Talk:San Pedro (Chile volcano)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 20:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:04, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm copyediting as I go; please revert if I mess anything up.

Not issues for GA:
- There are four dead links you may want to fix: [1], [2], [3], [4].
- Footnotes of the form "373,374" should be "pp.", not "p."; I see one is "p. 735, 735" -- a mistake?

Remedied these.

This region of volcanism spans the borders of Peru, Bolivia, Chile and Argentina and contains a number of individual volcanic centres, including the world's two highest volcanoes Ojos del Salado and Llullaillaco. Not really necessary in the lead; suggesting cutting this and merging the first two lead paragraphs.

Done.

6,145 metres (20,161 ft), 6,142 metres (20,151 ft) or 6,163 metres (20,220 ft) high San Pedro: ugly; can we find a more readable way of giving the alternative heights? Maybe pick an authoritative one or the most recent, and give the others in a note?

Took a stab at it. The problem with giving a certain height as the "authoritative" one is that I am not certain which one that would be - as you can read on Monte Pissis heights of such mountains are contentious, and while at Pissis & Salado the high profile of the mountains means that eventually we do settle on one San Pedro being a lower profile peak most likely doesn't have any authoritative height.

prismatically joined blocks: what does this mean?

Would "jointed" be clearer?

The quoted source writes: "prismatic jointed blocks", which is a term commonly used in vulcanology for this phenomenom — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.44.151.224 (talk) 22:03, 17 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

instead features groves and radial ridges: should this be "grooves"?

Yes.

which dropped down an elevation difference of about 2,845 metres (9,334 ft): not sure what is meant by "dropped down" here.
a lava dome at an elevation of 5,000 metres (16,000 ft) dots the southwestern flank of San Pedro: "dots" requires a plural subject.
Either cone, San Pedro volcanic rocks belong to...: suggest "In each cone, San Pedro volcanic rocks belong to..."
Should the link to phreatic to go phreatic eruption instead?
one eruption reported from 1877 may instead have occurred in 1891: that seems odd enough to be worth an inline explanation, if it's easy to give one.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:45, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Responded to some issues; will address the others tomorrow. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:37, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Got the other issues. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:37, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Two points left: it's "prismatically" that is baffling me. To me it means "in the manner of a prism" and I can't see what it's telling me. Is it a standard technical term? Second, the "dots" point is unaddressed. Once can say "plants dot the landscape", or use a mass noun like gravel to make a plural that functions like a singular: "gravel dots the ground", but I don't think you can say "a tree dots the landscape". How about " a lava dome at an elevation of 5,000 metres (16,000 ft) on the southwestern flank of San Pedro seems to be a parasitic vent"? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:22, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted another rewrite on "prismatically". As for "dots", the only issue with the rewrite is that it is fairly similar to the source text The southwestern dome is situated at about 5000m on the southwestern flank of San Pedro, and overlies pumice flow H; I'll see about another wording. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:29, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's similar wording, but "on the southwestern flank" is going to be hard to avoid. I think it would be OK. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:49, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Attempted a rewording with "lies" instead of "dots". Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:59, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That does it. Promoting. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:04, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]