Talk:Nevado del Ruiz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Nevado del Ruiz is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Featured topic star Nevado del Ruiz is part of the Armero tragedy series, a featured topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 19, 2009.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Disaster management (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Mountains (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Volcanoes (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Colombia (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Colombia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Colombia related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Glaciers (Rated FA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Glaciers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Glaciers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Alternate elevation[edit]

I deleted the elevation a previous editor had put in the first sentence, for two reasons. First, it's standard with mountain articles just to have the elevation in the infobox. More important, the elevation given was inconsistent with the one in the infobox, which is derived from the Smithsonian site. If someone has a source that gives a different elevation, please discuss it here and we can figure out which is correct. -- Spireguy 17:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Spireguy, that does make more sense.--Smithers50 18:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

swimming man[edit]

[1] maybe the image of the arm should be included? i've always thought that to be one of the most alarming photos to have come out of the 1985 eruption —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.209.214.5 (talkcontribs)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nevado del Ruiz/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

{{subst:#if:This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.|


This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.|}}

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    {{subst:#if:Well done.|Well done.|}}
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
    {{subst:#if:Dates need to be un-linked, per here.
    done. —§unday {Q} 23:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)|Dates need to be un-linked, per here.
    done. —§unday {Q} 23:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)|}}
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    {{subst:#if:It would be best if the references use the {{cite web}} format. Reference 1, 4, 6, 11, 13, and 15 are missing an accessdate. Reference 3 needs to be fixed.
    done.§unday {Q} 00:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
    Half-check, there's something wrong with Reference 3. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)|It would be best if the references use the {{cite web}} format. Reference 1, 4, 6, 11, 13, and 15 are missing an accessdate. Reference 3 needs to be fixed.
    done.§unday {Q} 00:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
    Half-check, there's something wrong with Reference 3. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)|}}
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    {{subst:#if:Does Reference 1 cover all this ---> "In 1595, a lahar flowed down the valleys of the River Guali and the River Lagunillas, killing 636 people. In 1845, a massive lahar flooded the upper valley of the River Lagunillas, killing over 1000 people. It continued for 70 kilometers downstream before spreading across a plain in the lower valley floor"? In the Geology section, the link to "Ring of Fire" needs to be fixed.
    done. —§unday {Q} 23:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)|Does Reference 1 cover all this ---> "In 1595, a lahar flowed down the valleys of the River Guali and the River Lagunillas, killing 636 people. In 1845, a massive lahar flooded the upper valley of the River Lagunillas, killing over 1000 people. It continued for 70 kilometers downstream before spreading across a plain in the lower valley floor"? In the Geology section, the link to "Ring of Fire" needs to be fixed.
    done. —§unday {Q} 23:47, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 14:47, 18 September 2008 (UTC)|}}
    C. No original research:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{2ccom}}}|}}
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{3acom}}}|}}
    B. Focused:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{3bcom}}}|}}
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{4com}}}|}}
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{5com}}}|}}
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{6acom}}}|}}
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
    {{subst:#if:|{{{6bcom}}}|}}
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    {{subst:#if:If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!|If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!|}}

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you to Lord Sunday for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:25, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Highest active volcano in Colombia[edit]

According to the Global Volcanism Program,[2] Nevado del Huila is the highest active volcano in Colombia. The first paragraph should be edited accordingly. --Canaima (talk) 04:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Last eruption missing description[edit]

The last eruption listed in the InfoBox occurred in 2007; however, no such description exists in the current article. This is particularly important since this article was cited as having historical relevance to an article on the recent Nevado del Huila eruption.MVD (talk) 10:58, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

From the references I have, there was not an eruption in 2007. —Ceran (talk) 21:45, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Issue of quote typos in reference source, but not printed source[edit]

The source for the longish quote under the subsection Eruption and lahar flow has two misspellings, everthing and horibble, which also appear in the referenced source. However, that source in turn references the quote as from "A. Scarth (1999)", which appears to be the book "Vulcan's Fury: Man Against the Volcano" by Alwyn Scarth. Checking the book via Google Books shows the two misspellings are not present, at least for the imaged 2001 edition. (This is a bit complicated to verify since the page itself is restricted from display at Google books. Without the physical book, one needs to search the book for the misspelled and correctly spelled versions of the words for that portion of the quote. In both cases, the correctly spelled version is found and the misspelled version is not).

