Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Quelccaya Ice Cap/archive1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Jo-Jo Eumerus in topic Chipmunkdavis

SandyGeorgia

edit
  • A secondary expansion occurred during either the Antarctic Cold Reversal or the Younger Dryas. ... could we say ... occurred after the last ice age, during either the ... again, to avoid jargon and make it clear that these are different Ages being referenced.
    Added "climate anomalies" as the least incorrect term that I can think of. ~~
    Good, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:29, 30 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
  • Over interfluves, the border of the ice cap is embayed. We struggled with this sentence when I went through to do MOS corrections and copyediting. Consider the current attention on jargon, something has to happen here, as I am still unsure what this sentence says. Need help with interfluve and embayed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 30 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
    I don't know. "Curved" isn't precise enough to stand in for "embayed". The sentence is supposed to mean "The borders of the ice cap retreat above the areas between outlet valleys or glaciers" Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
    This one is very hard to understand, and I struggled with it before, so we gotta do something. How about just adding what you just said, like ... Over interfluves, the border of the ice cap is embayed; that is, the borders of the ice cap retreat above the areas between outlet valleys or glaciers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
    Added it, but I am concerned that folks will want a source for such an interpretation and I wouldn't know where to find one if my life depended on it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
    Cross that bridge if we come to it ... it can be deleted later if someone complains, but the alternate is that someone will complain about jargon :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:08, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Done. Please check all my edits and revert anything stupid. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hmm. I am a little iffy on the equilibrium line altitude explainer; formally it divides two parts of a glacier, it isn't the actual snowline, and I don't think we can put the proper definition into a non-jargon form...too many technical terms involved. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
OK, I removed that one, but this jargon still needs to be resolved somehow. Ideas? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Good, done,[1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:22, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
I've put in a note.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:26, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply
Jo-Jo Eumerus I have moved all of those remaining to the bottom of the list for your re-review. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:19, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Remaining

edit

MONGO are you able to lend a hand on the two issues above? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:15, 31 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Well, as someone who is pretty well versed in geology I have no issue with what an "escarpment" is and not sure we need a qualifier that calls them "landforms known as escarpments" An escarpment is merely an abrupt cliff that lies between two relatively level geographical points. I think a blue link on escarpment is all that is needed in case anyone is unfamiliar with this term. Also not sure why we are discussing albedo? Does this vary greatly from one ice field to another? Perhaps some are more dust covered so they have a lower albedo? I'm not clear on this.--MONGO (talk) 17:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Jo-Jo Eumerus and MONGO: Since I am not the expert :) I will leave it to you and Jo-Jo to figure that one out ... I also had a problem with embayed. All we need here is something so that the layperson gets a general idea and isn't forced to click on the link to understand the context of the sentence. We have some kerfuffle at FAC about jargon, so we should avoid forcing the reader to click out to understand the context of the sentence, even as they don't need to understand the specifics of the volcanology/geology. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 1 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
Wow. I mean, just ... wow. How in the hell did I not notice that this source which supports the Albedo sentence is a preprint that was not accepted for publication. Imma need to fix that. I don't think the albedo sentence is strictly necessary. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)Reply

Chipmunkdavis

edit
    • "two, three or four;[30][36][37]" Do these sources all describe two three or four, or are they each a source for a different number? If so it might be better to distribute the sources after the number.
    • "descend to elevations of 4,900–5,100 metres (16,100–16,700 ft), and even lower on the eastern side" I don't see how Mercer et al. 1974, p. 20. supports this sentence. Thompson & McKenzie 1979, p. 16. gives 4,900 as the lowest point on the east. I don't have access to Mark et al. 2002, p. 289., but would be surprised if glaciers grew between 1979 and 2002.
    • "It currently forms a separate watershed from Quelccaya." Assuming this is based on "The bedrock of the headwall surrounding Yanacocha prevented inflows of QIC meltwater from entering the lake during the Holocene" from Beal et al. 2014, p. 439. Perhaps the sentence in the article could be adjusted to clarify the meaning for readers less familiar with the implications of something being a separate watershed? Perhaps just adding "...from Quelccaya, filled by rain rather than meltwater" at the end?
    • The "Among animals..." sentence is long and unwieldy, suggest it is broken up.
    • "Two birds, the white-winged diuca finch and the white-fronted ground tyrant are known to nest on the Quelccaya ice cap", together with "other bird species might also nest on the Quelccaya ice", contradict "Other than this finch, only emperor penguins are known to nest on ice".
    • "Volcanic ash...has been used to date the ice core". Which is "the" ice core?