Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Huaynaputina/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 10 June 2021 [1].

---

Huaynaputina

Nominator(s): Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:31, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

OK, the first nomination didn't work out but at least one editor who had raised concerns back then appears to have been satisfied by changes performed at Peer Review, so I am trying again. This article is about a rather unimpressive-looking volcano in Peru which in 1600 had a major eruption. This eruption devastated the surrounding region and caused worldwide climate change, including one of Russia's worst famines. Pinging participants of the PR, these mentioned there and of the previous FAC: @Gog the Mild, Iridescent, Femkemilene, ComplexRational, Fowler&fowler, MONGO, Ceranthor, SandyGeorgia, AhmadLX, Heartfox, Buidhe, and Z1720: Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:31, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

• Image review licensing looks good (t · c) buidhe 04:01, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Comments by Fowler&fowler

• Making a placeholder for myself. Won't say much for now beyond smoothing the language in the early sentence: "Part of the Central Volcanic Zone of the Andean Volcanic Belt, it is the product of the subduction of the oceanic Nazca tectonic plate beneath the continental part of the South American tectonic plate." Why so cumbersome? Why not something like:

• "Lying in the Central Volcanic Zone of the Andes, it was formed when the oceanic Nazca Plate subducted under the continental South American Plate and its molten contents were forced up?"

• Notes: this is the lead. Its language should be accessible and explain the science easily. "Central Volcanic Zone" redirects to a section of the AVB, so no need to repeat. No need to explain either that the SA plate might have an oceanic half, but some clue should be given of its birth (without going into the convection in the mantle). More later. Good to see this. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

• Hmm. This is better, but the past tense is problematic (subduction is still occurring and Huaynaputina still exists and still could erupt again). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

• Would something like, "Lying in the Central Volcanic Zone of the Andes, it has been formed by the subduction of the oceanic Nazca Plate under the continental South American Plate and by the former's molten contents being forced up" be better? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

• Seems like I missed one other issue ... " and by the former's molten contents being forced up" isn't really how the process works. The article does not discuss this but the main process is the release of fluids by the downgoing slab into the overlying mantle, which causes the latter to melt. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

• OK, then how about, "Lying in the Central Volcanic Zone of the Andes, it has been formed by the subduction of the oceanic Nazca Plate under the continental South American Plate whose mantle in molten form has been forced up."? (i.e. without going into the finer details of the process at this stage, but then adding a sentence or two in an appropriate later section.) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 14:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

• That's in, minus the last sentence which isn't supported by the rest of the article (yet). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:51, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Second paragraph, lead

• During the Holocene,

• "During" has the meaning of "throughout," or "in the time of" and is more commonly applied to a time that has ended.

• Better in my view: "In the Holecene ..."

• Witnessed by people in the city of Arequipa,

• Arequipa was established in 1540, and after 60 years, it was most likely still a colonial settlement.

• Better in my view: the "town of" or "the settlement of" (later on we say "Arequipa Metropolitan Area" so people will know soon enough that it is a city now.)

I think that by contemporary definition it would be considered a "city". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

• this eruption measured 6 on the Volcanic Explosivity Index

• This index was not around then and is quite likely based on historical reconstructions

• Better in my view: this eruption has been computed to measure 6 on ..."

• infrastructure a

• "infrastructure" is a modern word (ca. 1920s or 30s), with its meaning these days including power-plants, highways, airports, ports, dams, railroad tracks and whatnot.

• Better in view: "the foundations of buildings" (if that is what is meant; if not, perhaps you can explain a little more what is)

• It's a bit more the modern meaning, not simply architecture. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

• economic resources

• This too is vague in the context of a relatively new colonial settlement.

• Better in my view to mention the most salient resources by name.

• I don't think it's that much specified beyond "agriculture". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

• The eruption had significant effects on Earth's climate; temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere decreased, and millions of tons of acid were deposited. Floods, famines and cold waves resulted in numerous places in Europe, Asia and the Americas. The climate disruption caused social upheaval in countries as far away as Russia and may have played a role in the onset of the Little Ice Age.

• There are some coherence issues here: "millions of tons of acid," whose origin and effect are unexplained, appear in the middle of climate. Social upheavals appear between cold waves and the Little Ice Age.

• Better in my view: The eruption had a significant impact on Earth's climate: temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere decreased; cold waves affected places in Europe, Asia and the Americas; and the climate disruption may have played a role in the onset of the Little Ice Age. Floods, famines, and social upheavals resulted.

• (Note semi-colons are allowed in lists, especially ones with internal commas.) If the eruption really did have such an impact, then it is likely that floods, famines, and social upheavals were more widespread than in a few countries we are able to list. Also, this was a violent physical event; it is a situation for which we can–without stylistic worries–use the word "impact" in its figurative meaning.

• That is probably a better formulation, yes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Third paragraph, lead

• Huaynaputina has not erupted since 1600. There are fumaroles in its amphitheatre, and hot springs occur in the region, some of which have been associated with Huaynaputina.

• Probably better if second Huaynaputina ---> "this volcano." and "This volcano" in the following sentence ---> Huaynaputina

• lies in a remote region, where there is little human activity.

• Better in my view to make the clause restrictive: i.e. "lies in a remote region in which there is little human activity."

• Still, there are about 30,000 people living in the surrounding area, with another 1 million in the Arequipa metropolitan area.

• "Even so" is probably more precise than "still," or "Although H. lies in a remote region, there are ..." (but this is not a biggie; I use "still")
• "Surrounding area" can mean "immediately surrounding area," which can be confusing; better in my view: there are about 30,000 people living in its proximity, and another 1 million ..."

• That's done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

• If an eruption similar to the 1600 event occurred, it would likely lead to a high death toll and cause substantial socioeconomic disruption.

• occurred--> were to occur
• likely--> quite likely. (Your last volcano article was written in British/Commonwealth English which shuns the adverb "likely," a relatively recent Americanism, preferring "very likely." In this instance, the more modest "quite likely" is probably better. (Note: I tend to use only "likely" myself, though usually in informal situations.)

Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

That's the lead. I hope I haven't made any typos. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

• Hi Fowler&fowler, is there more to come? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Source review

• Text-source integrety okay per previous FAC. I did noticed two more citations with improper name formatting. In FN 151, van den is part of the surname. In FN176 there is a double surname again formatted as a non-Spanish surname. Check if that is consistent throughout. FN160 seems dead. FemkeMilene (talk) 11:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

  @Femkemilene:Corrected, with the catch that I don't know much about the formatting of Spanish (sur)names. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

• @Femkemilene: Should I take this as a full source review and as a pass? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

  Yes, this is a pass :). Should have said explicitly. FemkeMilene (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

AhmadLX

• I still think a number of technical terms need to be explained a little. Holocene, for example, should be described; something like "Holocene, the current geological epoch, ...". I will list others as I go through the article.

  Thanks for that, AhmadLX. I've added a note for Holocene. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

• "The Peruvian Geophysical Institute announced in 2017 that Huaynaputina would be monitored by the Southern Volcanological Observatory." Any latest information on this? Did they do so or just said and forgot it afterwards;).

  Well, this is an odd one. Google News has both an article in 2020 saying the SVO will be ready in February 2021 but earlier articles that say it already exists. This one implies it already exists. Not sure how to resolve this. I've added the seismic monitoring part, though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

• Andes not linked at its first instance.

  Isn't the lead link enough? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay fine.

• "Huaynaputina lies at an elevation of about 4,850 metres (15,910 ft)." This is vague. Is its base at that elevation (as "lies" would suggest)? Or the highest point on the rim? Or the floor of the amphitheatre? Should be changed to something like "The summit of Huaynaputina lies at an elevation of about 4,850 metres (15,910 ft)."

  The source does not specify and none of the others I've seen discusses this aspect. I am guessing that the unusual morphology of the volcano makes it hard to assign it a height. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

This one says "Summit Elevation 4850 m (15912 ft)".

Hmmm. That source does not explain how it comes to that conclusion and the last digit (0) makes me wonder if they are approximating. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

It is the very source that you've used in the article to support the elevation thing.

Yes, but as I've said this volcano does not quite have a "summit" so I am wary of interpreting it as such. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:47, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

• Tephra, Speleothems: short description.

  Added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

• "The duration of the eruption is not well constrained but may have lasted up to 12–19 hours.[94] The event ended on 6 March with ash fall;" What was happening between 20 February and 6 March?

  Added a sentence, but I invite suggestions on how to reduce the two mentions of "ash fall". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Maybe something like "The event continued with earthquakes and ash fall for over/about two weeks and ended on 6 March."?

