Talk:Daikoku Seamount/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs) 08:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

Buncha disambiguations that need to be disambiguated. "sub-region of Micronesia in the Pacific Ocean" is an odd formulation. "during periods of volcanic activity" - not "after"? "which is" - repetition. Composition paragraph is quite short - lots of choppy paragraphs in fact. "Volcanic activity on Daikoku has been continuing for the last two decades, since the discovery of the sulfur pond in the summit crater" can probably be reformulated.
Fixed as much as I could, slightly reformed the article as necessary. Reego 41 15:13, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

I think the lead can be expanded a bit with information about why this seamount is noteworthy.
Lead expanded accordingly. Reego 41 15:13, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

However, there is now a lot of text in the lead with information not in the article (or any source) Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):

b. (citations to reliable sources):

However, the sources section should probably be ordered somehow.

c. (OR):

"The volcano has many hydrothermal vents, which can host various animal species including the one which makes this seamount widely known, the tonguefish Symphurus thermophilus." needs a source. Where does #2 refer to Daikoku? #3 does not say "slightly" or "rivulets". #6 does not mention Daikoku again.

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a. (major aspects):

b. (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:

Have these sources been inspected?
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

Some of the file pages have links directly to the source filepage, which can be hard to fix if they break. Is it possible to replace them with links to gallery pages instead? Also, the "Activity" section on my screen is WP:SANDWICHed between the images.
Fixed. Reego 41 15:13, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Sorry, but it seems like after a few weeks, the issue with unsourced lead information is still there. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:47, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]