Black Crater has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: January 24, 2023. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Volcanoes Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Mountains Low‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Oregon Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

This review is transcluded from Talk:Black Crater/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Mertbiol (talk · contribs) 19:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am very happy to take on this review. This is a very interesting and well-written article. I have read through the West Crater, Belknap Crater and Black Butte (Oregon) articles as a guide to what GAs of this type should include and how they should be structured. I look forward to working with the nominator. (Please note that I am from the UK and that some of my suggested changes may not work so well in US English. I should also say that I am not a volcanology expert!)
Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 19:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I suggest that the third sentence (starting "It has been eroded by glaciers...") is moved to the end of the end of the first paragraph as a chronological order seems more logical.
• The current third sentence of the first paragraph seems a little unclear. Would it be better rephrased as "The large cirque extending from the crater down the northeastern flank, was formed by glacial erosion" or perhaps "The crater was enlarged by glacial erosion to form the large cirque on the northeastern flank of the mountain"?
• I suggest deleting "epoch".
• I suggest deleting "to the south of McKenzie Pass" from the first sentence of the second paragraph.
• Would using the {{circa}} template be better than saying "around 1862"?
• I suggest replacing "and pioneers moved…" with "when pioneers moved…".
• I suggest deleting "in the area around the volcano" from the second sentence of the second paragraph, to avoid repetition of "volcano".

• I have implemented all as suggested except the second point. I think the current sentence allows for sufficient detail, but I am open to clarifying with you what is unclear about the current sentence. ceranthor 21:12, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I suggest deleting "located" from the second sentence. (Some editors might not approve of using "lies" in the first sentence, but I think it's OK.)
• This may be an WP:ENGVAR issue, but I'm not sure about the term "underground runoff". Source [6] uses "subsurface runoff" and, for me, the more usual term would be groundwater flow. Would it be better to rephrase as "…streams fed by springs and surface runoff?
• The final sentence of the first paragraph (starting "These streams supply the Willamette River basin...") doesn't quite feel right. The streams presumably feed the Willamette basin all year round, it's just that in the winter, they do so with a much higher flow. Would "These streams supply the Willamette River basin and in the winter season the flow is increased by rain and melting snow" be better?
• I suggest modifying the second and third sentences of the second paragraph, so that they read: "The volcano has a broad conical shape with gentle slopes^[6] and a diameter of around 1.9 miles (3 km).^[9] Its relief is about 1,969 feet (600 m).^[6]" (The aim is to bring the details about the conical shape into the same sentence.)
• Please rephrase the first sentence of the third paragraph (starting "Glaciers carved a cirque...") per my comment above.
• The second sentence of the third paragraph (starting "Glacial erosion has exposed the interior...") is fairly long. I suggest moving the comment about Scott Mountain and Two Buttes) to a footnote.
• Please add a comma before "but did not erode them."
• I suggest changing "making it the second-largest wilderness area" (first sentence, fourth paragraph) to "and is the second-largest wilderness area".
• I suggest moving the second sentence of the final paragraph (detailing the history and geography of the wider Three Sisters Wilderness to a footnote.
• I suggest deleting "area" from "at the northern edge of the wilderness area".
• Please capitalize "sisters" in the final sentence of the final paragraph.
• I suggest changing "which includes most of its major mountains" to "and includes most of its major mountains".

  I have implemented most of these. I am still unclear on the objection to the cirque sentence. I cut the Scott Mountain bit. A comma is inappropriate before "but did not erode them" because that would create a sentence fragment, so I would like to keep that as is. I also think the sentence about the Wilderness is at an appropriate level of detail; it is only one sentence about the area, after all. ceranthor 21:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Should this section be moved so that it immediately precedes the "Recreation" section (see Belknap Crater and Black Butte (Oregon))?
• I suggest rephrasing the third sentence (starting "They moved to the area south of Black Crater...") to "They moved into the forested region south of Black Crater, near what is now the city of Sisters" to reduce repetition of "area".

  Both implemented. ceranthor 21:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I suggest rephrasing the second sentence to read "The wet climate supports rapid regeneration of vegetation, but the soil infiltration capacity is not surpassed, even after fires" or perhaps "The wet climate supports rapid regeneration of vegetation, but the soil does not become waterlogged, even after fires."
• Please link "soil infiltration" to infiltration (hydrology).
• I suggest replacing "erupted by" with either "ejected from" or "from" in the final sentence of the first paragraph.
• I suggest rephrasing the first sentence of the second paragraph to read Arctic–alpine plants are common above the timberline, in the area around Black Crater." (The verb should be further forwards in the sentence.)
• I suggest moving "the northwestern flank" from the first sentence of the third paragraph to the second sentence. The second sentence should read "The flow started in an area with rilling and erosion near the upper volcano and traveled down the northwestern flank, crossing Oregon Route 242 at two points." (Doing this will reduce repetition of "volcano".)
• Please rephrase the final sentence to read "At its narrowest point, the flow was 16.5 feet (5.0 m), with depths exceeding 5 feet (1.5 m)."

