Wikipedia:Peer review/Mount Fuji/archive1

Mount Fuji
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… I hope to do some work to improve the article to possibly FA, in honor of a deceased colleague, but am not myself familiar enough with articles of this type to be able to say what sections and areas are or are not acceptable.

Thanks, John Carter (talk) 15:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is interesting and a good start. Some sections such as the "Etymology" subsection seem much more polished than other sections. A significant problem in the lower sections is lack of sourcing. Here are some suggestions for further improvement:

Lead
 * MOS:INTRO says in part, "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of each of the main text sections in the lead. This one could easily be expanded to three paragraphs that would summarize the article more fully.

Sourcing
 * Although parts of the article appear to be properly sourced, large blocks are unsourced, all of the "Climbing routes" section, for example. A good rule of thumb is to provide a source for every paragraph as well as a source for every set of statistics, every direct quotation, and every claim that is extraordinary or that has been challenged or is likely to be challenged. Please see WP:V and WP:RS for details.

Etymology
 * "A Japanese classical scholar in the Edo era.. ".- Wikilink "Edo era" to Edo period?
 * "argued that the name is from the Ainu word for 'fire'... ". - Double quotes are standard in Wikipedia article rather than single quotes; i.e., "Fire". Ditto for all similar instances in the article.

Variations
 * The Manual of Style generally frowns on extremely short paragraphs. I think the two in this section could be merged.
 * The second paragraph lacks a source even though it contains information that is not common knowledge.

History
 * "It is thought that the first ascent was in 663 by an anonymous monk." - Specify CE or BCE?
 * "Ancient samurai used the base of the mountain... " - Wikilink samurai?

Geography
 * "The lowest recorded temperature is −38.0 °C while on June 2008 the highest temperature was recorded at 17.8 °C." - In Wikipedia articles, metric units are generally presented in imperial units as well. I like to use the convert template because it spells and abbreviates correctly and does the math; e.g., -38.0 C. You can look at this in edit mode to see how to convert other temperatures.

Aokigahara
 * The image at the top of this section needs to be moved or made smaller to avoid displacing the section head.

Transportation
 * "crashed near Mount Fuji Gotemba New fifth station" - I think "fifth station" needs to be explained clearly on first use. Most readers will not know what a fifth station refers to.

Climbing routes
 * "From the seventh station to near the fifth station, one could run down these ash-covered paths in approximately 30 minutes." - Would it be helpful to add the elevations of each of these stations? Is the seventh station at the summit?
 * "Nevertheless, one can sometimes see people riding mountain bikes along the tractor routes down from the summit. This is particularly risky, as it becomes difficult to control speed and may send some rocks rolling along the side of the path, which may hit other people." - This paragraph sounds like personal research, a no-no. Who is the "one" who is seeing this?

General
 * The gallery is too big and includes a lot of redundant images. Readers can always visit the Commons via the link provided if they want to see more. Please see WP:IG for a more complete explanation.


 * I'd be inclined to place "Geology" and "Geography" before "History".


 * Would it be possible to include a bit more about the mountain's religious significance? What religion? Sacred in what sense? What in the religion forbade women to climb the mountain? When did those views change?


 * Would it be possible to include a section on flora and fauna with a lot of detail about what grows and lives on the mountain? Does anyone farm on the mountain or near its base?


 * Do any streams flow from Mount Fuji? Is the mountain a source of drinking water for any communities?


 * A good way to get ideas for articles on any topic is to look at the sublist of Featured Articles on that topic. See WP:FA, within which you'll find Mount Tambora and other FA volcano articles.


 * The link checker tool in the upper right-hand corner of this review page finds at least six dead urls in the citations.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 21:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

As is, the geology section needs a major expansion; each of the phases of activity should get its own subsection and a quick review of the region's geology should be treated in another subsection. Especially needed is an account of where the lava came from (subduction). The gallery, at least most of it, needs to go since Wikipedia is not a place for them; Commons is. Image formating also needs to be fixed for File:Ogata Gekko - Ryu sho ten edit.jpg since it is interfering with the ===Aokigahara=== section sub-heading. Also, for such a monumentally important volcano to Japan, the ==History== section seems a bit thin on detail. I'd like to see a few substantial subsections. Overall, at 2100 words of prose, I don't think this article is comprehensive enough to pass FAC. I suggest putting this through WP:GAN after addressing the points raised in this PR. If it fails GAN, come back here. If it passes, also come back here before submitting to FAC. This article is so important that any FAC for it will get extra scrutiny. Compare with the less important, but FA, Mount St. Helens (4500 words). --mav (Please help review Mono-Inyo Craters) 02:58, 23 November 2009 (UTC)