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

Reviewer: Kingsif ( talk · contribs) 21:35, 29 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Opening review Kingsif ( talk) 21:35, 29 September 2019 (UTC) reply

Style

• Good use of wikilinks
• Lead good length for article
• Made an amendment to one instance using km template - in this example it doesn't need conversion because the last distance mentioned is the same, but also the style of writing 5 km-long needs that connection which the template can't do
• fluvioglacial might need a wikilink

  Added. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Very well written in terms of language, structure, connectives, and style
• In the hydrology section, I don't think the Quebrada Achuco valley can be "accompanied" by wetlands; is there a different way to say they're in the same place?

  Eh, I think that "accompanied" is really the term. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• "damaged floodgate caused a damaging flood" seems like it has an extra word, but I also feel it would benefit from some adjective there, if you want to edit that

  Swapped with "broken". Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Do metal contamination and alterations causing floods relate? If not, these should be linked differently (or separate sentences)

  Reworded this a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Does Servicio Nacional de Meteorología e Hidrología del Perú have a wikilink?

  Only to es:Servicio Nacional de Meteorología e Hidrología del Perú. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• In Geology section, "historical time" may sound more natural if rephrased as ' recorded history'.

  Added a link. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Composition and eruption history could be combined into one subsection

  Hmm. These seem somewhat unrelated topics. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Even though there's plenty of wikilinks, some expansion on the more specialist terms would make understanding the article easier

  I never like saying this, but you might need to point to the specialist terms in question as I don't spot them readily. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Needs attention

• You could add the es wikipedia link, but otherwise looks good now. Kingsif ( talk) 22:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC) reply

Coverage

• Lead gives good overview
• May need some clarification/extra info on why people can see Casiri and Paucarani as distinct volcanoes; presumably there are multiple peaks?

  Sources are not detailed enough to draw conclusions, sorry. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Good coverage throughout, though later parts are succinct
• Needs attention

Illustration

• Good use of images and map, but they're not really spread through the article
• Could do with another image for one of the lower sections to even this spread

  From what I can tell, there aren't really any other images. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• Needs attention

Neutrality

• written neutrally
• Pass

Verifiability

• Quality sources
• Everything cited in-line
• Pass

Stability

• History looks stable
• Pass

Copyright

• Check looks good
• Images all PD
• Pass

Overall

• on hold - A few spots needing attention; I've made some minor mostly comma-based edits; well-written, nice article Kingsif ( talk) 22:14, 29 September 2019 (UTC) reply

  @ Kingsif: Replied to points. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

  Thanks for replies and for updates; I also think I agree with all the points where you haven't been able to action things. Will take a look at the specialist terms and look over article soon. Kingsif ( talk) 19:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC) reply

• - could add the Es link mentioned above, but otherwise looking good! Kingsif ( talk) 22:20, 5 October 2019 (UTC) reply