Wikipedia:Peer review/Mount Pinatubo/archive1

Mount Pinatubo
I've been working over the past few days on fleshing out this article about the volcano and its huge 1991 eruption. Would very much appreciate any comments on how it looks and what else might be worth including or expanding on. Worldtraveller 14:04, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The range is the Zambales Mountains.

Perhaps a mention of the Pinatubo Aeta? RJH 20:14, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't know about the name, I'll see what I can find out. Will include info about the Aeta, they're mentioned in the main reference I've used and I'm sure lots more can be said about them. Worldtraveller 23:27, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I found out a bit about the etymology of the name, that's in there now, and also quite a lot about the Aeta and how the eruption affected them. Worldtraveller 22:38, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Certainly it's a good article already. Here are my ramblings about how it might be improved.
 * I think the title needs to be changed. "Mount Pinatubo" would be an article about the mountain/volcano; I would expect such an article to contain information about its geological formation, its cultural and religious significance thoughout history, prior eruptions&mdash;stuff like that. Instead, this article is about a specific event in the volcano's history: the 1991 eruption. You might want to rename it to something like 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo. Compare Mount St. Helens with 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens to see what I mean.
 * A set of maps, showing the topology of the area, the surrounding villages and maybe the extent of the different flows and ash precipitation would be helpful.
 * I get the feeling that the article in its current state is a good, scientifically sound and factual treatise of a geological event. Nothing wrong with that. However, it makes the story a bit sterile. I kind of miss the human aspect of it all. For instance: the effects on the local population are described in a single paragraph. How many people were living there? What kind of an economy were they running before the eruption? The scientists who worked for the institutes that did the predictions remain nameless in the article. Who were they? Very little is said about the evacuation: who organized it? How was it conducted? What happened to all these people? Where are they now? Have people returned to the area? Etcetera. To summarise: an event of this magnitude most likely had a huge impact on the lives of the people it affected; I think the article would be greatly enhanced if it shed light on that side of things: it would make it a lot more personal and engaging. Good luck! --Plek 20:56, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * These are great comments, and I'll set to work on addressing them. A question regarding the article title though - would it be better to change this to an article just about 1991, or instead expand it to include information about before?  I'd been thinking about this myself and thought I'd rather add a bit more info about what's known of previous eruptions, and the pre-1991 local significance of the mountain. Worldtraveller 23:27, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, of course. Adding all that to the article under its current name is an option I was thinking about, but failed to include in my ramblings. I guess it all depends on the amount of information you've got and whether you think it's enough to build a comprehensive article about the mountain. Alternatively, working on just the 1991 eruption for now might prove to be a shorter path to a Featured status, because I imagine it's easier to obtain good sources for such a recent event. Translation: it's all up to you ;-) --Plek 23:49, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, on point 1 I've broadened the scope of the article and I hope there's enough about things other than 1991 now. Point 2, got a map of the area showing locations of villages, and also an aerial photo showing locations of pyroclastic flow deposits and a map showing where tephra fell.  Point 3, I've now included lots more about the effect of the eruption on the people of the area.
 * Thanks again, Plek and RJH, for very helpful comments. How do you think the article is looking?  Ready for FAC? Worldtraveller 22:38, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)