Yeah, that's better; implemented it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• "It has been proposed as a marker for the onset of the Anthropocene." Important term; short description.

  I admit, the source there does not bother to actually state an explicit definition of the term and its importance; it's more like several allusions. Do you have a proposed explanation? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I think the controversy regarding the exact starting point of the epoch is not relevant here. We can just brief that it is a period in Earth's history in which human impact on global climate has been considerable. This can be helpful.

I agree that the controversy doesn't matter, but even from the source currently used it doesn't seem like everybody defines it as "a period in Earth's history in which human impact on global climate has been considerable." Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• I don't think you need links for crops and livestock.

  Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• "...while in Moquegua children were reportedly running around and women screaming." This has nothing to do with "Religious response".

  True, but I don't see a better place for it and it's kind of important. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:03, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

IMO, it is completely trivial. People scream in every disaster. There is nothing unusual about it to warrant a mention here. If people didn't scream and run around in such an event, that would be something of a note.

I am going to disagree on this one. I think that sentence helps underscore that this was an actual human tragedy rather than a statistical pattern. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• "56.59 million tons Global [200]". [200] cites Gao et al. 2008 for the value. I couldn't find anything on Huaynaputina there.

  No, but Gao et al. 2008 points to this database which has the value. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• "The Huaynaputina eruption[133] decreased the amount on solar energy reaching Earth by about 1.9 W/m2." Please add % drop.

  The source doesn't mention a percentage and I am kind of iffy of applying WP:CALC here; insolation variations while small are non-trivial. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

• Unlink Iceland, Canada, Taiwan, California (I'm not sure about the other US states but this one is certainly well-known), Kazakhstan, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Switzerland, England, Denmark, Norway, Ireland, Latvia, Croatia, France, Germany, Italy, Scotland, Sweden, Finland, Poland, Taiwan (again), Thailand, Japan, Korea, Nepal. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 15:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:52, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

@AhmadLX:Is there any other problem that needs addressing? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• Although I believe that several of my concerns were dismissed through unconvincing arguments (both here and in PR), I, nonetheless, think that this now meets the criteria. so I support. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 15:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

HF

Will take a look at this soon. Might claim for 5 points in the WikiCup. Hog Farm _Talk 02:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

• The Quechua name of Waynaputina from the infobox should be mentioned in the names section

  Removed it pending a source as I can't find anything endorsing that spelling. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• I'm not entirely for sure what the value of link to List of volcanoes in Peru in the infobox is

  For people who want to know more about Peruvian volcanoes? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• Is the redirect El Misti the correct link in the context of " Other volcanoes in this zone from northwest to southeast include Sara Sara, Coropuna, Ampato, Sabancaya, El Misti, Ubinas, Ticsani, Tutupaca and Yucamane"?

  Yes, it's a common name for that volcano. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• "The event continued with earthquakes and ash fall for about two weeks[82] and ended on 6 March;[5] the air was clear of ash from the eruption on 2 April 1600 - is the " an error, or is it an unclosed quote?

  An error. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the Huayruro Project began in 2015 and aims to rediscover these towns" - Any update on this?

  Not that much, and what little there is is a bit too specific I think. It's more about the towns than the volcano. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• While the flora of the volcano is mentioned, fauna don't seem to be. Even if wildlife is not present on the volcano in significant numbers, I feel like that should be mentioned.

  The problem is that there is no source definitively discussing fauna in the context of Huaynaputina. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• The external link is dead and should be removed or archived. If it doesn't add anything significant, just remove it.

  Removed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• I didn't see where the 500,000 age of rock figure from the infobox appears in the body; I may have missed it.

  It's not based on anything, just typical infobox OR. I've removed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

• Not all of the non-English sources state which language they are in; this should be added for all non-English sources.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

That's it from me, I think. Hog Farm _Talk 21:58, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

@Hog Farm:Replied to queries. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Supporting on WP:FACR #1a, 1b, 1d, 1e, 2a, 2b, 2c, and 4, with the understanding that the article will be updated in the future if studies on fauna on the volcano are performed. Did not check other criteria. Hog Farm _Talk 17:39, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

OpposeSupport from TRM

• "is a stratovolcano in" vs "Huaynaputina is a large volcanic crater" - as a non-expert these two appear to contradict one another. You then say it has "an outer stratovolcano" rather than is a stratovolcano. I'm very confused.

