Will be reviewing this slowly over the next seven days. First impression is good, like all of your articles very detailed :). I might give some feedback that is not necessary to address for GA which I'll indicate as (Not GA: comment).
Femke Nijsse (
talk)
08:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Lede
The Quelccaya (also known as Quenamari) Quelccaya Ice Cap remove the first Quelccaya?
Life and lakes have been occupying the terrain left by retreating ice, generating sometimes dangerous lakes that can breach forming floods. Find this sentence bit difficult to understand. can breach?
within the Cordillera Oriental/ eastern Andes. Unclear what the slash means here, and
WP:SLASH indicates that slash should be avoided. Better is probably Cordillera Oriental (eastern Andes)
and Quelccaya together with ice bodies in New Guinea and the Rwenzori Mountains in Africa is one of the few tropical ice caps in the world, or even the only one; Not clear whether it's the only one or not. If there is disagreement in the literature, it might be better to explicitly state it. The sourcing stating that there are others are quite old, maybe defer to the most recent one?
The cities of Cuzco and Sicuani lie 130 kilometres (81 mi) northwest and 60 kilometres (37 mi) southwest of Quelccaya, respectively. Consider grouping the references at the end of the sentence. It distracts me a bit to have them in the middle, and this is not controversial information for which precision trumps readability.
with a crust of ice lying above snow. The source indicates that this was encountered once, not that this is the normal state of being. As far as I'm aware, normally what happens (glaciers/ice sheets in general, never heard of this specific one) is that the top layer is snow, then a layer of
firn and only then you get ice. I think that snow can also be somewhat hard, so it might still have been snow. Am I wrong here?
I don't quite understand this sentence: caves associated with crevasses when they roof over. (also, maybe group the references at the end of sentence again)
I don't understand the following sentence: cold-based and thus not very erosive. What does cold-based mean and why does it imply that it's less erosive?
Temperatures at the top of Quelccaya are assumed to be about. No assumption, but measured/inferred. (The word assumed in the source applies to next sentence)
It took me very long to understand what (0.9 – −6.3 °C (33.6–20.7 °F)) meant with the double dash and minus sign. Please change the order of numbers so that the lowest is first.
One of these wet periods has been correlated to the Medieval Climate Anomaly -> Occurred during the Medieval Climate Anomaly? With MCA such a ill-defined 'event', it's difficult to find a correlation between it and something else. Are you correlating European temperatures or something else entirely? Maybe simply use the time-period, because the timing of the MCA also varies widely across sources?
(not GA: you might want to put in some ugly 'as of year' in sentence: Tussock grasses have been recently expanding in the area to avoid the word recently)
Avoid starting sentences with numbers, especially big ones. This one: 12,400 retreat recommenced could be rephrased as Retreat recommenced in 12,400 years ago. I don't think you should omit any 'years ago', even if that were to be the standard in this specific scientific discipline.
with rapid deglaciation underway during the late 20th century -> Can you replace this with a more modern source stating since the late 20th century? (If you wait 3 days, the new IPCC report will be out! But there should be a lto of other sources available)
This warming is unprecedented by the standards of the late Holocene, and future 21st century warming is expected to exceed the natural variability of the last 1,000 years. Maybe drop the last part of that sentence? The current warming is already exceeding natural variability over an even longer period (see first part of sentence).
For example, about 80% of Peru's hydropower sources are buffered by glacial meltwater. I think this sentence belongs after the first sentence (not after third one)
complies with relevant MoS (1b). no copyvio, pictures have licence, broad in coverage, well sources, stable, neutral. While my preference is less detailed articles, it can be argued in good faith that it is written in summary style.
.
The only GA requirement I think might not be entirely met is understandably to broad audience. Could you have a look whether you could simplify or explain some more jargon. The body of the article is tailored towards a university audience I'd guess, but it's still nice to have discipline-specific terminology a bit more explained.
Femke Nijsse (
talk)
10:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Femkemilene:Addressed more points. I prefer to write detailed articles, myself, there are many kinds of readers and some want the details. Regarding jargon, you'll probably need to flag some of that problematic jargon; I know it so I can't readily spot the unclear bits.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions)
11:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)reply
I think I might know a bit too little about geology to be able to say what is bad jargon (3rd year Bachelor terms?) and what is okay jargon (1st year Bachelor). I'll give it a try though. Did you see I skipped geomorphology and went over it later?
