Talk:Tectonic subsidence

Sean's review
1. The images look like they were done very well throughout the article, although the last one seems like it has alot going on for the same image. Also, it wouldn't hurt if it could be larger when someone clicks on it so it would be easier to see in certain parts.

2. Some things I see could still be linked to other pages which would be useful to the reader.

3. The overall content seems to explain the topic very well and is very organized.

4. Maybe you can talk more about aulacogens. Sjense2 (talk) 08:00, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

John's Feedback
Maybe link all the stuff in that big list in the intro. Link more stuff in general. Don't quite follow the cooling section completely, maybe its just me. Overall, liked the layout. A few syntax errors. Cheers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geologian (talk • contribs) 06:26, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Logan Kirst's review
Stephen, good improvement on your page, I can tell you put a lot of effort into this. With that said, I think your page is semi-complete, except for your figures. It is good that you found figures in the wikimedia commons that are relevant to your page, but I think that your personal user created figures are lacking in substance. They seem to generalized, try adding detail, it WON'T hurt. I think that it is organized well, has plenty of figures and seems to ready smoothly. I do think that you can add links to more scientific/geologic words within the article, but other than that pretty solid work amigo.

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment
This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Louisiana State University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program&#32;during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)