  I've reduced it to just "volcano". An unqualified "stratovolcano" is indeed misleading, as Huaynaputina looks quite different from a regular stratovolcano. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the Holocene[a], Huaynaputina" horrible footnote placement.

  Moved it to after the comma, but I am not sure what other means there is to explain this piece of jargon. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "to measure 6 on the" this gives no indication to non-experts as to the severity.
• "The eruption had a " also.

  I've re-cast the paragraph that these two comments pertain to to put this line at the end; the other sentences explain the impact more clearly for non-specialists. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "affected places in Europe" places reads odd to me.

  Rewrote this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• Did it kill anyone?

  Added this information. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "its amphitheatre, and" you footnote the previous jargon term but wikt this one, and I know what an amphitheatre is in the Roman sense, but certainly not in the volcanic sense. Why the different approach to jargon?

  Mainly because amphitheatre isn't the kind of term that you can find a footnote-able explanation for; it's just a shape. I've put a somewhat better explanation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "with Huaynaputina. Huaynaputina lies" repetitive.

  How did I miss that? Replaced. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "remote region, where there" no comma required.

  Removed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "there are about 30,000 people living in " -> "about 30,000 people live in"

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "with another 1 million" ->" and around one million"

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "monitored ... monitoring" repetitive.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "View of the crater and part of the nearby valley." fragment, no full stop required.

  Removed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "(15,900 ft) [1]" no space before references.

  Sorry, but I don't know how to fix that. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• Huge table of contents creates masses of whitespace at the start of the article.

  I'll ask for assistance on WT:FAC; I tried to change this but it didn't work. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "was given to" by whom? Locals? Officials?

  We don't know. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "The volcano El Misti was sometimes confused" in what sense? They look like each other in books? Or they're misrecognised when looking out to the distance?

  Geographers have sometimes called one volcano with the name of the other. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "with volcanic explosivity index of 6+" I guess you mean "6 or greater", or is there a category called 6+? Still not sure what this means contextually.

  The former, which I've added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the Moquegua Region of" is that a formal title? It redirects to "Department of Moquegua"....

  Yes, that's the formal title. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "The city Moquegua " -> "The city of Moquequa"

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "4,850 metres (15,910 ft)" using different accuracy to infobox here.

  Matched the infobox to this; since it's not a mountain peak we cannot be very precise with it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "400-metre (1,300 ft) deep.[9] This horseshoe-shaped[19] structure opens eastwards[20] and ..." perhaps just aesthetics but I find it very jarring to read through all these interspersed references. I'm certain our readers will be okay with them being grouped at the end of sentences for such mundane facts.

  I've simplified this one a bit, but the drawback of grouping is that folks need to check several references at once to verify a given statement. I am not sure if that is an improvement. Regardless, if I may, I'd like to leave the current citation format in place until everybody has reviewed the content; as I found out with Laguna del Maule (volcano) fixing any content issue is harder with grouped references. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• I mean "margin[15] of a rectangular[22] high plateau[15] that" is just too much.

  That one's fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "by ash about 2 metres (6.6 ft) thick" ->"by about 2 metres (6.6 ft) of ash"?

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "600 m (0.37 mi) " I would stick with converting to feet, not many people recognise miles as a unit above the ground.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• Dunes is linked to the ones made of sand, is that what you mean?

  Yes. Sand, tephra, not really much of a difference. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Another southeastward-opening landslide scar" was there another such landslide I missed?

  You didn't miss anything, we don't have information on this other landslide beyond the fact that it left a scar so the article doesn't say more. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• ""about 400-metre (1,300 ft) wide " not adjective, 400 metres.
• Same: 200-metre (660 ft) wide.

  Done and done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• And suddenly back to spelling out units?

  Hmm, I think they all are? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

  Nope. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

  OK, I got this now. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "as a maar" why isn't this explained?
• "a phreatomagmatic eruption" likewise.
• "a Plinian eruption in" and this.
• "Dacitic dykes crop out ..." this whole sentence is pretty much beyond me.

  Added footnoted explanations. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

That takes me to the Geology section. The biggest concern here is the jargon and also not mad keen on all the crowbarred references. More to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Did these things. If I may, I'd like to ask that the current reference style stay until everybody has got a chance to review the content - as mentioned before, grouped references make it harder to solve a content issue. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the uplift of the Andes mountains and Altiplano plateau" the uplift of both?

