Talk:El Negrillar

El Negrillar is currently a Geography good article nominee. Nominated by Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) at 15:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer.

Short description: Volcanic field in the Andes

Volcanoes Low‑importance

	Volcanoes portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chile Low‑importance

	Chile portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chile, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chile on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChileWikipedia:WikiProject ChileTemplate:WikiProject ChileChile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Possible spelling and grammar errors[edit]

Hello Jo-Jo Eumerus, I saw that the nominated this article for GA status. I'm currently experimenting with a script to automatically detect spelling and grammar errors, I hope you don't mind being my guinea pig. Feedback and improvement suggestions are welcome.

Detected possible errors:

Sentence: The vents are spread over three sectors, and the northern in an eastern and a western sector.
- Correction: replace "northern in an eastern and a western sector" with "northern sector is divided into an eastern and a western sector"
- Explanation: clarity and grammatical structure

Sentence: Ages of the volcanoes range from 982,000 ± 8,000 to 141,000 ± 72,000 years, and is often not reflected in the appearance of the vents.
- Correction: replace "is" with "are"
- Explanation: subject-verb agreement

Sentence: It is possible that a change in tectonic regimen from compressive to extensive 780,000 years ago allowed the ascent of magma.
- Correction: replace "regimen" with "regime"
- Explanation: "Regimen" refers to a systematic plan or set of rules, typically for health, while "regime" refers to a system or planned way of doing things, especially one imposed from above, which is more appropriate in the context of tectonics.

Phlsph7 (talk) 15:47, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They seem fine for me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, I'm still trying to figure out how to best configure the script to avoid false positives. Phlsph7 (talk) 16:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Nominator: Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk · contribs) 15:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Kusma (talk · contribs) 16:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will review this in a few days. —Kusma (talk) 16:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Content and prose review[edit]

Lead: The "Radiometric dating has yielded ages of less than 1.5 million" does not seem to be in the body.
What does the name mean? Alternative name "Negros de Aras" is only in the infobox, not in the body, although it seems to be used.
Geography: Stratovolcanoes [..] include Socompa south, Pular east of the volcanic field perhaps clearer with "to the South of" or similar.
Check your links. Monturaqui is a volcano, and Peine a town in Germany. You probably mean es:Peine (Chile).
What minerals are being mined in the area?
Interest in the monogenetic volcanoes of the area arose in the 2010s and 2020 who is interested in them? geologists or people who want to show them to tourists or other people?
The location description would benefit from a map. (The one given in the coordinates section of the infobox helps, but does not really show the extent of El Negrillar).
Geology: El Negrillar is by far the largest of all these monogenetic volcanoes. is it one volcano or several volcanoes?
What does "Rocks [...] define a calc-alkaline suite with five distinct members" mean in lay terms? I don't understand it.
Eruption history: would be nice to gloss Pleistocene.
Ages ... is often not reflected in the appearance of the vents grammar seems off
Socompa collapsed and partly buried the El Negrillar volcanoes. Is Socompa part of El Negrillar or not? Might be easier to understand if you repeat that Socompa is another volcano south of El Negrillar?

Source spotchecks[edit]

Numbering from special:permanentlink/1224010639.

1a,b: ok. Note that they say "190 km2 area", unlike the "exceeds 220 square kilometres (85 sq mi).[18]".
3a: ok (although the citation could cover slightly more I think)
4a: ok
6b: did you mean to cite the page with the map?
11a: ok.
24: looks ok. I like the map.
26: ok
32: looks ok

Spotchecks look fine, minor comments above. —Kusma (talk) 21:22, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

General comments and GA criteria[edit]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Prose: Quite dense and full of technical terms, but not much that would be a GA showstopper. See comments above.
MoS: looks OK. Lead is short, but so is the article.
Ref layout is fine, sources are scholarly articles.
Anything known about vegetation/fauna? Otherwise looks reasonably broad.
No concerns with neutrality and stability.
Main image is fine from a licensing point of view, but it is hard to tell what we see. What is the scale of the image? It looks so weird that it could be anything from a millimetre to a thousand kilometres across. Can you try to address this in the caption?

Source checks next. —Kusma (talk) 20:55, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: review done, awaiting your response. —Kusma (talk) 21:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]