Jump to content

Talk:Antofalla

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


GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ceranthor (talk · contribs) 17:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


I will be reviewing this. ceranthor 17:02, 12 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • "Antofalla itself is a remote volcano, close to the town of Antofalla, Catamarca." - these are contradictory, no?
  • "It is part of the volcanic segment of the Andes in Argentina" - I would link to the Andean Volcanic Belt and the Andes itself here
  • "Antofalla volcano is located in a region with basins-and-ranges-like topography" - this is probably unclear to a lay reader... suggest rewriting for clarity
Fixed these things. I left "basin-and-range" in since the literal meaning is close enough there. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Name
  • "The name may be derived from anta, anti, antu, which mean "metal" (especially "copper") in the indigenous language Quechua.[3] " - "means", not "mean"
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Geography and structure
  • "Antofalla is part of the Central Volcanic Zone of the Andes, which runs along the border between Argentina and Chile[1] and whose main expression occurs in the Western Cordillera.[11] " - don't think "whose" is correct here
  • If there's no data available for Cerro Bajo-Cerro Onas, you should clarify that or potentially leave it out
  • "These volcanic centres overlap with each other,[25] are all much smaller than the main Antofalla volcano and little eroded" - "little eroded" reads awkwardly; maybe rewrite this sentence
  • "Cerro Onas is constructed by an ignimbrite and ignimbrites occur elsewhere in the complex[27] including a recent one in the Quebrada de las Cuevas area,[28] and between Cerro de la Aguada and Cerro Cajeros lies the Cerro la Botijuela obsidian dome.[27]" - run-on; rewrite for clarity and split into two sentences
I thought that "whose" was correct; what would be another term? Regarding Bajo-Onas, the source is an incomplete map which does not give labels for this peak beyond their name. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Geology
  • "Volcanism does not occur along the entire length of the subduction zone; north of 15° and south of 28° a flatter subduction is associated with the absence of volcanic activity.[11] " - "a flatter subduction" - what does this mean? If you're indicating that the angles of decline/incline are different, you should be more explicit in what makes the difference I think
  • "A further volcanic zone, the Austral Volcanic Zone, is caused by the subduction of the Antarctic Plate beneath the South America Plate.[12]" - might be worth indicating its location as opposed to the other zones, rather than just saying "a further ... zone"
  • "The whole region is tectonically controlled by various lineaments which direct the ascent of magma and the location of basins" - "tectonically controlled"?
  • "some of these lineaments exist since the Precambrian" - grammar
  • Don't like the bulleted segment under composition. That should be converted into prose.
Mostly done; some of the lineaments are still active so using present tense is warranted, and I don't think that one can easily force the bulleted list into prose form; it's better in list form as it's four distinct occurrences. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Eruptive history
  • Worth it to explain what mafic and felsic mean to a lay reader.
Added two explanatory notes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Climbing
  • Any more info on this? This section is bare.
The only source I know of for such a thing is John Biggar, which may have WP:SPS problems. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More comments on references and images to follow once these are addressed. ceranthor 15:48, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Responded to a couple of points and actioned others. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:17, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fine. More reference comments below. ceranthor 23:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
References
  • For ref 5, " Moreno 2012, p. 104,105.", why not just make it pp. 104 to 105? Same with refs 50, 56, 57, and 66?
  • Ref 17 needs an access date
  • for consistency, any references with all caps should be changed so that they match the others
  • same with the sources that are all caps as the above note
  • why are certain refs with more than three authors listed as et al. but others have all the authors listed?
  • why are certain journal articles given individual page references but in other cases you cite the entire journal article as one source?
  • for ref 65, surely you don't mean to give a range from p. 938–938?
  • Seem reliable and comprehensive
  • Copyvio tool checks out

Good work. I can pass this once these are addressed! ceranthor 23:35, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ceranthor All done, but the GVP template does not seem to accept access dates. The number of authors displayed thing seems to be an {{sfn}} problem. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:37, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I think they become et al. once you reach four authors or more. Nonetheless, my other concerns have been addressed, so I will go ahead and pass this. Nice work. ceranthor 22:33, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]