  Yes; clarified in text. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "subduction is oblique, leading to strike-slip faulting"" unexplained jargon.

  Clarified the latter, I don't think that "oblique" is jargon? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "does not occur along the entire length" this reads odd, like it's saying it doesn't occur anywhere along the length of it.

  Honestly, I don't think that can be written differently. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Quaternary activity limited to the southern" what does that mean?

  Rewritten, does "Quaternary" need an explanation? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "300–500 m-thick (0.19–0.31 mi)" convert to ft.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "from the ignimbritic" what's that?

  Explained. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• What does "pre-existent" mean?

  Reworded these. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "from calderas. One such caldera" merge to avoid repetition.

  Tried that and every formulation was ambiguous. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "has a similar structure as " similar to not similar as.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Tambo graben[50]"" what's a graben?

  Explained. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "slip faults. The faults "' repetitive.

  As before, it becomes ambiguous without the repetition. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "and recent seismic" what timeframe constitutes "recent"?

  Put "historical" instead. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "they share a magma" link magma first time.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "are dacites, which" overlinked.

  De-overlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "which define a calc-alkaline,[55] potassium-rich suite[56] sometimes described as adakitic" lost on me, completely.
• "contain rhyolite inclusions[56] and a rhyolite matrix.[58] Andesite" likewise.

  I see, but I don't think thes ones can be trivially explained, especially since they are about composition which is really only of interest to specialists. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• 'The Huaynaputina pumices' the?
• "have a white colour" is "are white" the same thing?

  Rewritten. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "of volatiles in " what are they?

  Explained. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "'The amount of volatiles in the magma appears..." magma appears four times in one sentence.

  Cut two of them. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "change may explain changes" repetitive.

  Cut one of them but I don't know if it's too clear now. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• 'Crustal interactions and crystal fractionation processes" what does that mean>

  Explained. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "of mafic magmas" what?

  Added an explanation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "depths of more than..." depths used three times in one sentence.

  Cut one of them. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "new dacitic magma" overlinked.

  Fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "deep andesitic magmas" andesite is already linked.

  Delinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

That takes me to "Eruption history". Generally this section is for all intents and purposes inaccessible to anyone without some level of expert knowledge in volcanology. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

It should be clearer now I think, but the detailed geology and in particular composition are really only of interest to people who know at least some concepts. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the Pastillo volcanic complex" no link?

  Not enough material to justify a link, especially since it's notability is merely "the volcano that Huaynaputina rises above". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "of half-a-kilometre-thick " why not just 0.5 km?

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Pleistocene" should be linked but probably first time.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• " postglacial " this redirects to Holocene, confusing for someone who isn't an expert.

  The terms are often - not always - synonymous, but the intuitive reading "after the ice age" is correct enough. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "flows deposits" reads odd, should it just be flow deposits?

  I don't see it? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I fixed it. Volcanoguy 22:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "years before present, respectively"" Before Present is capitalised according to our article.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "respectively.[85][1] The" order.

  Switched. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "The first event" is this the first eruption or the first pair of eruptions or something else?

  Changed to "the first of these". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Salinas north of Huaynaputina and" -> "Salinas, north of Huaynaputina, and"

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "amphitheatr" typo.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "and was blown" -> "which was blown"

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "The last eruption may..." well, you mean the eruption that preceded the 1600 one, not the "last" one.

  Rewritten. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "ejecta" is that a general term for "stuff ejected from a volcano"?

  Yes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

  I guess when I'm asking I mean "non-expert readers don't know this". The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

  Changed it to something more general. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• I don't think "personal clothing" classes as a sacrifice, perhaps an offering.

  I agree, but the other two do. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

  But you can't use that for all three if it only applies to two! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

  Put "offerings" in as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "offered sacrifices ... offered sacrifices" repetitive.

  Rewritten. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• General: why isn't the "1600 eruption" part of the "Eruption history" section?

  If memory serves, because the subsectioning got wonky after that. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "white fumes and smell of rotten eggs" well can we say actually what it is?
• "gave temperatures" recorded temperatures of?

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• Ah you do say what the fumes are made of, but three sentences later, put them together.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• "influenced by surface waters" what does that mean?

