Talk:Convergent boundary

Untitled
This article highly lacks the citations and notes required for a well developed Wikipedia page. There is only one work cited and it appears to be from The University of Leeds, School of Earth Science website. Even with this source present the article can still come across as unreliable and as the source is only used for a particular section of the Article it doesn't make a great impact on the quality overall. However, the information that is presented is done so in an unbiased and neutral way. There are no claims that appear heavily biased towards one particular position or opinion.Ailobao (talk) 20:37, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Evaluation
This article requires more references and citions in every paragraph. However, I believe that texts are pretty relevent to the topic. It hepls with beginners who are lack of knowledge about convergent margin. Chenhy12 (talk) 06:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Evaluation
I agree with Chenhy12, while this article has useful knowledge for beginners, it needs more sources of information, and more citations in every paragraph. There is interesting stuff in the Volcanic Arcs, Back Arc Basins, and Oceanic Trenches sections, but there are no citations in any of them to support that information. Images of the various processes discussed would also be useful. ErraticGeologist (talk) 15:15, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Evaluation
The article generally requires more information supported with more resources. While it has covered a good range of sub-topics, more elaboration and information is needed for each sub-topic. Could consider incorporating some of the sub-topics like volcanic arc and oceanic trenches into a bigger topic of "topographic features along subduction zones". This could help improve the organization of subtopics. Also, while the diagram used in the article is useful to explain different types of convergence boundary, having some description clarifying the ideas would help! -- Bing Y. Lee (talk) 07:17, 1 April 2018 (UTC)