Wikipedia:Peer review/Mauna Kea/archive1

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Mauna Kea
This peer review discussion has been closed. I'm listing Mauna Kea because I need a review in leiu of a WP:FAC run. Res Mar 20:17, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Comment by Noloop
The lead has a lot of interesting stuff, but it is too long. A lead should be a punchy intro and a roadmap to what follows, not a place to develop ideas. The middle two paragraphs should be shortened. I like the balance of aspects in the lead: an intro, a paragraph on geology, a paragraph on culture, and its modern importance in astronomy.
 * I've tried, and I knew this would be coming in reviews. I've looked at it from all sorts of angles, and I can't shorten it any without cutting its respective view of the article :/ Res Mar 01:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

“As such the volcano is currently dormant, as indicated by steeper shape, lower eruption rates, and differing lava types “ Doesn’t "dormant" mean zero eruption rate and zero lava?
 * Nope. That's extinct. Dormant simply means that it is not erupting, but will probably erupt again. Res Mar 01:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I doubt “astronomical” is the right word: “The first to detect activity would be telescopes on Mauna Kea's summit, as they can detect the sensitive astronomical changes that would result from the volcano's swelling”
 * Changed to coordinate. Res Mar 01:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

It makes me nervous that there is typically only one source per paragraph. Usually there is some controversy about something, even with a non-controversial subject. For example, the article says: “Ancient Hawaiians arrived on the island in between 25 BC and 125 CE” But then I follow the wikilink to Ancient Hawaiians and I’m told they arrived between AD.300-800--there’s not even any overlap in those two periods. So relying on just one source might not be fair to the reader. Also, don’t mix secular and Christian dating terms: BCE + CE or BC + AD.
 * While one source per para is not a problem (especially check out the source! they're the official managment papers for the 2000 plan!), this date deficency is highly disturbing. I've querried Viriditas on this. The base source is of an impecable standard, being part of the official 2000 managment plan papers from the University of Hawaii, so this is very strange. Res Mar 01:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Minor problems: “chiefss” “coursly soiled rock” “the results of which is Lake Waiau.” “...and is prevent on much of the volcano's slope.” “during past glacial period.” “Glacial moraines formed on the volcano formed approximatly” “its flanks has seen virtually no lava flows within that time” “out the lowest possible hazard rating of 9 “
 * All done. <b style="color:#731A25;">Res</b> Mar 01:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

That’s a start. I didn’t finish the article, because I felt I found enough for you to work on. It really needs a good copyedit.

It’s very thoroughly researched, and has a lot of information. Good luck! Noloop (talk) 01:33, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Specific suggestions regarding the lead:
 * 2nd paragraph. Delete this and everything after it: "The great height of Mauna Kea is due..." By "delete" I mean 1) make sure it is in the body of the article, and then 2) delete from lead.
 * 3rd paragraph. My recommended version: "In Hawaiian mythology the peaks of the island of Hawai?i were sacred. Being the highest, Mauna Kea was the most sacred of all, and a kapu allowed only high-ranking tribal chiefs to visit its peak. Ancient Hawaiians living on Mauna Kea depended on its forests for food, and a large adze quarry contained dense basalts used for tool making. The arrival of Europeans in the late 18th century was a turning point. Settlers brought cattle and sheep which became feral, damaging Mauna Kea's ecology. The basal forest was rapidly destroyed to make room for sugar plantations and residences." Again, make sure the material I omitted is in the body.
 * Just some thoughts. I think my version above is an improvement on the lead. Naturally, there are many other ways to improve it too. Noloop (talk) 02:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Problem with this is that it elimenates all mention of geology and all mention of ecology. <span style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"><b style="color:#731A25;">Res</b> Mar 01:35, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * It doesn't eliminate anything from article. It takes detail out of the lead, where detail doesn't belong. Noloop (talk) 05:19, 25 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it kind of does. The lines after "The great height of Mauna Kea is due primarily to its age" are the geo summary. Also, your replacement for the other para removes ecology, only saying "...damaging Mauna Kea's ecology. The basal forest was rapidly destroyed to make room for sugar plantations and residences." <span style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"><b style="color:#731A25;">Res</b> Mar 19:20, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

That's all of Geology, and


 * LIke I said, it doesn't eliminate anything. Move detail out of the lead, where detail doesn't belong. Don't eliminate it. Noloop (talk) 19:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Lead
I'm going to have a stab at cutting this down. See what you think.