  Means that surface waters mix into the waters that emerge at these hot springs. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Up to "1600 eruption" section. More to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:37, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• ("and pyroclastic flows.[84] " overlinked in the Holocene section)

  Hmm? I only see one link. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• VEI is used as an abbreviation but not explained, add it (VEI) after the fist expanded use.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "on the 15th" avoid awkward 15th, say "four days prior" or similar.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "reports of late ash falls may be due to wind-transported ash" repetitive.

  Can't think of a better formulation, sorry. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "from Arequipa ... from Arequipa" ditto.

  This one is resolved. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Stratigraphically, the eruption deposits have been subdivided into five formations." what does that mean? Are the five formations worth noting?

  Not that much, this sentence is more for specialists. I'll move it down so that folks don't miss stuff if they skip it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• No need to link common word like ice.

  Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "new, "Dacite 1" magma" why comma?

  Otherwise folks might think that there is both an old and a new "Dacite 1" magma. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• first Plinian stage" what's one of those?
• "Vulcanian eruptions" what's that?

  Same as in the preceding mentions of these terms. Would it be better to put notes here too? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "explosions[130] and noises that could be heard" would those be the same "noises"?

  Not all noises are explosions. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• " English corsairs" is linked to privateer. That's odd for me, a very specific pipe for a general link like that.

  If memory serves, they were indeed privateers. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the viceroy of Peru sent" most sources seem to indicate that "Viceroy" is capitalised in this usage.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "tongues of fire" very evocative, not very encyclopedic.

  I know this sounds weird from me, but I am trying to write also for general audiences which can visualize what I can talk about better if some evocative formulations are used. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "form at Huaynaputina, in the form" repetitive.

  Resolved. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "in historical time" when is this?

  When there were people around to record and remember the events. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• 1883 eruption of Krakatoa has an article.
• As does 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo.

  Linked both. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "volume of tephra erupted by" overlinked.
• "of dacitic tephra" overlinked and repetitive.

  Resolved. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the eruption ... erupted" repetitive.

  Solved. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the dense rock equivalent of" dense-rock is usually hyphenated in this usage.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "closer to the volcano" that's some step up, how much closer?

  Source does not specify. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• Any chance of a tephra fallout diagram?

  I'll ask on Commons, but I don't promise anything. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "ashfall in Nicaragua are" context, how far away, why implausible?

  Explained. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

That takes me to the "Local impact" section. More to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 12:34, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Ash falls, pumice falls and pyroclastic flows incinerated everything" the ash and pumice presumably didn't incinerate anything.

  Rewritten. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Ash fall, debris flows and pyroclastic flows.." this is getting repetitive...

  Remedied. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "has been deemed" by whom?

  It doesn't seem like it was a specific person. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Bolivia mostly" comma after Bolivia.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• Camaná seems to have lost its diacritic.

  It's gotten it back. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "some villages lost their entire populations" vs "The local population fled during the eruption" this are incompatible.

  Not really, in some villages everybody was killed and these who didn't fled the region. Added a "surviving" though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "fatalities,[23] not counting any fatalities" repetitive

  Cut the second. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "after an earthquake" odd place to link earthquake...

  Unlinked, I think everybody knows what an earthquake is. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the second stage" of the eruption?

  Yes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "good wine" according to whom?

  Cut the adjective. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• Don't link common words like "cattle". Or tax.

  Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "Quinistacas valley" no link?

  It has no article, and I am not sure it should have one. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• ""Quinistacas valley moved to Moquegua because the Quinistacas valley was" reepetitive.

  Removed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "as far away as in Bolivia" don't need that "in".

  Removed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "as far away as ... as far as" repetitive.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "city ... city" also.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "children were reportedly running around and women screaming" is that a religious response or just human nature?

  Probably the latter but I don't think there is a better section. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "their clandestine native religion" why "clandestine"?

  Because the Spanish were trying to Christianize the region back then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• No need to link "devil".

  Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "horrifying storms"[205][86] which" order.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• Ref col in table no need to be sortable.

  Not sure how to change that. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

  class=unsortable. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:51, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

  I think I got this? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:02, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• In sortable tables, every item that's linked should be linked every time as there's no guarantee which one will come first after a re-sort. Alternatively, make the table unsortable, it doesn't offer much utility here.

  Linked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "46 million tons of sulfate aerosols" so is that sulfuric acid or not??

  They are (mostly) the same thing but some sources say this and others that. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

  That doesn't answer the question really. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:51, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

  They are not the exact same thing. I've rewritten this on the assumption that WP:CALC applies. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:02, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• ""the northern Hemisphere" shouldn't that be Northern?

