Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mount Price (British Columbia)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 22 April 2022 [1].

Mount Price (British Columbia)

Nominator(s): Volcanoguy 03:50, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a mountain in the Canadian province of British Columbia. Mount Price is also an andesitic stratovolcano that began forming 1.2 million years ago. A vent on its western slope (Clinker Peak) was the source of two thick lava flows that ponded against an ice sheet within the last 15,000 years. These lava flows were one of the first described occurrences of lava having been impounded by glacial ice. Volcanoguy 03:50, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—pass images are freely licensed (t · c) buidhe 05:11, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't know whether the article complies with 1c and 1d of WP:WIAFA, but everything else seems to fit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:14, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Did some work on checking for these two criteria, thus I now say support. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:11, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Version reviewed

"It is located 10 kilometres (6.2 miles) southeast of the abandoned settlement of Garibaldi above the eastern flank of the Cheakamus River valley" - source?
Be consistent in when/if you include publication locations
What makes Liu a high-quality reliable source?
Fn26: what is given as work title appears to instead be a section title. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:15, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Nikkimaria: I have dealt with all of this except for the last one because {{cite web}} does not have a section parameter. Volcanoguy 04:47, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Okay, but you can't address that by putting that info into a parameter in which it doesn't belong. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I've removed it. Volcanoguy 23:13, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note - at three weeks in, while the important source and image reviews are done, this has failed to attract any general supports. It will likely have to be archived in a few days without further reviews forthcoming. Hog Farm _Talk 21:01, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

~~Why do we need to mention Burke Channel and King Island in the "Geography" section? They're not that close to Mount Price and are never mentioned again in the article.~~

Removed. Volcanoguy 21:26, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, the adjacent ecoregions, listed at the end of the first paragraph of that section, don't seem relevant -- they would be relevant to an article about the Pacific Ranges Ecoregion, but this article is about a mountain that is entirely within that region.

I agree. They've been removed. Volcanoguy 19:48, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get a map showing the extent of either the Eastern Pacific Ranges Ecosection or the Garibaldi Volcanic Belt (or just its southern segment) or both? You mention multiple geographic divisions -- another is the Garibaldi Lake volcanic field, and another is the tectonic plate arrangement -- and for someone unfamiliar with the geography it's hard to follow. A smaller map showing Mount Price, Mount Garibaldi, The Table and Clinker Peak would be helpful too; I looked at the two images for a while and am still not completely sure I correctly identified everything in the captions. And there are plenty of other locations mentioned in the article that could be labelled on a map: Culliton Creek valley, the Cheakamus River valley, Price Bay, Table Meadows, etc.

I'm not aware of there being any maps, not freely licenced ones anyway. Volcanoguy 19:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just searched Commons and found this, that's a little gaudy but would be helpful. I'll keep looking. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:12, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's also this, which you could rotate and crop. Interestingly, the date of that map is 1928, but it shows the peak as "Mt Price", so this is a little earlier than the earliest reference you currently have for that name. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:17, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the first image but I'm unable to crop the topo map. Volcanoguy 19:01, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll crop it and post it for you to take a look at and decide if you want to use it. However, I think we have to mention it in the article in any case, because it's a source for a 1928 use of the name "Mount Price". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:04, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the cropped map. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:16, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Volcanoguy 23:38, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"These eruptions resulted in the creation of a small 1,788-metre-high (5,866-foot) lava dome or scoria cone on Mount Price's northern flank". I take it this is the elevation of the peak, not the height above Mount Price's flank? If so this could be clearer -- I initially read it the other way, but then realized that that wouldn't have been "small".

I've changed this to "These eruptions resulted in the creation of a small lava dome or scoria cone on Mount Price's northern flank with an elevation of 1,788 metres (5,866 feet)." I'm not sure if that's any better. Volcanoguy 20:57, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's clearer. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:09, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~"The age of this final volcanic phase has varied from 15,000–12,000 years ago to as recently as 10,000–8,000 years ago." I don't understand this. Do you mean estimates of the age have varied?~~
- Changed to "The age estimates of this final volcanic phase have varied from 15,000–12,000 years ago to as recently as 10,000–8,000 years ago." Volcanoguy 19:38, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"In 1927, Canadian volcanologist William Henry Mathews (1919–2003) identified Mount Price as Clinker Mountain in articles and journals." It seems unlikely he did this at the age of 8. I don't think you need to include the birth and death dates in parentheses like this when you mention someone, but in any case it seems this can't be the right person.

I've revised this to "In 1952, Canadian volcanologist William Henry Mathews identified Mount Price as Clinker Mountain in the American Journal of Science." Volcanoguy 20:22, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Generally this looks in good shape. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:43, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:00, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from GeoWriter

Overall a well-written and well-sourced article. My detailed comments:

Introduction
"If this were to happen, relief efforts would be quickly organized." — I suggest this should be rephrased. One would hope/expect relief efforts to be quickly organized but it is not accurate to state that this would (definitely) happen.

What would you recommend then? Volcanoguy 23:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed "would be" to "may be" if that's any better. Volcanoguy 00:35, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Geography
"with the northern summits containing large icefields". — Can (non-crater) summits contain icefields? Or are they covered by icefields?

