Talk:Nevado Tres Cruces/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Simongraham (talk · contribs) 13:15, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Comments

The article is stable; 95.6% of authorship is one user, Jo-Jo Eumerus. It is currently ranked a C class article, assessed on 23 November 2015.

• All images are either licensed under Creative Commons or are within the Public Domain in the United States.
• The text is clear and uses language appropriate for the audience.
• Earwig's Copyvio Detector find 32% similarity with Kay, Coira & Mpodozis 2008. I suggest taking a look and editing appropriately to avoid any allegations of copyright violation.

  To me, it seems like Earwig is picking up on titles of sources which aren't really copyvio material. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

  Thank you. It is below 25% now, so that is a pass. simongraham (talk) 22:16, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

• I suggest replacing "downgoing" with "subducting" (if that is what it is).

  Yes, but I was thinking it may be clearer this way. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

• Please clarify "normal fault".
• What are "cubic kilometres per kiloare" please.

  Done and done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Great work on this article. Please ping me when you have had a chance to review these minor amendments and I will complete the assessment. simongraham (talk) 13:18, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Simongraham: Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Looks great. I'll finish the review. simongraham (talk) 22:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Assessment

The six good article criteria:

1. It is reasonable well written

   the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

   it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout and word choice.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable

   it contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

   all inline citations are from reliable sources;

   it contains no original research;

   it contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.

3. It is broad in its coverage

   it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

   it stays ffocused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.

4. It has a neutral point of view

   it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.

5. It is stable

   it does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;

   images are (relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Congratulations. This article meets the criteria to be a Good Article.

Pass simongraham (talk) 22:16, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.