Jump to content

Talk:Meidob volcanic field

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Meidob volcanic field/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ceranthor (talk · contribs) 15:21, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


I will review this. ceranthor 15:21, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Prose

[edit]
Lead
  • Mostly looks good. This one sentence reads a bit awkwardly, though: "but legends by local people imply that they witnessed volcanic eruptions in the field." Might be better to rephrase the "legends by local people" bit - I think the issue is the word "by".
    Did a change. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Name
  • "The term "Meidob" is derived from a Nubian language where peida means "slave".[2]" - Is it "the" Nubian language or "a" Nubian language? Also, not sure about the use of "where" here.
    I think it is the Midob language which is a Nubian language but the source does not explicitly say so. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm doubtful that this etymology is accurate. According to Werner, slave in Midob is peedi, not peida. And I have my doubts that this is sufficient for an etymological relationship. Other Nubian languages are probably out of discussion (slave is nogo in Kunuz and osshi in Nobiin, osh in Old Nubian). For me, Arkells guess is far too fishy to be kept as fact. So, wouldn't it be more appropriate to refer to the [Midob people] where the volcanic field derives its name from? And if a further etymology needs to be added, you could use the more recent comment from Werner: "The origin of the term 'Midob' is obscure, although Midob tribesmen mentioned in conversation that it goes back to an ancestor of the Midob called Ahmed al Adoob. Whether this etymology is acceptable and by what process this purported ancestor's name would lead to the term Midob, is not clear to me." (Werner 1993, p.13) Gruenman (talk) 16:46, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Midob people live in the Meidob area.[4]" - which is where exactly? A little more info would be useful to a lay reader (like myself :))
    Per the source it's the "Meidob Hills" which is how it refers to the hills formed by the volcanic field. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Geography and geomorphology
Geology
Eruption history

References

[edit]
General
  • Refs seem reliable and consistently formatted.
  • Earwig's tool checks out.
Notes

Images

[edit]

Good work overall. Should be easy to make the above changes and then I'll be happy to pass this. ceranthor 14:56, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Acted on these. I see that "Meidob people" is by some sources spelled "Midob"; does it make sense to standardize? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 20:45, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I think so. Otherwise these look good. Let me know when you standardize and then I'll do one last run-through before passing. ceranthor 20:51, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eruption history

[edit]

The date ranges in this section are incomprehensible.

  • What do the short dashes represent, and why?
  • Some dates are marked as BCE, others aren't. Are these others also BCE, or what?

Ehrenkater (talk) 17:08, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. The issue is that different sources use different date formats - I've explained a bit. The dashes are b/c these are two dates for the same eruption. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:38, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]