 * Mauna Kea ( or in English,  in Hawaiian) is a dormant volcano on the island of Hawaii. In Hawaiian, Mauna Kea means "white mountain": it is usually snow-capped in winter. It is also known as Mauna o Wakea, or "Mountain of (the deity) Wākea."


 * Mauna Kea stands 4205 m above sea level, making it the highest point in the state of Hawaii. However, a significant part of the mountain is underwater; if instead it is measured from its oceanic base, Mauna Kea is over 10000 m, significantly taller than Mount Everest. This great height is due to its age of around one million years. Mauna Kea's most active shield stage was hundreds of thousands of years ago; in its current postshield stage, its erupted lavas were more viscous and created a steeper profile. The late volcanism has given it a much rougher appearance than its neighboring volcanoes, added to by cinder cones, the decentralization of its rift zones, glaciation on its peak, and the weathering effects of the prevailing trade winds on its windward flank.


 * In Hawaiian mythology, the peaks of the island of Hawaii were sacred, and Mauna Kea the most sacred of all. A kapu allowed only high-ranking tribal chiefs to visit its peak. Ancient Hawaiians lived on the slopes of Mauna Kea; its forests provided food, and its dense basalts were used in tool production at a large adze quarry. The arrival of Europeans in the late 18th century was a turning point. Settlers brought cattle and sheep which became feral, and deliberately introduced invasive species as game animals, damaging Mauna Kea's ecology. Mauna Kea can be ecologically divided into three sections: an alpine climate at its summit, a māmane–naio forest on its flanks, and an Acacia koa–ōhia forest at its base (now mostly destroyed). In recent times, the state was required to eradicate all feral species on the mountain.


 * Mauna Kea's summit is one of the world's best sites for an astronomical observatory, due to its combination of high altitude, dry environment, and stable airflow. Since the creation of an access road in 1964, 13 telescopes, some among the largest in the world, have been constructed by 11 countries at the summit. Mauna Kea Observatory has since become a point of debate both ecologically and religiously. Studies are ongoing to determine its effect on the summit ecology, particularly following the discovery of the rare wēkiu bug. Culturally, the construction represents the threat of development on a summit that had once been considered untouchable.

Iridia (talk) 01:04, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I'll adapt it to the page, thanks. <span style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"><b style="color:#731A25;">Res</b> Mar 01:57, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Further comments
Iridia (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * No full geological map in the Geology section? Strange.
 * Geology: Structure needs major alteration. Detailed descriptions of the physical features of the volcano should surely be integrated as part of a coherent history: there's a good amount of material, but it's not arranged to present a geological history of the volcano. Considerable repetition of statements such as 'the volcano will erupt again'. This should start with the origin of the volcano in the context of the other Big Island volcanics, and move towards the present, with a subsection for the glaciation. Future activity should have a more detailed explanation of the hazard assessment.
 * Native history: no mention of Poliʻahu?
 * Natives, native Hawaiians, indigenous Hawaiians, Hawaiians...could this please be given a consistent usage throughout?
 * Archaeology: the locations given should inform the content in History, not be separated out.
 * quarries, shrines, umbilical cords, canoes, houses...severe overlinking should be reduced.
 * Modern era: chronological flow. Should this be a summary-style of History of Big Island or some such? Just needs more continuity, it jumps around a bit.
 * The controversy in Māmane-Naio forest paragraph 3 needs more citation for the language used than a single end-of-paragraph reference.
 * Summit observatory: rename just Observatory (they aren't elsewhere on the mountain, unlike the Volcanic Observatory across the way)
 * "has a total light gathering power 60 times that of the Hubble Telescope" - that's rather an amusing way of wording it. Perhaps a discussion of the diversity of telescope types (by wavelength), and the presence of a large number of large-aperture telescopes, would be more useful.
 * With all the discussion of this many acres for telescopes, that many acres for reserve, the footprint actually occupied by telescopes should be mentioned.
 * Also, why does imperial come before metric here, when it's the other way around for the altitude measurements?
 * There should also be mention of the future construction plans on the mountain (Pan-STARRS and TMT specifically), especially given its controversy.
 * I agree with the comments on the talk page: the balance in Recreational significance needs modifying. It's a dangerous location, and unsupervised visitors shouldn't go past HP. The HP article itself has about the right balance, and should be a Main article link for that section.

Comments appreciated. <span style="font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"><b style="color:#731A25;">Res</b> Mar 21:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)