Given the difference of two years, and the possibility that the article reference uses a pre-publication source from Scarth because the book is not directly referenced, it is difficult for me to suggest a best course of action here, whether to fix, flag (e.g. sic), or ignore the misspellings. -- Michael Devore (talk) 03:53, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Could you perhaps bring this to the FAC so I will remember to try and fix it? Thanks. —Ceran [ speak ] 23:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Since this is an issue that exists outside of the FAC process I placed it here, although you can copy it to the FAC as a reminder if you prefer. Some authors don't like to clutter up a FAC with minor copy issues unrelated to a support or oppose recommendation, and request such remarks be placed on the article talk page. I have no preference either way. -- Michael Devore (talk) 23:58, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Infobox age of rock[edit]

The infobox says Pleistocene. Should we include Holocene as well, or ignore it since it is small in volume? Awickert (talk) 03:05, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism Undone[edit]

I undid several acts of vandalism done my schoolmates. Everything should be back to normal. 216.162.89.85 (talk) 12:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. They seem to be back at it, however. -- Avenue (talk) 13:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for trying to stop it. I'll have a talk with them about it later. Bobtheadventurer (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. Awickert (talk) 16:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations....[edit]

...for the featuring of this article on the main page! Amandajm (talk) 01:36, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks from me and the other editors... I don't quite understand why it wasn't held off until November 13, 2010, the 25th anniversary though? Or why I wasn't notified... ceranthor 13:45, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Apology[edit]

A quick apology: a few minutes ago, in attempting to revert an unsubstantiated anon-IP edit, I accidentally re-introduced some vandalism that had already been removed. Sorry. Feline Hymnic (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Cerro Machin[edit]

As redacted, the Geography and geology section implies that Machin is an ice-capped volcano, which it isn't. Also the USGS reference doesn't mention it, listing instead El Cisne as one of the 5 volcanoes. Maybe it should list El Cisne instead of Machin, or make it clear that Machin isn't ice-capped. --Canaima (talk) 15:34, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Comments requested on "Recent activity" subsection[edit]

1st paragraph
  • "Between September and October" - meaning, I think, "During September and October..." (There's nothing "between" Sept & Oct)
  • Similarly, from the context I understand "Up to 2011" to mean "From the beginning of 2011..."
  • The sentence beginning: "Also beginning in 2010 were increases..." is awkward on several counts. It appears to jump back, chronologically; it is not clear what else was "beginning in 2010" - why do we need the "also"? We have "correspondent to" which I think should be "corresponding to". It is not clear what peaked in February 2012: increases in sulfur dioxide, or small eruptions of the volcano.
2nd paragraph
  • A comma is advisable after: "After seismicity continued to increase..."
  • "The peak in March passed without a major eruption..." The peak what?
  • It can't be right to say the alert was "raised" to Yellow, when it was at a higher level
  • Be consistent about "Orange" and "orange"
  • The following clunks a bit: "Over the next few months ash fell frequently until earthquakes increased again in June, and evacuations were ordered by the Emergency Committee of Caldas on news media for 300–1500 people." Some tidier phrasing, and maybe a bit more punc, would help.
  • "indicating an imminent eruption, and an eruption 7.5 kilometers (4.7 mi) in diameter took place" - "eruption ... eruption" should be avoided.

That is all I can see. Hope this helps. Brianboulton (talk) 21:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

These should all be fixed. Thanks so much! ceranthor 21:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)