Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like the feedback, AND I'd like to nominate the article for Featured Article status. I chose this topic because I live within 100 miles of the Rove Formation, have an interest in geology and it was a redlink.
In the discussion page of the article I do have three concerns relating to the article.
Thanks so much, I do throughly appreciate your help. Bettymnz4 ( talk) 20:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
After perusing the article, there are a few things that stick out and need to be fixed.
Hopefully this has given you something to work with, although not very detailed about the prose itself. Regards, fetch comms ☛ 00:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank for your help and comments. I'll continue working on the article!! Bettymnz4 ( talk) 01:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Comments Betty, I'm glad to see that there is finally an article on this important feature. Suggestions and comments:
Good luck with this. Kablammo ( talk) 17:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I will move the to article to Rove Formation.
I included some of the ecology because those plants are found only on the north-facing cliff faces in this part of the continent. Otherwise those plants are usually found in sub-Arctic environments. I had realized I had too much emphasis on the ecology and had already cut half of my text. Would it be inappropriate to mention that the micro climate of the north-faing cliffs is unique for this part of the continent, and cite just the names of the flora?
I have done an article on the Saganagan Orogeny; it should be in the Peer Review process. I didn't find much (online) on the batholith.
I will cut back on the human history portion.
I do have a copy of "Minnesota's Rocks and Waters" by Schwartz and Theil, 1963. The Rove Formation is mentioned several times, but in no great detail. I used it mainly to affirm information retrieved from inline. I'll go the library to find more reference works.
I do print out my sources; I did try to reword them, apparently I wasn't too successful. I'll work on rewording.
Fetchcomms also talked about citation. Last night I printed off the guidelines and haven't had time to work on that yet. I will.
Again, thank you for your invaluable feedback. I will work on them. Bettymnz4 ( talk) 17:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm confused. Is this an article on a geologic formation? If so, this article seriously lacks focus. If not, it is confusingly named. It looks more like an article about the geology of a region. Either way, the lede and location sections are not detailed enough. Wired, class notes (example: www.cc.ysu.edu/~jcdick/), student papers, mailing list posts, Star of the North Concert Band, etc are not reliable sources. See WP:V and WP:RS. -- mav ( Urgent FACs/FARs/PRs) 01:08, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like the feedback, AND I'd like to nominate the article for Featured Article status. I chose this topic because I live within 100 miles of the Rove Formation, have an interest in geology and it was a redlink.
In the discussion page of the article I do have three concerns relating to the article.
Thanks so much, I do throughly appreciate your help. Bettymnz4 ( talk) 20:42, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
After perusing the article, there are a few things that stick out and need to be fixed.
Hopefully this has given you something to work with, although not very detailed about the prose itself. Regards, fetch comms ☛ 00:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank for your help and comments. I'll continue working on the article!! Bettymnz4 ( talk) 01:01, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Comments Betty, I'm glad to see that there is finally an article on this important feature. Suggestions and comments:
Good luck with this. Kablammo ( talk) 17:03, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I will move the to article to Rove Formation.
I included some of the ecology because those plants are found only on the north-facing cliff faces in this part of the continent. Otherwise those plants are usually found in sub-Arctic environments. I had realized I had too much emphasis on the ecology and had already cut half of my text. Would it be inappropriate to mention that the micro climate of the north-faing cliffs is unique for this part of the continent, and cite just the names of the flora?
I have done an article on the Saganagan Orogeny; it should be in the Peer Review process. I didn't find much (online) on the batholith.
I will cut back on the human history portion.
I do have a copy of "Minnesota's Rocks and Waters" by Schwartz and Theil, 1963. The Rove Formation is mentioned several times, but in no great detail. I used it mainly to affirm information retrieved from inline. I'll go the library to find more reference works.
I do print out my sources; I did try to reword them, apparently I wasn't too successful. I'll work on rewording.
Fetchcomms also talked about citation. Last night I printed off the guidelines and haven't had time to work on that yet. I will.
Again, thank you for your invaluable feedback. I will work on them. Bettymnz4 ( talk) 17:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm confused. Is this an article on a geologic formation? If so, this article seriously lacks focus. If not, it is confusingly named. It looks more like an article about the geology of a region. Either way, the lede and location sections are not detailed enough. Wired, class notes (example: www.cc.ysu.edu/~jcdick/), student papers, mailing list posts, Star of the North Concert Band, etc are not reliable sources. See WP:V and WP:RS. -- mav ( Urgent FACs/FARs/PRs) 01:08, 22 March 2010 (UTC)