Talk:Rocky Butte/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: Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Ok, you know the drill.....will jot stuff below. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:39, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

The volcano erupted between 285,000 years and 500,000 years ago. - the first "years" is redundant...?

Fixed. ceranthor 15:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

lead a little small for an article this size...?

I suppose it might be. Any ideas for what to expand on? ceranthor 15:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

How about what type of rock it is composed of and the flora as it looks pretty forested from image Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:25, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Think this has been fixed. LMK. ceranthor 14:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

The butte lies within the Portland city limits - this is repetitive in this sentence. I'd remove it and combine with the first sentence segment "Rocky Butte lies in the northeast part of Portland" somehow.

Fixed. ceranthor 15:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Portland's climate is moderate, -is "moderate" an official term? If not remove and let facts speak for themselves

@Casliber: Due to the shutdown, I can't check the USGS source. Will get to this once I can, but I'm pretty sure the source says "moderate." ceranthor 15:17, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

@Casliber: Update: the source's wording: "The region has a moderate climate characterized by long frostfree growing seasons, moderately heavy rainfall, mild rainy winters, and warm to hot dry summers." ceranthor 19:25, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

...and precipitation is not typically very heavy, allowing for vegetation, which can hamper fieldwork in the area - this is confusing. makes it sound like hte vegetation hampers fieldwork...or is it heavy rain...or not heavy rain....

I think I clarified this. Basically, there's lots of secondary growth, which prevents fieldwork from effectively clearing land. The source says: "The moderately heavy rainfall and mild climate promote a lush vegetation that is a deterrent to fieldwork. Uncultivated cleared or burned-over land commonly supports abundant second-growth including gorse, huckleberry, nettles, poison-oak, salal, wild blackberry, many varieties of fern, and smaller fast-growing deciduous trees such as alder and vine maple." Let me know if this needs further tweaking or clarification. ceranthor 14:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Ah ok, no it means the climate is wet enough (coupled with lack of snow) that plants grow like crazy (much like where I am!!). So I reworded thus. In Australia we call it "regrowth" rather than "secondary growth" Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:54, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

or cemetery applications in the early 20th century - huh??

The source says "cemetery uses," so I was concerned about just saying "cemeteries" as a blanket statement. Happy to change if you prefer that though. ceranthor 14:59, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes that is tough. the existing possibly the best without further information changed to "burials" (I mean, that's what one does in cemeteries..?). Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:53, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

The Recreation section is a bit choppy paragraph-wise. Suggest trying to consolidate.

Tried to do some reorganization and consolidation. Let me know what you think. ceranthor 15:21, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Better Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:53, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

NB: Earwigs looks good Cas Liber (talk · contribs)

Otherwise, looks and reads well. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:46, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Casliber: Thanks for your helpful comments. I think I've addressed them all now. ceranthor 15:21, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Also, would appreciate any feedback at Wikipedia:Peer review/Newberry Volcano/archive1 if you have some spare time, since your GA review there was helpful. ceranthor 18:45, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

@Ceranthor: will try to get over to the Peer Review at some point on the weekend. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:29, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

OK all good. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:58, 18 January 2019 (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.