Talk:Cerro Blanco (volcano)

Feedback for GA article nomination

This article has been nominated for Good Article status. As a newbie to the GA process, I did not want to initiate a formal review because I do not currently feel competent to do so, yet I wanted to help out by offering a few general observations which I hope may be of use. (Feel free to ignore anything I say as I do not bring a Wikipedian GA expertise to the topic!)

My over-riding impression of this article is that it has been written in a far too technical language. The editor(s) need to be congratulated for their enthusiasm in bringing their expertise in their subject to Wikipedia, and this article should be a valuable addition to the encyclopedia. However, whether the content is correct or not - and I am sure that it is correct - I simply found myself unable to retain understanding of the article's main points, and I never got to looking at the citations.

Please consider simplifying the article as well as using a much less technical language which will allow a non-specialist to understand the salient points. There are too many wikilinks to technical terms which the user will need to understand before the sentences make sense. I suspect this article has been written by a graduate or post-graduate geologist with a great expertise and enthusiasm for the subject, and that's fantastic. But for GA status it really needs to be written more simply, with inline citations being used to enable further information to be obtained.

If it helps, try imagining yourself as a journalist, writing a piece for the National Geographic magazine. Lots of knowledge - good communication - getting the story across - winning audiences.

In a number of places I found the style of English quite broken, and its extreme scientific complexity did not aid comprehension. e.g.

• Cerro Blanco has been active for the last eight million years with several ignimbrites.
• This unit is constructed on dacitic–trachyandesitic volcanites 9–7 mya old and an igneous-metamorphic granitic basement containing orthogneiss, quartz of Neoproterozoic-early Paleozoic age, containing paleozoic mafic to ultramafic volcanic inclusions.
• Minor bimodal–mafic volcanic centres during the Pleistocene–Holocene include systems in the Pasto Ventura, Salar de Carachi Pampa and Volcán Negro Peinado areals.
• The Cerro Blanco area is also characterized by surface features including mega ripple marks formed by gravel, among the most extreme on Earth. These are formed from aeolian processes acting on local ignimbrites, including saltation of fine grains and sand during wind.

Maybe the last sentence could be re-written something like this:

• Some of the surface geological features found in the Cerro Blanco area are amongst the most extreme on Earth. In particular, giant ripple marks can be observed here, and have been likened to some found on Mars. Known as mega ripple marks, they were formed by wind action which blew fine particles of sand and gravel into undulating fields of ripples, each ripple being spaced widely apart from the next.

I hope this gives a useful starter for action. Parkywiki (talk) 00:57, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

• I've rewritten some of the problem bits you pointed out.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:36, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

That's good to hear, although I do think each paragraph still could do with considerably more simplification. (It's never nice taking factual information away, but sometimes it can be rather over-power the main thrust of an article). Keep up the good work. Regards. Parkywiki (talk) 21:44, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cerro Blanco (volcano)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Would like to help with this as well when we are at it. Sainsf <^>_{Feel at home} 18:33, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

• Sure, @Sainsf:. Take note that I didn't pass this article through GOCE so verbiage will probably need some scrutiny here.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Alright, so here are my comments: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:05, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Lead

• Known as "Robledo" in which language?
• it is a caldera located Omit "a caldera", it is redundant.
• in a depression Calderas are depressions, so this should be redundant. Also, an explanation of caldera in a few words would be really helpful.
• less well defined caldera to the south and with several lava domes. "well-defined", remove "with"
• Every para should not start with the volcano name, variety is appreciated. Try something like "The caldera" at times.
• up to one metre and are separated by distances up to thirty metres convert templates
• Unlike dunes they do not Comma before "they"
• have been compared to Martian ripple marks By whom?

Regional setting

• where since the Eocene volcanic activity occurs –> where volcanic activity dates to the Eocene
• north of 25°; south of 25° "southern latitude"
• a rising of the arc "a rise in the arc"
• What are pyroclastic and subduction geometry?

Local setting

• Several duplicate links from now on, use this tool to fix them User: Ucucha/duplinks
• Nevado Tres Cruces lies in the west and Nevado Ojos del Salado lies southwest to the west, to the southwest.

• In Pre-Holocene is it rosa white or white rosa?

@Sainsf: Got most of these things; for the Martian ripple marks, would it be OK to mention" geologists" since the papers are written by them? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:37, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 16:49, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

@Sainsf: Got these other things as well.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:39, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, glad to promote this. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:05, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Additional sources

Some additional sources that could be used. Especially to settle the age and identity of the Purulla and Medano ignimbrites, some sources consider them separate and others as the same, and the dates also vary. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:12, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

This one. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:11, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

In case we want to mention that pumice fell out from the volcano. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:29, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

For discussing remotely observed appearance. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:48, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not clear if El Viejo is part of Cerro Blanco, but if it is then it should be added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:44, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Cerro Blanco (volcano)

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Kept buidhe 17:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I have just done a large rewrite of Cerro Blanco (volcano), to give it pagenumbers and installing the most recent literature. As the new text has almost nothing in common with the old one beyond the lead section, I'd like to get input on whether the new text still qualifies as a Good Article under the criteria. In particular, the paragraphing and the comments I've placed in the source need reviewing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:13, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Okay I read through it and it seems pretty good. A few comments:

• Some more pictures would be nice, but I assume we don't have any. Found it a little hard to find it on the infobox picture. Wonder if it could be marked or circled.

