Talk:Misti/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 19:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, sorry for how long this is taking. This is a bit of a longer article, so I'll add comments section-by-section.

Extended content

"The name is...snow cover" A bit too many commas and clauses, maybe split into two sentences or add a (semi)colon.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"indigenous name is Putina" In which language?
Quechua, I guess, but I don't think the source says so explicitly. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"both names are a reference to how the volcano appears" How is "mountain that growls" referring to the volcano's appearance?
I've recast this sentence. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"El Volcán" Is this really a name or just an example of people referring to prominent landmarks that are the only ones of their kind in the area by generic nouns (eg "go past the church to get to the park")?
Source does not specify. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Sometimes chroniclers...Huaynaputina." The rest of the paragraph discusses etymology, so this is a bit out of place. is there a better place to mention this?
No, which is why it's there. Confusing mountains usually involves giving them the wrong name. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"sillar" What is sillar, and how is Arequipa's nickname relevant to the volcano here?
Deleted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"These dams have...on bridges" This whole part seems to me to be more relevant to an article on Arequipa than this volcano.
These dams however are at the foot of Misti, and potentially in danger from it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed you don't use Oxford commas; iirc, they're required by MOS, so they should be added throughout the article.
Actually, Oxford commas are a style matter that can vary from article to article. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'mm stop here for now and get through the rest later. AryKun (talk) 21:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"According to Cumin 1925" I'd change this to "According to the Italian geographer Gustavo Cumin"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Misti^[b]." Footnote should be after the period. Also, you have a fn within a fn; counting the sfn cite in the second, you end up with four levels of mouseover tags before you get to the actual citation.
No, these kinds of explanatory footnotes go after the term they are about, not just the next punctuation available. And citations can go in a footnote. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about the citations in the footnote, but the footnote within the footnote. I haven't seen those used ever, so just merge footnote a ("Which was...observatory.") into footnote b. AryKun (talk) 14:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I get it now. Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:47, 12 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"the high-elevation atmosphere" Either "the upper atmosphere" or "the atmosphere at such high altitudes", depending on what is intended.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You could just split this and the next clause into two sentences, dropping the semicolon.
Eh, I think this works better together. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When was Mt. Blanc station added? Also, "In its time" should be changed to "At that time" after the date for its establishment is added.
That was tough to source. You'll probably need to double check this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Physics observations" to "Observations of phenomena such as"?
That's a bit too unspecific, so wrote something else. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you move the images in the gallery to different points within the article where they'd be appropriate? I think having images at points within the article where they have context is better as a reader than just having them lumped together at the end. AryKun (talk) 08:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Note, I've expanded the article a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The Condesuyos province of the Inka empire" You mention the province of the Inca empire, but link to the modern Peruvian province.
Fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The mountain is visible from the sea." Is this really worth mentioning?
Aye, cause the sea is quite far away from Misti. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"southern Peru over Bolivia" maybe "southern Peru through Bolivia" instead?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"but poorly known" to "but most are poorly known"?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Several Peruvian volcanoes were active" to "Several Peruvian volcanoes have been active"?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Other Peruvian...the local populations." This really doesn't seem relevant to Misti to me; readers can just go to the article on the Andean CVZ if they want to know this.
I think it's useful context. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"It has been christened the Fuji of Peru." This doesn't seem relevant, especially coming from a hundred-year old travel book.
I've seen the claim more recently, so I think it fits. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"slopes with a nested" to "slopes and a nested"?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Scoria is linked at second mention.
Fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"volcanic plug/lava dome" Why the oblique?
'cause different sources call it differently. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"it is fumarolically active" Could do with a gloss in the text.
I think the link suffices. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The western rim...the southern." How is the western rim higher than the southern when it's the most heavily eroded side?
'cause erosion isn't the only thing that affects height. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Hijo de Misti" Any translation?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"hummocks" Gloss or link.
Glossed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Link quebrada.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Volcanic activity goes back" Volcanic activity where? In Peru, the CVZ, or Misti specifically?
Specified. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Link mya and add en-dashes. Also, although "9–4" and the like is perhaps the more logical way to write it, I think most people would still write it "4–9".
Don't see a mya to link, but added endashes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"emplaced" Any simpler ways to put this?
Not as far as I am aware. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"The Tacaza Arc is correlated to the Huaylillas Formation" What does this mean?
Explained. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"northwest-southeast trending" What does this mean?
Means that it goes from northwest to southeast. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"offsetting tephra deposits" Link tephra
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe gloss phenocryst in text.
It's already linked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"34,000–31,000 years ago" see above.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"at 6–15 kilometres (3.7–9.3 mi) depth" to "at a depth of 6–15 kilometres (3.7–9.3 mi)"?
I don't think that is better. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"last reactivated during the 2 ka eruption" Give some sort of range for how long ago that was, as you haven't actually talked about this eruption yet.
Did something else. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Link kiloare.
See Template talk:Convert; it's not supposed to display as "kiloare". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"place all 4,000–2,000 years" Do you mean "place every 4,000–2,000 years"?
Yes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"first last glacial maximum" Link's to a more recent LGM.
The term extends to older ones too. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
" >6,400" There's got to be a better way to write this.
