Talk:Apacheta-Aguilucho volcanic complex/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Neopeius (talk · contribs) 16:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello! This is an interesting article, which has lain fallow too long. I will try to get the review done tomorrow (Saturday, 1-1-22)! --Neopeius (talk) 16:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello.

Geomorphology and geography
The section, Geomorphology and geography, is confusing. You start by discussing "Apacheta-Aguilucho" but it is unclear whether you are speaking of the complex or something else. This confusion is heightened by the following paragraph, which starts with "the volcano" (singular) followed by another paragraph, in which you describe Apacheta-Aguilucho as a complex consisting of two volcanoes. I suggest you rewrite the three paragraphs such that they make sense. I'd start with defining exactly what the complex is and where it is and then proceed with the subsidiary information.

i.e.

Apacheta-Aguilucho is a volcanic complex formed by two volcanoes, Cerro Apacheta and Cerro Aguilucho, in northern Chile, close to the border with Bolivia. The highest summit of the complex reaches a height of 5,557 metres (18,232 ft). [**which volcano**] The northern Aguilucho volcano and the southern Apacheta volcano are in their central portions formed by rhyolitic lava flows, with the surrounding edifice formed by andesitic-dacitic lavas. An andesitic lahar and pyroclastic flow crops out south and east of Apacheta, which as the oldest part of the edifice is heavily eroded. North and east of the complex, the two lava domes Chac-Inca and Cerro Pabellón (also known as Apacheta or Pabellóncito[11]) form the youngest part of the volcano.

The complex is part of the Central Volcanic Zone of the Andes. The Central Volcanic Zone further includes the Altiplano-Puna volcanic complex, which between 10 and 1 million years ago was the source of large ignimbrite eruptions[3] that produced over 15,000 cubic kilometres (3,600 cu mi) of rock; after that it produced lava flows and lava domes like Cerro Chao and geothermal fields such as El Tatio and Sol de Mañana, accompanied by a decreased production of volcanic material. The Altiplano-Puna volcanic complex is underpinned by a magmatic body that appears to be a batholith. Volcanic activity is the consequence of the subduction of the Nazca Plate beneath the South America Plate.[8] Aside from volcanic activity, crustal shortening has resulted in a thickened crust since about 35 million years ago.

Moraines are encountered both west-southwest of Apacheta and east of the Chac-Inca dome, and traces of glacial erosion are observed on the Aguilucho crater region. The moraines developed during the last glacial maximum. Presently, the region has an arid climate. Vegetation, if present, consists mainly of grasses and shrubs. The city of Calama lies 105 kilometres (65 mi)-120 kilometres (75 mi) southwest of Apacheta-Aguilucho and El Tatio is about 60 kilometres (37 mi) south-southwest, but with the exception of geothermal power and mining-associated infrastructure the area is remote and uninhabited.

You will need to move references as appropriate, too, of course.

Also, instead of explicitly listing the kilometers and miles, suggest you use the cvt template (i.e. 60 km)
 * I've gone and standardized "volcano<->volcanic complex" a bit. FWIW I think everything actually uses cvt? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, sorry about that. I still feel that the re-order I suggested above will accomplish what you want a lot more clearly. You still open the paragraph with Apacheta-Aguilucho without explaining it's the complex. As is, that section reads like a hodgepodge of loosely related facts rather than a cohesive section. A couple of minor corrections will not fix the section. --Neopeius (talk) 05:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually, that's deliberate - I describe where the volcano is, then how it is constituted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Then I recommend the following:

1) Swap the second and third paragraphs.

2) Put "Presently, the region has an arid climate.[14]" at the end of the first paragraph, where it fits better with the description of vegetation.

--Neopeius (talk) 16:54, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That would create an odd flow from the volcano to the region and back to the volcano. I've put some sectioning that might help. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 18:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Geothermal manifestations
Again, reference to a volcano without first explaining which one! :) Moreover, since there are two, it doesn't make sense to speak as if there is only one volcano in the complex.
 * Rewrote this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Finally, the fact that Cerro Pabellón is another name for Apacheta-Aguilucho should be as early in the article as possible, as a parenthetical aside, probably. I assume Pabellón de Inca is not the same as Cerro Pabellón? The former seems further north.
 * Done and no I don't think they are the same. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Sector collapse

 * "Sector collapses like the one at Apacheta-Aguilucho have been observed on other volcanoes (such as Mount St Helens during its 1980 eruption)"

I found this a little confusing since it suggests Apacheta-Aguilucho is a single volcano. Suggest always adding "complex" when referring to both volcanoes.
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Geothermal power production
Suggest "The Cerro Pabellón project is expected to produce..."
 * "Cerro Pabellón is expected to produce "
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Can you better explain why Cerro Pabellón's being first or second is in dispute?
 * It depends on whether you count the demonstration plant at Copahue as one. I am not sure that all sources are aware of its existence. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * If there is a source that confirms the existence of Copahue, and Copahue came before Cerro Pabellón, then Cerro Pabellón can't be first. You could say first operational plant or something. :)

Images
Re: Desierto de Siloli, Bolivia, how do you know that's a picture of Apacheta-Aguilucho?
 * I am not certain myself, I'll ask the uploader of the original photo. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Any chance you could get a picture of the geothermal plant? I wonder if you wrote to the company, they'd give you one as a PR piece?
 * Sorry, but I have never been particularly at ease with contacting people in this form. Someone else can do this, but not me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)


 * That's fine. It was just a suggestion.

That's what I have for now. Once you address these issues, I can go on to the rest of the review. :) --Neopeius (talk) 03:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Suggestions as of 1-3-22:

1) Change "Apacheta-Aguilucho lies in northern Chile, close to the border with Bolivia." to "The Apacheta-Aguilucho complex lies in northern Chile, close to the border with Bolivia."
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

2) Move "Presently, the region has an arid climate.[14]" to the end of the 1st paragraph or delete.
 * Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

3) Change "becoming either the first[41] or the second (after Copahue) geothermal power station in South America" to "becoming the first geothermal power station power station in South America (second if one includes the short-lived, demo-only station at Copahue."
 * Went with a variation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

4) Change "It is the first or second geothermal power plant in Chile." to "It was the first long-term geothermal power plant in Chile."
 * Corrected this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Then I'll review sources. Thank you!

--Neopeius (talk) 23:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Wrap-up
The only outstanding issue is the picture, which you were going to confirm is actually of Apacheta-Aguilucho volcanic complex. After that, we're good! --Neopeius (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello! Just one thing holding up the nomination. :) --Neopeius (talk) 01:08, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I really hate to remove the image as articles on these topics tend to be underillustrated, but Poco a poco did not comment on my question on the coordinates so go it must. I've removed it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That is a shame. Perhaps they will get back to you. I take it these are all of Pabellón de Inca? --Neopeius (talk) 04:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC)