Talk:Ice/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nominator: InformationToKnowledge (talk · contribs) 20:11, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 07:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is well organised and fully cited.

I've made a few minor or very small fixes.

Comments

Maybe briefly mention sea level rise in the lead, saying that this is only from grounded ice. (cf. next item)

Historical: could you please make it clear in the text that melting of ice sheets and other floating ice does not contribute to sea level rise. There are plenty of readers who won't have grasped this as they hear (correctly) that melting ice is causing impending disaster. I suggest you state in terms that only the melting of grounded ice affects sea level, as you have hinted (but not quite stated) in the graph caption.

Both done. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you also need to state in terms that the loss of Antarctic sea ice sheets is accelerating the movement of glaciers and hence loss of grounded ice, i.e. its melting can indirectly raise sea level.

I presume you meant ice shelves? And well, the mention of marine ice sheet instability had already referred to that. Of course, most people wouldn't know that at a glance, so I did clarify this point now. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very important disruption of the two overturning circulations: it would be very useful to present a world map of the global circulation, with (probably newly added, not a big task) arrows for where meltwater flows would disrupt the circulations.

We have the map of the thermohaline circulation here:

I am guessing @RCraig09: might want to try additions like this, since he rarely thinks much of the graphical edits I make on my own. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the oceans: you've include pancake ice, but there are numerous other sea ice forms in the Arctic (and Antarctic) as freezing progresses, such as nilas, young ice, brash ice, fast ice, compact ice, frazil ice, grease ice (two poorly-cited articles, unfortunately), not to mention ice floes and oddities like ice eggs. It seems we're missing an account of that complex process. You could use a list or table to name the forms of sea ice compactly; it might be a good place to use an image gallery; if you use a table you could have a column for small images directly next to the text.

The lack of detail on sea ice forms contrasts oddly with the rather extensive coverage of ice pellets: why so much on that, when other forms like graupel aren't mentioned at all? This seems quite uneven (to coin a phrase), for both sea and land forms. I think we need more on the variety of forms here (blue ice (glacial), hoar frost, yukimarimo, etc.), and a feeling that at least "the main points" (to quote the GA criteria) are actually covered at least briefly. Again, maybe an illustrated table of the terrestrial forms of ice would be helpful.

I feel that tables would make this article feel "heavy": it used to have a large table for Phases of ice (now moved over to that newly created article) and it really broke up the flow. We also have so little written for many of those forms that a) sooner or later, it probably makes sense to merge all those stubs into just a few articles; b) there isn't a whole lot of information that are standardized enough to fit into a table. I chose two galleries instead, and wrote some additional paragraphs. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First non-stop flight across Atlantic: please add the date, 1919.

See also - surprised that the Density link and "ice crystal" aren't used in the text, they should be.

Can't see any value in linking the Water portal: the article is thick with genuinely useful and fully-navigable links to genuinely-related articles, which the portal really isn't.

All three points up above done. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Yakhchal image: it looks as if the ice is outside the structure! Please explain that the system works entirely inside the yakhchal. The image is actually very poorly designed as the ground is shown as one thing, whereas there should be an inset for the mechanism (there could be a dotted circle around the bottom of the structure, with a bigger dotted circle for the mechanism, joined by two dotted lines, for instance), and no ground shown beyond the yakhchal itself. As it is, it's a hopeless mess, and most of the image is taken up with uninformative blue or brown deadspace. I could help with that, I guess.

This is probably best addressed to @MingoBerlingo:, who made that graphic. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gwrych Castle: which is the ice tower?

I couldn't find a reference answering that, so I chose another image entirely. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Late 19th-century ice factory: please explain what the components are in the caption.

Probably the only way to avoid being speculative about it is going straight to its reference, and that reference is an ancient Popular Science volume with 900 pages. It might be easier to choose something else.InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

US propaganda film on Road of Life. Please explain in caption why this is relevant: the word "ice" should be in there somewhere.

Done. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rim ice on aircraft wing: where and what is this boot thingy? It slides along the leading edge somehow? We need something in the caption about it.

Done. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All the images are on Commons and are plausibly licensed.

Sources

Spot checks are fine. I'll assume good faith with the offline sources, many of which are books without page numbers at the moment, see list below.

Pages needed

[1] needs page number or at least chapter.
[2] ditto
[3] ditto
[7] ditto
[10] ditto
[11] ditto
[21] ditto
[84] ditto
[105] ditto
[106] ditto
[107] ditto
[111] ditto
[124] ditto

Better sources needed

[24] please replace news item with its source (the research paper)
[29] ditto
[38] ditto

Other

[54] please add "|display-authors=6" (or similar) to the ref; you might like to do this consistently across all >6-author articles.
[58] seems to be a dead link.
[98] what does page 34–1 mean?

Haven't started on this yet. The hunt for page numbers in particular often makes me question if finding an online reference wouldn't be easier. Guess there's still the weekend.

Summary

OK, I've found more issues than I was expecting. Most are very minor and will be quick to fix; there are some important but not very complex things to say in the text; and the coverage of forms of ice does seem to need more work with text, images, and citations. After that we'll be ready for GA. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other people's comments

Drive-by: Can we at least take citations out from lead?? 2001:4455:36D:9100:E4A1:2E4E:1798:80DC (talk) 11:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, we need to do that please. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:17, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you need to take ciations out from the lead? I would actually add more. Reason being: if this lead is transcribed somewhere else with the excerpt tool, then citations in the lead are useful. As per MOS:LEADCITE there are no blanket rules for citations in the lead. But it is a bit odd that only the first para of the lead has citations (and rather weak ones?!). I would add the most important citations to all paras (without overloading it with citations). EMsmile (talk) 14:57, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well we can't leave it as it is, that's for sure.

I've removed the 3 citations from the first para of the lead that seemed to me ill-fitting. But I would suggest to add some high quality citations throughout the lead, taking some of the same citations that are used for the main text? EMsmile (talk) 20:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's an option. Actually the policy should be clarified, as many editors feel the lead is meant to be citation-free.

The images from natural formation section are ruining/sandwiching the texts. 2001:4455:36D:9100:E4A1:2E4E:1798:80DC (talk) 11:01, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, we should have a gallery in that section to organize images, specially if (as I've already suggested) we add some more. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:17, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.