Talk:Pine Island Glacier/GA1

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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * 1) Is it neutral?


 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

There were some formatting errors, but I think the article is overall a very good article.  ceran  thor 22:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Your last sentence in the acceleration section. It would seem that this question can be explored more by describing the acceleration observed. Polargeo I encourage you to do so. That is where is acceleration greatest, is it propogating. This will help indicate whether it is a calving front-ice shelf or upstream induced phenomenon. I did the bathymetry for the Polar Freeze journey for T.Kellogg and T.Hughes.