Halo \0.0/

Here are some minor suggestions for your page:

1. You may want to add some links of other wiki pages, not only in your text, also under the subheading as main article if there is other page, which have a more detailed explanation of your content, Such as Mesozoica and subduction under your "Mesozoic subduction" section and Borneo on your whole page.

2. Some suggestions for your diagrams: (1) For "Ophiolite emplacement" Diagram, you may want to crop it in a fit size, enlarge that and move that below your text, which maybe more clear. (2) For "The three models for the spreading of the South China Sea northwest of Borneo", you may want to cut that into 3 diagrams and enlarge each of them.

3. it may be better if you can include a flow chart or annotated diagrams of the whole geological changes, which may be effective in presentation your whole page by summarize that on a single chart or the stages by diagrams.

jupmira104 (talk) last modified on 21 October 2016, at 09:52

Review from Skylar

Hello Beth! Skylar from your class =] I am surprised you are interested in Borneo, a place far away from Scotland, haha. I knew nothing about Borneo before reading your page. You did very well in explaining its long complicated geological history, and nice diagrams! Here are some comments for you.

1. Adding some Wiki links to the terms in your page may make it more reader friendly. For example, you can link geology terms like continent-continent collisions and ophiolite and places like Borneo and Sumatra, to their respective Wiki links. Such links can instantly refer readers to another page when they do not understand the terms, such that they do not need to wiki or google them. I think you may feel the coding quite difficult to deal with, like the links, superscript 2 in km2 and the titling. I suggest you referring the codes of other pages to find out how the coding works.

2. The diagrams are nice and clear in showing the regional setting. Some amendments may help improving them. I suggest simplifying the labels in the diagrams. For example, the labels in the first figure are quite lengthy. I think it would be better to put the description in the paragraph and just leave simple labels in the diagrams. And some labels are missing like the ‘Pacific Plate’ in the first figure. The model figures are nicely drawn but it would be better if you separate the models into three separate figures for clarity.

3. The flow of the content is easy to follow, despite the wrong placing of the part ‘Subduction Model’. I think you could add a map in the Overview part such that readers know the relative positions of those locations mentioned. Also, some paragraphs maybe too lengthy, like the ‘Mesozoic subduction’ one. It is easy to read if you break it into a few paragraphs. Lastly, I think a geological stratigraphy or geological timeline might be useful in showing the complicated geological history of Borneo. Geological units and events can be match in such timeline so that readers can have a clear overview on the history.

Keep the good work up!

Skylar - SkylYip (talk) 15:53, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

review from Jennifer

Hi Beth! Here are some suggestions:

1. Use complete word rather than abbreviation for the first appearance of the word, e.g. Southeast Asia but not SE Asia.
2. It's hard to read the words in the figures without clicking open it. I would suggest enlarging them to a scale which reader can read the words without the need to open the image. If you are worrying that the figures on the right do not fit the text after enlarging them, you may consider putting the figures right below the sections by adding |none| in the image code.
3. Some paragraphs are not cited or only cited once for the whole paragraph, e.g. 1st paragraph in Mesozoic subduction, 1st paragraph in Late Cretaceous – Cenozoic Sedimentation,and last paragraph in Extrusion model. Add the reference to each idea even if they come from the same paper.
4. I would suggest grouping some of the sub-sections under a main section. Rajang Group, Kinabatangan Group and Serudong Group can be the sub-sections of Late Cretaceous – Cenozoic Sedimentation; Extrusion model, Continental Rift Basin Model and Subduction Model as sub-sections under Cenozoic South China Sea Extension.
5. I see you have added the geological time before each main section title which makes me easy to follow. I suggest adding "Mesozoic" before "Ophiolite emplacement".

Jjyyu8 (talk) 18:12, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

review from Vincent

1) the diagram of Early Amalgamation from Gondwana is too small. 2) You may also put Rajang Group and Kinabatangan Group as well as Serudong Group in a point from at Late Cretaceous – Cenozoic Sedimentation, i am hard to trace it. or you may bold the name at the box od Late Cretaceous – Cenozoic Sedimentation.So it is easiser to trace. 3) Could you add some pictures of Rajang Group and Kinabatangan Group as well as Serudong Group only . I am surous about where thery are, so they can be the basins of sedimentation records. I can trace the Rajang Group in the yellow area of the diagram but confused of where Kinabatangan Group and Serudong Group are. --Hk vincentlai (talk) 14:41, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Review from Cloud

Hey Beth, I think your topic is quite interesting as it incorporates so many tectonic settings. Here are some suggestions for your page:

1. Similar to Jennifer and Vincent, I think sub-sections (e.g. 1.1,1.2, 1.3...) would help to organize your page better, especially for the three subgroups within late Cretaceous sedimentation. (Try using the pen tool and change the 'heading' part into 'sub-headings 1/2')
2. I think aligning your diagrams into the text parts you are referring to is important. For instance, the map you drawn for Early Amalgamation from Gondwana also took part in Mesozoic subduction. Similar goes to the 3 models at the last part of your Wiki page. Moreover, you may also add words like "Refer to diagram 1 or Please see diagram" to tell readers what part of the texts is relevant to the diagram.
3. Would there be any chance you can incorporate the stratigraphic sequences of different groups? As they should be quite relevant and you can illustrate better with them.

Keep it up! Cloudnstars (talk) 12:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)