Wikipedia:Peer review/Mount Kilimanjaro/archive1

Mount Kilimanjaro edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've recently worked hard at expanding the article and resolving issues such as insufficient sourcing and the like. I'd like to ask about the quality of sources, the width of coverage and the writing quality, though. Maybe this will make a suitable GA or FA candidate someday.

Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:05, 14 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by starship.paint

Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus. I am by no means an expert on geography or history, so I'm offering comments from a general perspective.
On section ordering, following Wikipedia:WikiProject Mountains#Structure, and looking at some FA class mountain articles like Joppenbergh Mountain / Mauna Kea / Nevado del Ruiz, I suggest the following structure -> shift Mythology to just above Popular culture. Shift Mapping just above Vegetation.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:30, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Drainage is a tiny section. Can it be combined with Geology or Glaciers?
Aye, on second thought it appears to be more germane to that. Done as well. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:31, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On referencing, please fix the various Cite uses deprecated parameter |month=, by removing the various "|month= "
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are various references which are in the format of <ref>[http://www.oxforddictionaries.com Oxford dictionary]</ref> Please use the cite web tool to convert them to the format of <ref>{{cite web|title=Oxford dictionary|url=http://www.oxforddictionaries.com|accessdate=|publisher=|author=}}</ref> More to come in the future. starship.paint ~ KO 01:49, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Cleaned these up a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the input! For personal time reasons, I'll start working this evening on your suggestions. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:27, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
More comments, Jo-Jo Eumerus. The Mythology section is hilarious. For some reason, Kibo and Mawenzi are people in one myth, while Shira is absent from all three myths. None of the myths are particularly interesting or encyclopaedic to me, personally, I would nuke the section.
I think it's worth having (dunno why Shira is underrepresented ... maybe its geography isn't attention-catching?), but definitively not at the pagetop - moved it down. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The first sentence of Geology throws out the figure of 4,877 metres ... and I'm confused. Surely you should be talking about 5,895 metres first? Why is there a difference of 1,000 metres, actually? starship.paint ~ KO 12:23, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Added some text. Is it less confusing now? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:52, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. So it's base is already 1km up? starship.paint ~ KO 07:24, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Two unsourced paragraphs: 1. Mawenzi and Shira are extinct ... 2. Shira is topped ... There's lots of jargon starting from these paragraphs. Please try to Wiki-link as many words as possible. Even "caldera".
These are sourced to the citations in the following paragraphs, but yeah, it is not straightforward. I'll be working on the jargon linking too. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please repair 3 dead links and several redirects. starship.paint ~ KO 13:15, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dead links repaired, but these redirects for me simply open up PDF files. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:08, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: - good work with the Wiki-linking so far! Here are some problematic words and phrases for me in the Geology section, could there be easier words used or an explanation?

concomitant -> use "concurrent" or "consequent"?
Went with the first; the source does not clearly indicate a causal relationship. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are tephrophonolites and tephriphonolite the same? Typo?
Appears to be the same thing from an analysis of some sources; changed to the more frequent term. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
aphyric phonolithe -> typo in second word?
Yes. Fixed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
erosion has cut deeply into a remnant rim
Rewrote it a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
accompanied with lava effusion along ring fractures
Rewrote it and added a link for one of the terms. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
a mafic dyke swarm
Both are technical terms; linked them. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
a subsidiary peak -> use "secondary"?
Wikilinked it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
scarps
Changed to a corresponding term and linked it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Parasitic activity occurred
Reworded and wikilinked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Upper Rombo Zone cones are mostly lavic
Reworded this one; Rombo Zone itself would require some more rewriting. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:58, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. starship.paint ~ KO 07:24, 18 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm okay with the changes, good work! Except for this: Shira is topped by a broad plateau at 3,800 metres (12,500 ft), perhaps a filled caldera, and erosion has deeply degraded the remnant rim. I understand the first two parts. First you have a caldera, you fill it up and it forms a plateau. But I still don't understand the third part - the rim of what has been degraded? The rim of the plateau?
Clarified it a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:30, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the Name section, I don't like the standalone quotes, I don't see why they deserve to be so distinct. They are quite big. I think they can be summarized -> The first quote to Jim Thompson claimed in 1885, although he also did not support his claim, that Kilimanjaro "has generally been understood to mean" the Mountain (Kilima) of Greatness (Njaro), "though not improbably it may mean" the White (Kilima) Mountain (Njaro). The second quote is already summarized by the paragraph just above it. starship.paint ~ KO 07:11, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, these are lengthy quotes. I've put some info into prose format. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:30, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for integrating the first quote. How about the second, larger, block quote? starship.paint ~ KO 12:41, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Summarized that blockquote. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great! starship.paint ~ KO 13:28, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jo-Jo Eumerus - the first paragraph of Human history is unsourced. starship.paint ~ KO 12:41, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed that sourcing issue. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:54, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Is Prior to Ptolemy Aeschylus and Herodotus refer to "Egypt nurtured by the snows" and a spring between two mountains respectively. One of these mentions two tall mountains in the coastal regions with a valley with traces of fire in between. in the source? starship.paint ~ KO 13:28, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is in the other source. I've clarified that. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:56, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: - sorry I've been busy with other stuff for a while. Here are more comments. The lede is short at just one paragraph. Perhaps the first recorded ascent, by Meyer and Purtscheller (and Lauwo?) in 1889, could be mentioned.
Some of the pictures in the article are bunched together, the first three below the main infobox, two in Human history. Could you space them out throughout the article, evenly if it's suitable?
There is no mention of Shira at all in Human history. Poor thing. Could you find when it was first conquered?
Is there a need for the technical info in Mapping, like Subset of Kilimanjaro, East Africa (Tanganyika) Series Y742, Sheet 56/2, D.O.S. 422 1964, Edition 1. The scale is fine, but this?
More Wiki-linking in Vegetation needed. Perhaps Climate would also benefit. That's all for now. starship.paint ~ KO 12:18, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the extra input! These things will need some searching to fix, though, so I'll probably get to them this evening. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I did a search on terms related to Kilimanjaro. Perhaps Sia lives on Kilimanjaro, The Snows of Kilimanjaro (1952 film), Under Kilimanjaro, Killers of Kilimanjaro and Kilimanjaro Expedition deserve mention In popular culture.
There are some animals related to Kilimanjaro: Lovoa swynnertonii, Kilimanjaro shrew, Papilio sjoestedti and Kinyongia tavetana, do they deserve mention?
Other related terms: Kilimanjaro National Park, Kilimanjaro Region, Kilimanjaro Region, Kilimanjaro (ward) and Battle of Kilimanjaro.
Stuff to be linked or explained more clearly in the Glacier section:

little-dissected
The cap is divergent
Ice cores ... have a basal age
Vertical ice margins ... focus points of areal retreat ... manifest stratifications, calving, and other ice features

My review's almost done, I think. Phew! starship.paint ~ KO 03:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

An IP address has also edited the article and voiced some concerns about some statements. Unfortunately, I got sidetracked with my exam preparations but I'll try to address all of these. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The timing's indeed a bit unfortunate, yes. Actually I was wondering if you could peer review one of my articles in return. I don't want to pile too much work on you, perhaps I'll just close my peer review and ask you comment on the FAC ... around the second week of August, would that be better Jo-Jo Eumerus? starship.paint ~ KO 09:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- My last exam is on the 14th. After that date, I can lend my hand on reviewing your stuff as well. Perhaps I can free up some time before that too but I can't guarantee anything, then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 10:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nah don't trouble yourself, it can wait until after your exams, by the time it should be an FAC. starship.paint ~ KO 11:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]