Talk:Archean felsic volcanic rocks

Content

 * Need more explanation on REE, and their difference with modern felsic volcanics
 * perhaps it's better to explain more on crustal implication

Writing the page
I think it is hard to write a Wiki page, as a person who struggle with expressing thoughts. At first I wrote an introduction and gave it to 10 friends, nobody was interested in my article. They all thought this term is very difficult to understand. So, simply they are not interested at all.

I then listened to some suggestions from student assistants and a friend who is excellent in communication. The original introduction was completely changed. Instead of explaining technical terms, I tried to draw readers' interest by simplifying the content and stressing the importance of the subject.

Some people started to understand what my article is dealing with, as well as they thought it is getting more interesting. I think the communication worked after some changes. However, meantime I am worried that some contents or ideas are improperly delivered. Until now, I am not confident of my writing enough yet. I still believe this project helps me building up my confidence in some sort of ways.

Ivancyyip (talk) 09:41, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

Feedback from Jupiter
Your page about "Archean felsic volcanic rocks" is well organized with simple language and clear diagrams. Every piece of information is supported by citations.

Here are some suggestions for your page:

1. Instead of showing an animation of Archean felsic volcanism in the introduction, it may be better to put a picture of Archean felsic volcanic rocks (if available) or just a felsic rock sample picture. Your audience may then have a direct idea of what you are talking about, and then put the conceptual diagrams in the following part.

2. You may want to enlarge the text size in your diagram, such as Figure. 4.

3. In the "Occurrence" section, a picture showing one of the region may be good, such as Pilbara Craton.

Peer review from Kevin
Hi Ivan,

Archean felsic volcanic rock is an interesting topic. I appreciate your great efforts in putting pieces of information together to introduce this complicated topic in a well-structured and simple way.

Suggestions:

1. It might be better if there are annotated photos of a typical AFV to make it more tangible and at the same time to help audience truly “visualise” this rare rock type. (esp. on mineralogy and texture part)

2. A few lines might be added in the beginning of “relationship between AFV and granitoids” to give the audience a general picture on why this part is there.

3. Perhaps a simple example of dating of AFV can be added to introduce how it works actually?

Cheers, Kevin

Kevnmh (talk) 16:19, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Feedback from George
hard to pick out improvements, very thorough stuff
 * it may not be clear to the average reader what the page is describing, especially early on. start from pretty basic knowledge
 * could the annotations on the last diagram be a little clearer? appreciate its hard because it being hand drawn. maybe just make the image larger
 * a comparison to the nature and style of modern day volcanism could be beneficial as well — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgealee (talk • contribs) 16:28, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Feedback from Harriet
Your page is interesting. Your figures (especially the map showing distributions of AFVs) clearly supplemented your text. Length of your article is short enough. I have no understandings on AFVs before. Your ideas are generally understandable to me. However, it is better to use easy words when you try to describe something. For example, "This texture represents a hot vapour-phase emplacement of the fragmented volcanic materials on the Earth's surface." This sentence is a bit difficult to understand.

Suggestions 1. You might enlarge some figures to make the texts easier to read. 2. It would be better to give a few words to explain some short forms when it first appears. Such as TTG in "Occurance" 3. Some sentences are quite complex and long. It might be better if you can break them into two sentences or simplify the structures.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by HarrietHKUGeology (talk • contribs) 04:21, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Comments from Graeme
The article is well outlined, and has plenty of references. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:13, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Please explain what "felsic" means in the intro.
 * Instead of using abbreviations, use the full name, eg Tonalite-Trondhjemite-Granodiorite instead of TTG. Also GMS, and REE
 * Link as many of the technical terms on first use as you can, eg terrane, Yilgarn Craton, Eastern Pilbara Craton etc.

Self-Review Notes
Major changes were made on simplifying the introduction and reiterating the significance of the topic. I am still confused on the best way to state an objective idea more obviously to others. I also improved the quality and readability of the figures. I extended the captions and add more annotations in the diagrams in attempt to explain the ideas better. I hope this could assist readers. Thank you everyone who gave me precious comments to improve my page. Ivancyyip (talk) 13:51, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Feedback from Yuwei
Hi Ivan, these are some suggestions for your page:
 * In the second paragraph of the introduction, I think you want to use "Nonetheless" as the meaning of "but"? It might have an ambiguity.
 * The repeated geological words could also have the hyperlink.
 * For the figures, it will be better for magnifying the labels or the figures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.140.125.84 (talk) 07:43, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by YuweiHGeo (talk • contribs) 13:07, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Feedback from Kevin on 20/11
Hi Ivan,

The diagrams are fancy, very clear and detailed. It can be understood very easily. The structure of this page is very good - I am guided clearly.

It is better if some true photos of AFVs with annotations are attached. Moreover, for the first sentence - is it better if a separate sentence is added to define what “felsic” means. It looks bit confusing now. Kevnmh (talk) 04:53, 20 November 2018 (UTC)