Talk:Tseax Cone

Carbon Dioxide is a poison?

Quoted elsewhere in Wikipedia:

"CO2 is an asphyxiant gas and not classified as toxic or harmful in accordance with Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals standards of United Nations Economic Commission for Europe by using the OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals."

CO2 is a poison as much as water is a poison. It is not and reference to it as a poison should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.26.206.130 (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

The problem is that the CO2 asphyxiation is only a causal hypothesis; it could have easily been hydrogen sulphide, which is most certainly a poison, or other gases. SkoreKeep (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Active or Not?

Ok. In the Future Present section the writer states "Gases currently being emitted by the volcano are evidence that the volcano IS STILL active and potentially dangerous." But later on in the same Sub-heading they state "... limited knowledge of the dangers of the Tseax Cone IF IT becomes active or erupts ..." Well, which is it? Jellis 1975 (talk) 22:25, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

It looks like two different definitions of "active". The first is that technical geological term used to classify volcanoes by the suspected ability to erupt; the second is the more common meaning of "doing something right now". I will essay a change on that. (Later: no need; someone fixed it.) SkoreKeep (talk) 20:11, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Unclear of meaning

I'm not sure what the writer is trying to say here, but, it almost seems as though they are just stringing sentences together and we are left confused so if someone can explain.... ". The relative lack of knowledge on the previous eruptions would need modern monitoring and include studies of the gases emitted by the volcano" So what this is saying is that the "lack of knowledge needs monitoring and we need study volcanic emissions this is nonsensensical. Jellis 1975 (talk) 22:31, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tseax Cone/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grungaloo (talk · contribs) 19:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Volcanoguy, I'm picking this review up. I'll ping you in a few days when I'm done! grungaloo (talk) 19:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey Volcanoguy, this is an easy pass. The article is well written (I apologize if my comments were nitpicky), it strikes a great balance between broadness and detail, and my source spot check is all good. There's nothing here even remotely close to requiring rework, and I think it's well on its way to being FA if that's where you intend to take it.

Excellent work, and congratulations! grungaloo (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Comments

• Lakelse Lake, Kitsumkalum Lake and Lava Lake are the only medium-sized lakes in the Nass Mountains Ecosection - What's meant by "medium-sized lakes" here? There's no mention of "large-sized lakes" so are these the biggest in the region? Consider explaining this further or saying their the largest lakes in the area for clarity.
  • Reworded. Volcanoguy 17:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
• "Lichens and mosses cover large portions of a lava flow sequence originating from Tseax Cone." - Swap "a lava flow" for "most lava flow sequences". Minor nitpick, but the source indicates that lichen/moss covers most of the lava flows, the way this is written sounds like it only covers a singular lava flow.
  • A lava flow sequence would be a collection of lava flows. Volcanoguy 17:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
• "Melita Lake and Lava Lake have ponded behind the lava flow sequence" - Sounds says that ponds exist, not sure what's meant by ponded.
  • See pond: "To block the flow of water so that it can escape only through evaporation or seepage; to dam." Volcanoguy 17:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
• "although Lava Lake had already existed before the lava was issued; it merely increased in depth" - swap the semicolon for an "and".
  • I think it's fine how it is. Volcanoguy 17:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
• "continue to develop on the lava flows in an increasingly wetter and milder climate" - Swap this around a bit: "as the climate becomes increasingly wetter and milder"
  • That doesn't seem to flow too well with the rest of the sentence. Volcanoguy 17:53, 18 January 2024 (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.