That's what the cited source claims. Volcanoguy 23:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Geology
"A diverse range of volcanic rocks with differing compositions are present in the Garibaldi Lake volcanic field." — The subject is "a diverse range" which is singular, therefore the verb should also be singular i.e. "compositions is present". (Alternatively, remove "A diverse range of").

Changed "a diverse range" to "several". Volcanoguy 23:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Volcanic history
"These eruptions resulted in the creation of a small lava dome or scoria cone on Mount Price's northern flank." — It is usually very easy to decide if a landform is a lava dome or a scoria cone. The word "or" suggests that geologists very familiar with the area do not know which it is, which seems unlikely. Checking the cited sources: Smithsonian GVP describes Price Bay as a "cone". Read (1990) states "a small andesitic dome was constructed on the northern flank of Mount Price". Hildreth (2007) refers to "Price Bay scoria cone" based on Green (1981) who refers to "andesite agglutinate breccia" of Price Bay (adventive) cone. Is "a lava dome or scoria cone" possible novel synthesis? Perhaps there is a lava dome and a scoria cone?

There's only one dome/cone on the northern flank of Mount Price. Volcanoguy 23:54, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source [5] ("Quaternary Magmatism in the Cascades—Geologic Perspectives" by Wes Hildreth) is a public domain USGS publication - the citation should include a web page URL for the PDF file https://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/pp1744/pp1744.pdf

Done. Volcanoguy 23:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"depositing 0.030 cubic kilometres (0.0072 cubic miles) of rock". — These units of measurement are (too) large and give the impression of a small volume landslide. I suggest changing to 30 million cubic metres (39.2 million cubic yards).

Done. Volcanoguy 23:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"impact-wave". Please clarify/define/wikilink.

Removed. Volcanoguy 02:39, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Naming
A date of renaming ("September 2, 1930") is mentioned twice. This duplication is unnecessary. One occurrence should be removed.

I don't see how that's a duplication since they are referring to two different mountains. Volcanoguy 23:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Protection
"which is in turn named after the Italian patriot and soldier Giuseppe Garibaldi." — Seems irrelevant to Mount Price and I suggest it should be removed.

Not irrelevant to Garibaldi Provincial Park of which the section is about. Volcanoguy 23:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

— GeoWriter (talk) 22:22, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GeoWriter, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:02, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. GeoWriter (talk) 16:01, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Pfly

Is it too late for this article, is it now archived? I've read through it and found it quite good. A couple things:

Under "Geology": Seceral volcanic rocks with differing compositions are present in the Garibaldi Lake volcanic field.

Is that supposed to be "Several volcanic rocks..."?

Yes fixed. Volcanoguy 00:07, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Under "Human history", "Naming": ...associated with 'a'a flows.

Wouldn't it be better for this Hawaiian term be written with ʻokinas, like: ʻaʻa?

Yes done. Volcanoguy 00:07, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, it looks good to me. Makes me think better monitoring of the volcano is needed. I didn't check all the footnotes and their formatting. Pfly (talk) 00:00, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pfly: Not too late at all. Volcanoguy 00:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Pfly (talk) 23:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

Non-expert prose review.

"The committee requested that the Geographic Board of Canada adopt Mount Price for this mountain after Thomas E. Price," Is this supposed to be italicised?

I thought it had to be but I could be wrong. Volcanoguy 17:19, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so? If it is, maybe put "The committee requested that the Geographic Board of Canada adopt the name Mount Price..." because it's weird that this is the only instance that the name is italicised. Z1720 (talk) 01:07, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done and removed the italics. Volcanoguy 02:53, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the lede and infobox, and the information there is cited within the article body.

As it should be. Volcanoguy 17:19, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Those are my thoughts. Z1720 (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. My concerns are addressed. Z1720 (talk) 21:12, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Harry

The Pacific Ranges Ecoregion is subdivided into seven ecosections, with Mount Price lying inside the Eastern Pacific Ranges Ecosection The use of "with" like this is tempting to join two parts of a sentence, but it's more befitting a tabloid headline than an encyclopaedia article, and at the very least it's poor practice to change tense mid-sentence. This construction occurs eight times in the article.

So what should I do about it then? Volcanoguy 22:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Easiest way is to split the sentence: "The Pacific Ranges Ecoregion is subdivided into seven ecosections. Mount Price lies inside the Eastern Pacific Ranges Ecosection." A semicolon would work just as well. Sometimes, just removing "with" solves the problem. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Volcanoguy 21:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

However, cold Arctic air invades "however" is listed on MOS:WTW and this is the sort of use that's cautioned against: implying a contradiction where one doesn't necessarily exist. There are a couple of other instances of "however" that look similar.

@HJ Mitchell: Done, although the word "however" is not only used to imply a contradiction. It is also used to mean "in spite of that" and "nevertheless". Volcanoguy 22:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Price and its eruptive products are protected I assume this means legal protection? Can we have a sentence on what that entails? Is access restricted? What can people do or not do?

I've reworded this to "Mount Price and its eruptive products lie within a conservation area called Garibaldi Provincial Park." Volcanoguy 22:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daisy Lake Road 30 kilometres (19 miles) north of Squamish provides access suggest using parenthetical commas for readability → Daisy Lake Road, 30 kilometres (19 miles) north of Squamish, provides access...

Done. Volcanoguy 22:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's it from me. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:54, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.