Talk:Pine Island Glacier/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

1. Fair representation without bias:

2. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

3. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   None provided.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   None Provided.

4. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

There were some formatting errors, but I think the article is overall a very good article. ceranthor 22:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Your last sentence in the acceleration section. It would seem that this question can be explored more by describing the acceleration observed. Polargeo I encourage you to do so. That is where is acceleration greatest, is it propogating. This will help indicate whether it is a calving front-ice shelf or upstream induced phenomenon. I did the bathymetry for the Polar Freeze journey for T.Kellogg and T.Hughes.