  Forgot to comment, but these have all been addressed. ceranthor 21:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Would "convergent boundary" be better than "margin of convergence"? I am not an expert, but my impression is that a "boundary" indicates a smaller area than a "margin".
• "Agglutinates" appears to direct to the wrong article.
• Please link North Sister at its first occurrence and delink it at its second occurrence.
• I suggest deleting "for the volcano" from "suggesting an age of less than 730,000 years for the volcano."
• I suggest deleting "it" from "and it has not erupted for about 50,000 years."
• I suggest deleting "epoch".
• Would "Near the end of its eruptive period" be better than "Near the end of its eruptive activity"?
• I suggest changing "but with some evidence of weathering" to "but show some evidence of weathering."
• I suggest rephrasing "Two lakes occur on the southern side of the volcano near its summit, named the Matthieu Lakes..." to "The two Matthieu Lakes, on the southern side of the volcano near its summit, are named after..."
• I suggest adding "the" to "Due to erosion, the lava has irregular joints."
• Should "Fault scarp" be "A fault scarp"?
• "a fissure eruption at Matthieu Lake" – which of the two Matthieu Lakes?
• Please link phenocrysts.

  These have all been addressed. It was actually at the Matthieu Lake fissure, so corrected. ceranthor 21:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• These two sentences appear to contradict each other ("each way" vs "one way"): "The Black Crater Trail runs one-way for 3.8 miles..." ("Recreation" section) and "The Black Crater Trail runs for 3.8 miles (6.1 km) each way..." (Lead section).
• I suggest adding "of Black Crater" after "eventually reaches the summit..."
• Please delete the excess space before ref [44] (Van Tilburg 2011).
• Please provide page numbers for ref [44] (Van Tilburg 2011).
• I suggest moving "since 1905" to the beginning of the sentence starting "All recreational activity at Black Crater has been overseen..."

  All addressed except that the reference does not provide page numbers, so nothing to do about that. ceranthor 21:35, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these points are suggestions for improving the wording, but the article is already very clearly written. I have spot-checked some of the references, but will do a more thorough check on the second run through. Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 19:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mertbiol: Thank you for the thorough review! I have implemented most of your suggestions, and I left questions/responses to the remaining few. ceranthor 21:36, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• The following sentences are in the Lead section and in the "Geography" section:

"The volcano has been eroded by glaciers, which carved a large cirque into the northeastern flank of the mountain, forming part of its crater."

"Glaciers carved a cirque into the northeastern flank of the mountain, which forms part of the crater."

Reference [2] says:

""Crater" is actually a glacial cirque open to the northeast."

My reading of [2] is that the crater and the cirque are effectively one and the same. I don't think that it implies that the cirque is part of the crater - it is the crater. Is it possible to reword to reflect this?

• I reworded to reflect it. I think I was confused because the current crater is not the same as the original volcanic crater, but that's what the source appears to be distinguishing. ceranthor 13:56, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Earwig's Copvio Detector detects no plagiarism problems.
• All images are appropriate and are correctly licensed.
• The infobox does not have a map, but a map is provided in each of the following articles: West Crater, Belknap Crater and Black Butte (Oregon).
• There is a missing "{" for a {{sfn}} template in the "Ecology and environment" section.
• You have used ref [17] (Brogan 1969, p. 151) to support "Arctic–alpine plants are common in the area around Black Crater above the timberline." However, the reference says "Even Black Crater, 7,200 feet high, holds a few species characteristic of this zone." I suggest changing "are common" to better reflect "a few species".
• I suggest changing |p=158 to |pp=158-159 in the sfn template for ref [36] (Schmidt 2005).
• I think the same page range should apply for ref [38] (Schmidt 2005).
• Should "agglutinate volcanic vents" be "agglutinated volcanic vents" (last sentence of "Geology" section) per ref [37]?
• Are "Sixmile Butte" (article) and "Fourmile Butte" (ref [39], Taylor 1981, p. 64) the same?
• Although the Van Tilburg 2011 reference does not have page numbers, it does have sections. I suggest adding |loc=41: Black Crater to the sfn template: {{sfn|Van Tilburg|2011|loc=41: Black Crater}}
• I have checked the following references: [3], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14] (uses old name for Whychus Creek), [17] (see note above), [18], [19], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [35], [36] and [38] (see notes above), [37] (see note above), [39] (see note above), [40], [42], [43] and [44] (see note above).

  All addressed. Sixmile Butte and Fourmile Butte are separate formations. ceranthor 13:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was a little worried that we were skirting close to the edge of WP:SYNTH. I have reread the sources and, even though Taylor 1981, p. 64 does not explicitly mention the "Sixmile Butte lava field", it's clear that it is referring to the same lava field as Sherrod et al. 2004, p. 21.

There are only a few minor points to address now, so I will put the review on hold. Best wishes Mertbiol (talk) 17:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mertbiol, I think I have fixed everything except the one I clarified above. Please let me know if I missed anything! ceranthor 13:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

It has been a pleasure to review this very interesting and highly informative article. It is well written and appears to cover all aspects of Black Crater in depth. Congratulations to @Ceranthor: for his hard work to bring this nomination forward. I have no hesitation in promoting this article to GA status. Great job!!! Mertbiol (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thorough and helpful review! ceranthor 20:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]