Femke Nijsse (
talk)
17:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Will be reviewing this slowly over the next seven days. First impression is good, like all of your articles very detailed :). I might give some feedback that is not necessary to address for GA which I'll indicate as (Not GA: comment).
Femke Nijsse (
talk)
08:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)reply
Lede
The Quelccaya (also known as Quenamari) Quelccaya Ice Cap remove the first Quelccaya?
Life and lakes have been occupying the terrain left by retreating ice, generating sometimes dangerous lakes that can breach forming floods. Find this sentence bit difficult to understand. can breach?
within the Cordillera Oriental/ eastern Andes. Unclear what the slash means here, and
WP:SLASH indicates that slash should be avoided. Better is probably Cordillera Oriental (eastern Andes)
and Quelccaya together with ice bodies in New Guinea and the Rwenzori Mountains in Africa is one of the few tropical ice caps in the world, or even the only one; Not clear whether it's the only one or not. If there is disagreement in the literature, it might be better to explicitly state it. The sourcing stating that there are others are quite old, maybe defer to the most recent one?
The cities of Cuzco and Sicuani lie 130 kilometres (81 mi) northwest and 60 kilometres (37 mi) southwest of Quelccaya, respectively. Consider grouping the references at the end of the sentence. It distracts me a bit to have them in the middle, and this is not controversial information for which precision trumps readability.
with a crust of ice lying above snow. The source indicates that this was encountered once, not that this is the normal state of being. As far as I'm aware, normally what happens (glaciers/ice sheets in general, never heard of this specific one) is that the top layer is snow, then a layer of
firn and only then you get ice. I think that snow can also be somewhat hard, so it might still have been snow. Am I wrong here?
I don't quite understand this sentence: caves associated with crevasses when they roof over. (also, maybe group the references at the end of sentence again)
I don't understand the following sentence: cold-based and thus not very erosive. What does cold-based mean and why does it imply that it's less erosive?
Temperatures at the top of Quelccaya are assumed to be about. No assumption, but measured/inferred. (The word assumed in the source applies to next sentence)
It took me very long to understand what (0.9 – −6.3 °C (33.6–20.7 °F)) meant with the double dash and minus sign. Please change the order of numbers so that the lowest is first.
One of these wet periods has been correlated to the Medieval Climate Anomaly -> Occurred during the Medieval Climate Anomaly? With MCA such a ill-defined 'event', it's difficult to find a correlation between it and something else. Are you correlating European temperatures or something else entirely? Maybe simply use the time-period, because the timing of the MCA also varies widely across sources?
(not GA: you might want to put in some ugly 'as of year' in sentence: Tussock grasses have been recently expanding in the area to avoid the word recently)
Avoid starting sentences with numbers, especially big ones. This one: 12,400 retreat recommenced could be rephrased as Retreat recommenced in 12,400 years ago. I don't think you should omit any 'years ago', even if that were to be the standard in this specific scientific discipline.
with rapid deglaciation underway during the late 20th century -> Can you replace this with a more modern source stating since the late 20th century? (If you wait 3 days, the new IPCC report will be out! But there should be a lto of other sources available)
This warming is unprecedented by the standards of the late Holocene, and future 21st century warming is expected to exceed the natural variability of the last 1,000 years. Maybe drop the last part of that sentence? The current warming is already exceeding natural variability over an even longer period (see first part of sentence).
For example, about 80% of Peru's hydropower sources are buffered by glacial meltwater. I think this sentence belongs after the first sentence (not after third one)
complies with relevant MoS (1b). no copyvio, pictures have licence, broad in coverage, well sources, stable, neutral. While my preference is less detailed articles, it can be argued in good faith that it is written in summary style.
.
The only GA requirement I think might not be entirely met is understandably to broad audience. Could you have a look whether you could simplify or explain some more jargon. The body of the article is tailored towards a university audience I'd guess, but it's still nice to have discipline-specific terminology a bit more explained.
Femke Nijsse (
talk)
10:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Femkemilene:Addressed more points. I prefer to write detailed articles, myself, there are many kinds of readers and some want the details. Regarding jargon, you'll probably need to flag some of that problematic jargon; I know it so I can't readily spot the unclear bits.
Jo-Jo Eumerus (
talk,
contributions)
11:45, 21 September 2019 (UTC)reply
I think I might know a bit too little about geology to be able to say what is bad jargon (3rd year Bachelor terms?) and what is okay jargon (1st year Bachelor). I'll give it a try though. Did you see I skipped geomorphology and went over it later?
Femke Nijsse (
talk)
17:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)reply