User talk:Lgkirst/Geology of the Antarctic Peninsula

Corey's review of Logan's draft:

Hey Logan!

Good things first:

Your content is good and well-organized. There is a solid amount of visual representations vs text. Wooot. The language is good, not too technical and too general. Your intro is good for the casual visitor, and the rest is specific enough for someone interested in geology.

Things to work on:

First of all, I think you need to have more sources. Two sources probably isn't enough for a whole article on a fairly general topic.

As I said before, your images are good, but double breasted should be double-breasted on the Una's tits image. And speaking of Una's tits, you might be a tad too specific about them, compared to the rest of the article at least. Are there other geologic landmarks you could talk about as well, so that Una's tits could fit in better and you wouldn't have to leave out any content? I know how much you like those tits...

I think you should have more bracketed words that take people to other pages, such as subduction, volcanics, terrestrial, etc.

Lastly, I think the headings of your smaller sections need to be in larger text. Is there a way to minimize the gaps between paragraphs, too? Because the spacing is a little awkward. Maybe larger section titles will help that.

Good start!

Cshirc1 (talk) 03:00, 24 October 2011 (UTC)cshirc1[reply]

1) Hope the pictures are legal, but it's good you have alot of them 2) Probably need more references 3) Tits are a good topic I think you should lead with that 4) Spacing is kind of weird Stephen Reed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sreed16 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review of Logan's page by Michael Stevens

Good start over all. The information seems well thought out and well organized, and most of the information is sited. The page should be a bit longer over all, there seems to be too little information for such a broad topic, though it is on a continent which nobody lives on. The way the geologic history is broken up into sections is very nice, however it would benifit the page to have three seprate paragraphs to match the three major geologic events, splitting the last paragraph into arc magmatics and rifting each as there own. Adding more specifics, like you did with those tit's, would give good examples and add evidence for each of the major events. Nice job bro. p.s. could you e-mail me a picture of those tit's, man their hot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mstev18 (talk • contribs) 11:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Una's Tits pictures are the work of others. Only one File:Paleoplates.jpg was Lgkirst's work. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:14, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Graeme

For the diagram File:Paleoplates.jpg the text could be bigger so that we can read it in the thumbnail in the article. You also mention transfer faults are these really meant to be transform faults? (if not we need an article on transfer faults). For the scale it is not clear what the 1000 km is, as it is broken into 5 sections. Where is Bransfield Rift or the back arc basin on this map?
On Laurasia-Gondwana I know where Antarctica is, but perhaps not every one does. But I have no idea where the Antarctic Peninsula is on that diagram.
For the Gondwanian orogeny section the paragraph should be able to stand alone and not be dependent on the heading for context.
Using abbreviations such as TPG is probably not needed, and you can spell out the full name each time you use it.
For non specialist like me, I do not know the meaning of Retroarc thrusting or antithetic piling-up, so you could explain or link to an article that does.
For reference naming subsequent ones could use <ref name=Birkenmajer1/> for subsequent uses, but more references would be good to establish. Also the cite doi has some inadequate output results so some more work should be done on those. I use cite journal myself.
For heading names for sections only the first letter should be capital except for proper nouns.
Use of the whole infobox for Una's Tits is inappropriate, even if the image is suitable.
Check for complete sentences. Also Basaltic would not have a capital B.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:10, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]