Talk:Nuvvuagittuq Greenstone Belt

	Volcanoes portal 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.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Volcanism of Canada task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Canada: Quebec / Geography Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Quebec.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Geography of Canada.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Tyler Hebert's Review[edit]

First off the first figure (box with all the info) looks really good and helps the reader understand the exact location of your topic. Your information is very good but based on other peoples pages I think you need more info to make the page longer. The background information is good. Maybe throw in some maps or cross sections of the area to show the structure of the area.

Review from Hongcheng Guo[edit]

1. I like the first paragraph. It gives definition, overview, and current research condition, but it should give a map showing the location, "Canada" and the coordinates are not "friendly" to read. 2. History and geography section is good and it can logically introduced the age problem. 3. I wish to see some geological maps aside from the photos in geology section. I think maps would match your words (showing those three units), which could make this section better. Hongcheng Guo (talk) 07:11, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tasha's Review[edit]

I appreciate that there were links to related pages to provide background on terms and subjects that some might not know about, and it seems to cover the information about the NGB well. My only concern is the fact that the age descriptions kept changing (ae, 3XXXX Ma instead of 3.XXX Ga) also, the average person reading the article may not know what Ma and Ga mean, so maybe write these terms out.

Corrections[edit]

Log and notes of correction edits Mfrphoto (talk) 07:05, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Units confusion: Although 1 Billion = 1,000 million, it is confusing to switch units. Adding clarification. "uvvuagittuq was dated to be a minimum of 3.7 billion years old." adding this is 3,750 million Mfrphoto (talk) 07:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be some discrepancies between this article and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acasta_Gneiss and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldest_dated_rocks Oldest dated rocks but I have not tried to correct because it needs someone with more knowledge. Mfrphoto (talk) 07:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]