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "large amount of sulfur" odd place to link sulfur.

  Nah, it's the first mention of the explicit term. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

  I take it that's a joke! I think it appears about seven times before that one! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:51, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

  Moved the link up but I note that some of these mentions are for "sulfuric acid" not "sulfur". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:02, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

• "inferred from ice core data"" likewise for ice core.

  Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

That takes me to "Climate impacts", more to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

• No need to link basic terms like "sunlight".

  Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "about 1.9 W/m2." this is context-free: how much does the Earth normally get? What kind of % reduction are we talking about?

  Added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the northern hemisphere during" capitalisation consistency.

  Fixed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "found somewhere in Iceland" is "somewhere" needed here?

  No; removed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "perhaps in 1600" who thinks this? Wikipedia's voice shouldn't be saying this

  Rewrote this; I don't think that we can specifically attribute it to someone. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• ""the 1257 Samalas eruption and the 1453 Kuwae eruption" overlinked.

  Delinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• ""10% growth of Northern Hemisphere" odd place to link Northern Hemisphere.
• And "sea ice".

  Unlinked both. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "the subpolar gyre.[244] " what is that?

  The only concise definition I can find is at this source, but I am not sure if it's clear enough. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "1601 and 1603 tree..." avoid starting sentences with numerals.

  Rewritten. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• " El Niño-Southern Oscillation.[254]"" en-dash, not hyphen.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "1605 ± 5 " this is odd, I'd make it a footnote.

  I don't think it needs to be there, it's simply a margin of errors. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "last thousand years" last as of now or last as of then?

  Clarified, but now I am unsure if it's too close to the source: Mono Lakefilled rapidly in the first half of the 17th century to brieflyreach the highest level of the past millennium

• ""additional solar influence" in what sense?

  Rewrote, the source is not clear enough as to which solar minimum it's referring to. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "of palsas in" what are they?

  Explained. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• Link oat but not barley?
• Oh you do, here "worst barley and rye harvests", so link it first time.

  Linked the first time. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "a plague outbreak" is there a more specific link for what type of plague?

  No, the source does not specify. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "1601 was called a "green year..." avoid starting sentences with numerals.

  Corrected. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "winter 1601–1602" of

  I think that it's clear enough that we are referring to the winter between these years. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• " Russian famine of 1601–03" 1603

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "In 1601 Japan, Lake Suwa froze" -> In Japan in 1601

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "cities of Moquegua and Arequipa, respectively" overlinked.

  Unlinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "worst-case"" should be hyphenated here.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• "recorded around the amphitheatre with no recorded"" repetitive.

  Rewritten. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Just the refs remaining on this first pass now. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man:OK, I totally missed these comments. I'll do these now... Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

• I'd expect to see all ISBNs formatted the same.

  Can they? Not all ISBNs I can find have the hyphens, but most do. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 134, pp. and space after comma.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 172: lang parameter.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 204: lang parameter.

  Added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 272: pp. and en-dash.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 290 title has --, should be en-dash.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 294, pp. and space after comma.

  Added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• Ref 300: lang parameter.
• Ref 301: lang parameter.
• Check sources for non-English text and add lang as appropriate.
• Then after that it's just resolving the awkward placement of a lot of the references.

The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:54, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

• @The Rambling Man:Done to here save for the awkward placement thing; partly in case someone else has issues with content and partly because a less awkward source placement makes it more awkward to verify a statement. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:31, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

  Ok my comments are resolved, but I can't support an article which is so fractured by references. It's horrendous to read and of no benefit at all to our readers. Everything else now seems to be in order. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 23:20, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

  @The Rambling Man:I've moved all the references that were mid-sentence so that they follow on punctuation. Perhaps that helps. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

  @The Rambling Man: is it better now, or do you think more ref shuffling is needed? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:44, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

  Much better, happy to support now. Good work. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:06, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Support from Volcanoguy

• Comment. I gave the article a look through and there is honestly not much I can suggest. The main thing that stood out is the introduction which seems kind of smallish for its length, especially the first paragraph. Make sure the introduction covers all of the core information in the article. Volcanoguy 01:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

  @Volcanoguy:I've done a mini-expansion but I am not sure what else could be added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:58, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

I suppose it is good enough how it is. Support. Volcanoguy 08:49, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 11:10, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.