  Aye, there aren't that many freely licenced files of the volcano as it's so remote. I'll see if I can annotate the image somehow. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Feel it could do with some more wikilinks to some specialist terms. Tephra and caldera is only linked in the lead and ignimbrite is linked in the lead and then well after a few mentions. Even things like Country rock could benefit from a link. I see now I am at the end that you have added notes about these in the article.

  I've moved one of the notes up. Changed the linking for ignimbrite and added a link for country rock. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• The geography section starts with The caldera while the next section says Cerro Blanco ... consists of four nested calderas. So which is the caldera mentioned in the first section? If my understanding is correct I think it would be better to just say volcano or use its name.

  Yeah, it's confusing because many sources apparently are not aware of the existence of more than one caldera. I swapped "The volcano" in. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• They are formed But only one is mentioned so not sure how they fits in.

  That's because "they" refers to the caldera walls, not the caldera. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• A site southeast of the Robledo caldera is known as Robledo. This seems vague to me. What is meant by site?

  The map is not really clear on this point. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• A map would be nice. It gets confusing following all the similar names.
• One of the most spectacular aeolian landscapes of Earth is found at Cerro Blanco Of Earth seems a bit unnecessary and makes this appear quite peacocky.

  Removed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• where a field of large ripples covers an area of 8 square kilometres this lost me

  Rewritten, is it clearer now? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• while a role of the bedrock structure or the size of the material is controversial This is sort of left hanging. Does it need some further

  I dunno, there is apparently disagreement between two researchers. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Is there a reason why a link to commons is wedged between two paragraphs?

  Probably an artifact of how that section was written. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• have been recorded in July What year?

  It doesn't appear to be a specific year. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• which only crops out close to is that right grammatically?

  Rewrote this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• and is also known as the first cycle ignimbrite. Don't quite follow. Is this what this was called, is it a common name for am event or is it something else. It doesn't seem to tie in with the start of the sentence

  It's the name used in several sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• there is no agreement whether the Robledo Caldera is the source and the volcano-tectonic depression northeast of Cerro Blanco has been proposed as a source These clauses don't quite fit as worded

  I've split that sentence. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• A major future eruption would put local communities to the south at risk. The body almost says the opposite, that the area is sparsely populated.

  The body also says Also, pyroclastic flows could through narrow valleys reach the Bolsón de Fiambalá valley 50 kilometres (31 mi) south of Cerro Blanco, where many people live. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

• Not quite sure what note k is getting at. Are you saying it is a different Cerro Blanco?

  The reason why I mention it is because it has the same name and is in a geographically correct position - a point reinforced by Penck 1920 (OCLC 27914696). However, nobody more recent has drawn a connection between this event and Cerro Blanco, which is why I put it in a note. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Not all required in a Good Article and all pretty minor. AIRcorn (talk) 08:24, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

@Aircorn: Replied. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Seems good to me. Will wait to see if anyone else has any comments. If no one else does I will keep it listed. AIRcorn (talk) 05:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Red links

May I ask why the red links were removed? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:16, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I honestly thought the red links might hinder this article's appearance in the TFA (although apparently I still left some red links which did not have any counterpart in other Wikipedias). Should I restore them, though? Vida0007 (talk) 09:29, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Probably good asking @TFA coordinators about this, since I don't know about the TFA redlinks either. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:04, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't think we would want red links in the blurb, but that's easy to avoid. I don't think we have a policy on redlinks in the actual TFA. I avoid having red links in my own FAs, but that's my personal preference, not policy. Coincidentally, I was thinking of running this at TFA in January, do you have any issues with that? If so please let me know asap, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:40, 11 DecJo-Jo Eumerusember 2022 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus and Vida0007: forgot to ping Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:00, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Nah, no particular objections. I see the need to avoid redlinks in the blurb (although I don't care, personally), but if it isn't policy to avoid redlinks in the article, then I'd say we ought to restore them. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:22, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus I'll leave that to you, probably schedule for midmonth Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:04, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak: I see. Glad that you also want to run this article at TFA for next month. And thank you for the clarification regarding redlinks as well. @Jo-Jo Eumerus: feel free to restore the redlinks, and I would like to apologise for the confusion that this caused. Vida0007 (talk) 20:51, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Language

The use of English (Commonwealth or US) is not consistent - 'centimetres/metres/kilometres', 'centre(d)', 'vapour', 'coloured' vs 'gray', 'archeological', 'outside of', 'sulfide' for example. As the Commonwealth English is dominant, I'll edit for that. Maybe a banner here on the talk page saying which version is used would be helpful? Stronach (talk) 09:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Excellent article, by the way - very interesting indeed. Thanks to all involved. Stronach (talk) 09:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

That's mostly b/c English is my second language. It's supposed to be Commonwealth English. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)