Jump to content

Talk:Kīlauea/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 21:51, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

review

This is a very interesting article. Just a few prose nitpicks and a few questions, probably due to my lack of understanding:

lede

  • "a modest 300,000 to 600,000 years old" - is "modest" encyclopedic here?
Volcanoes live and die on million year scales, so yes. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Because it lacks a topographic prominence" - because it isn't high?
Shield volcanoes are unique in that they are long sloping "shield" shaped mastiffs instead of classical triangles. While you could still pretty clearly tell where the summits are on other shields, Kilauea is so flat that its summit looks more like a plain than a peak. It's not that it's not tall; it's that its slope is, overall, so low that it's hard to find a center. ResMar
  • "ROVs" - should you spell out before using initials? (Remotely operated underwater vehicle)?
Eh...spelled out it's clunky, and I assume people know what these are in colloquial usage, or will click the link if they do not and are so inclined. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "should explosive activity start anew the volcano would become much more dangerous" - so it's not explosive now? - what about "Ki-lauea's current eruption dates back to January 3, 1983"?
Explosive eruption vs. effusive eruption. One rains blocks of molten rock, the other spews out slow globs of lava. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
reply

This distinction is not clear in the lede. Readers shouldn't have to read through the piping to figure out what is going on. I think that perhaps I don't have the required knowledge to review this article. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I've added qualifiers. ResMar 16:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Setting

  • "that causes the hotspot effect." - what is the "hotspot effect"?
Switcharood. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
reply

I don't understand your comment above: Switcharood. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the sentence :) ResMar 23:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "has yet to breach the surface." - the earth's surface?
Breach the water surface and become aerial. ...volcanoes don't grow underground...
reply

So Mount St. Helens must breach the water surface? I get the idea you're not taking my concerns seriously. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiian volcanoes are located in the middle of the Pacific ocean, which means that they necessarily start as below-water seamounts, and grow up and out from there. St. Helens is on solid land and doesn't have to work up to the surface in that manner. Fun fact: Mauna Kea is taller than Mount Everett if taken from its oceanic base, and a bajillion times wider.
Added a qualifier. ResMar 16:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Thus it is the second youngest volcano" - this refers to Lo-?ihi Seamount?
Mhm. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
reply

What does "Mhm" mean?

Yes. I don't know what kind of an answer you want here! ResMar 23:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "continued Hawaiian activity and occasional explosive eruptions will continue to heighten Ki-lauea's summit and build up its rift zones" - can repetition of "continued/continue" be avoided?
Check. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
reply

What does "Check" mean since you don't appear to have addressed the concern? MathewTownsend (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, it must not have saved. ResMar 23:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Structure

  • "occasionally intermittent with volcanic ash products from explosive eruptions" - suggestion: with intermittent volcanic ash products from explosive eruptions?
Check. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
reply

What does "Check" mean since you don't appear to have addressed the concern? MathewTownsend (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I improved the sentence, take a look. ResMar 23:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "elongate" > elongated?
It works as an adjective: https://www.google.com/search?q=elongate&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official. :) ResMar 23:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1790 to 1934

  • "Explosive activity began on May 10" - I'm confused about what year
Added a qualifier. ResMar 16:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • "this makes its ecosystem both to invasive species and human development" - needs a verb - vulnerable? relatively safe?
added vulnerable. ResMar 16:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "distribution of volcanic products—a'a, pahoehoe, cinder, tephra, and other volcanic products" - is there a way not to repeat "products"?
Rearranged the sentence. ResMar 16:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ecosystems

  • "Rainfall there exceeds the maximum 1,000 mm (39 in) a year and it is classified as a "true" desert." - this is my rewording but I don't understand. How is it classified as a desert if the rainfall exceeds the maximum? - I'm not understanding something, or did I change the meaning? Because of the acid rain?
Deserts in the classical sense are gauged exclusively by rainfall. But it's pretty much a desert and colloquially referred to as such so shrug. ResMar 21:35, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a’e ferns" - not a typo, right?

Modern era

  • quote "something must be done" - needs a citation
I ripped this from another page it appears now that the source it quotes doesn't actually support the statement, so I'm retracting the quote marks. ResMar 21:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • USGS? - the United States Geological Survey? - need to put {USGS) after first mention.
Done. ResMar 21:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tourism

  • under "Tourism" - events don't seem to be chronological. First paragraph is more recent, next goes back to past but flows to present; third paragraph present.
Is this an issue? I wasn't sure how to organize this section, so the first paragraph is background for the rest of the section. I could probably work something out. ResMar 16:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've made some edits that you're free to revert.[1]

A wonderful and fascinating article. (On hold until my notes addressed.) MathewTownsend (talk) 15:37, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. I think someone else should review this article, since I don't understand your replies so far. I spent a great deal of time trying to understand it, I guess to no avail, as I don't know what you mean by several of your replies. MathewTownsend (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is what I get for getting bored of saying "Done" to everything. :/
I'm not going to be around this weekend, but I should be able to start going over this in depth on Monday or thereabout. ResMar 23:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:PERCENT, the percent symbol (%) is more commonly used in scientific or technical articles than the written form. Thus the article should probably use the symbol. Volcanoguy 00:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get back to this tomorrow. ResMar 04:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@VG I prefer spelling out percent, and since the MoS doesn't specifically require percentages as the marker, I'm allowed to cling to my stylistic preferences here. ResMar 21:34, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that means this isn't a proper science article since that what they use. Volcanoguy 06:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exacting MoS compliance is literally the furthest thing from my mind. ResMar 02:13, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(more)

  • " their death is evidenced by a set of footprints, listed on the National Register of Historic Places and presently preserved within the Hawaii Volcanoes National Park." - just not sure here. Is their death listed on the National Register or the set of footprints? I guess it's the footprints, but grammatically unclear, as the subject seems to be "death". Perhaps adding "evidenced by a set of footprints that are listed on the National Register..."? MathewTownsend (talk) 21:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done (little late, sorry). ResMar 04:12, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
    b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, summary style and list incorporation:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
    b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
    c. no original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
    fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    no edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    Pass!

Congratulations. Fine job! MathewTownsend (talk) 18:20, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kīlauea/GA1&oldid=1086319085"