Done, but I suspect that the words make it less, not more, clear. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"came to Chiguata to provide assistance, where black ash had fallen" The comma's misplaced. Depending on where it's supposed to be, there are two interpretations of this: she came to Chiguata and provided assistance in areas where black ash fell, or she came to Chiguata because black ash fell there. Reword to make whichever one of these is right clearer.
Recast. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"AD 1440–1470" You can cut the AD per MOS, it isn't ambiguous in this case.
Eh, I find it clearer. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"they waveforms" in footnote should be "their waveforms"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"towns such as Chiguata within 11 kilometres (6.8 mi)." to "other towns such as Chiguata are within 11 kilometres (6.8 mi)." if I understand the intent of the sentence correctly.
Changed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"within Arequipa, which however probably" to "within Arequipa; however, this probably"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"can fall much closer to the volcano" How is this a problem for Arequipa if they're closer to Misti?
Recast. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"300–800 °C (572–1,472 °F)" Too many sig figs in the conversion. Actually, you might need to check all the convert templates for this, I can see extra sig figs in a lot of them.
Did some. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"are found in river water" to "have been found in the river water"?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"volcanic hazards drew little attention by the Peruvian state" to "from the Peruvian state"?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"tutelary" Use a simpler word.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"and not a threat" to "and is not seen as a threat"?
Doneish. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"El Alto, Peru" Hide Peru in a pipe; it's obvious from context here.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"locations: On the volcanic plug, the northern" to "locations: on the volcanic plug, on the northern"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"enough that it could be seen" to "enough to be seen"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"some distance, and sulfur" Why an Oxford comma here?
So as to make clear to what this refers to. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"concomitant to" to "concomitant with"?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Temperatures decrease...per year." Clauses before and after the semicolon aren't related to each other.
Nope, the preceding sentence is about Arequipa. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"reaches 89.1 millimetres per year" Is this an average or maximum?
Clarified. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"on the summit mostly in the form of snow or hail as of 1910 " to "a 1910 study found most precipitation to be in the form of snow or hail"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'They are known as the "Misti zone"' They would refer to the plants themselves, reword.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"at about 3,900 metres (12,800 ft) elevation" "at an elevation of about 3,900 metres (12,800 ft)"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Polylepis species" to "Polylepis shrubs"?
No, they aren't shrubs. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"its finding site" Type locality instead? Finding site is a nonsensical phrase.
Changed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"the apu" Gloss what apu means, and mention what it's considered the apu of.
There is a link, and I don't think apus are of something. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"good sight on Misti" to "good view of Misti"?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"A group of converts...the volcano." When?
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"after an earthquake had destroyed Arequipa and planted a cross on the summit" Reads as the earthquake planting the cross.
Split. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"so-called capacochas" Why "so-called"?
capacocha means human sacrifice. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"and most spectacular sacrifice" to "and most spectacular sacrifice known". Also, seems somewhat morbid calling a human sacrifice spectacular in wikivoice.
Changed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"They included infants, children and adults" You said they were "of children", which implies exclusively kids, a paragraph ago.
Fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Putina close to Arequipa (probably Misti)" Another contradiction, you state that this most likely refers to Huaynaputina two sentences later.
"This" in the next sentence is the story, not the word "Putina". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"mountain sickness" Altitude sickness is a more appropriate term, no-one's getting sick of the mountain itself (hopefully).
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Who's John Biggar and why is mentioning him important? If the information's uncontroversial, you could just say that there's no source of potable water.
'cause it's the only source that I can find, and it's a primary one. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow that took forever, sorry for the delay again. I'll perform spot-checks and a source review after the comments above are addressed. AryKun (talk) 19:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is a "house mountain"?
My understanding is that the iconic mountain of a town, or at least the mountain most important to a town, is often called a "house mountain". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you gloss this in the article? AryKun (talk) 08:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Linked, apparently the German concept applies across languages. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"950 metres (3,120 ft)-835 metres (2,740 ft)" I can't figure out what this is. These should be in one convert template together; if the sources citing each length are different, just put both of them after it together.
Nah, for such contradictions I put each claim with its source. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then this shouldn't be presented as a range, but as "835 metres (2,740 ft) or 950 metres (3,120 ft)". In its current form, it's almost unreadable anyway.
"90 cubic kilometres (22 cu mi)-40 cubic kilometres (9.6 cu mi)." Same issue as above.
Did both. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Discrepancies between elevation...different datums." How are you citing the reasons for differences between measurements made in 2001 and 2021 to sources written 80–100 years before that? These might be talking about discrepancies more generally, but they can't be used for the recent measurements, they're just too outdated.
'cause this is a problem even today. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But that source can't verify that, since it was made nowhere close to today. I'm not comfortable with such an old source being used to source issues with studies conducted over 80 years afterwards; aren't there any more recent sources that discuss the same issue?

Not for Misti specifically, no. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you just remove the statement "Discrepancies between...different datums." then? I don't think sources written 100 years ago can be used to explain discrepancies in modern studies, and I find the linking of the two to be kind of OR. AryKun (talk) 19:39, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Commented out. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New towns linking to planned settles is an EGG.
I don't see it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd expect new towns to link to, well, new towns, not planned settlements. Planned settlements have nothing to do with being new, and most new towns aren't planned. Maybe just say "new planned settlements" instead if that's what they are and the sources say so? The other solution would be removing the link.
Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jo-Jo Eumerus I've collapsed all the comments I think have been addressed sufficiently, there's only a couple left that I've added further responses for. AryKun (talk) 12:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
References are reliable and used correctly; will pass now. AryKun (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed