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

Nominator: Volcanoguy (talk · contribs) 20:24, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: MediaKyle (talk · contribs) 16:31, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'll be reviewing this article today. If I make any suggestions that don't have to do with the good article criteria, I will clearly mark them as (Optional). Please respond to actionable suggestions with a separate inline comment. MediaKyle (talk) 16:31, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• (Optional) The Big Raven Plateau is on the Tahltan Highland... I would adjust this to is located on for clarity. MediaKyle (talk) 17:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Done. Volcanoguy 17:06, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• (Optional) founded in 1972 might be better said as established in 1972 when talking about a provincial park. MediaKyle (talk) 17:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Done. Volcanoguy 17:09, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• (Optional): Your use of kilometres and miles vs. the abbreviated km and mi is inconsistent throughout the article. This does not matter for a GA review, but something that should probably be fixed. MediaKyle (talk) 17:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Fixed. Volcanoguy 17:08, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Is choaked with glacial and landslide debris supposed to be choked, or do I just not know the terminology? MediaKyle (talk) 17:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You're correct it was a typo. Volcanoguy 17:12, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Overall, the article is very well written, and I especially appreciate your ability to write about geology in a manner that is understandable to a non-specialist reader. Absolutely passes the "understandable to an appropriately broad audience" criterion. MediaKyle (talk) 17:03, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The article is consistently well-sourced, citing reliable sources such as BC Geographical Names; the British Columbia Department of Energy, Mines and Resources; and a variety of academic sources from reputable publishers. The use of topographic maps as a source seems to be in line with other articles in its class. No concerns regarding OR. MediaKyle (talk) 17:39, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• One minor nitpick about a source: I noticed that the source for the statement The Big Raven Plateau can also be accessed by float plane or helicopter, both of which are available for charter at the communities of Iskut and Dease Lake. is from 1992, and thus may no longer be current. You've already included the companies that are permitted in the area as of 2025, once of which is in fact in Dease Lake, but the other does not appear to be in Iskut. MediaKyle (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  According to the BC Parks website, "Alpine Lakes Air has added Tatogga Lake (near Iskut) as a base of operation". Volcanoguy 20:09, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Close enough then. The information is still verifiable in any case so I wouldn't quibble over this detail. MediaKyle (talk) 10:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The article seems to cover all of the main aspects, but just to be thorough, I did a bit of digging to make sure nothing important was left out - I'm sure that there's a good reason for this not being included, but what about the Little Iskut Formation? That article says it underlies and overlies other formations of the Big River Plateau, and I compared the coordinates and they seem to be quite close. MediaKyle (talk) 17:57, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The Little Iskut Formation is south of the Big Raven Plateau at Artifact Ridge and doesn't exist in the Big Raven Plateau stratigraphy. Note it has a much smaller volume than the Raspberry, Nido and Armadillo formations which are widespread throughout the Mount Edziza volcanic complex. Volcanoguy 18:25, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for the explanation. I figured that was the case, just couldn't quite figure that out based on our coverage of it. MediaKyle (talk) 18:56, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Overall, the article does a great job at staying on track, and makes good use of hatnotes for readers seeking more information. The article is written in a neutral, encyclopedic manner. MediaKyle (talk) 17:57, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Images used in the article are relevant and appropriately licensed. GAC6 also requires "suitable captions" - they're all pretty good, although the caption for the image under the section "Raspberry Formation" is a little barebones and could better establish relevance to the article (WP:CAPTION). MediaKyle (talk) 16:31, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  What would you suggest for the image caption under the "Raspberry Formation" section? Volcanoguy 17:05, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm honestly not sure - how does that image relate to the paragraph it's situated next to? That's the only issue is that it doesn't provide context... However, I will say that I just went looking through FAs to find examples of similar well-captioned articles to show you, and it appears even on FAs image captions are not much of a concern, so you can feel free to just ignore this if you want. MediaKyle (talk) 17:39, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• Obligatory Earwig check returned no hits.
• Having read the article a few times now, I see no more outstanding issues to address here except for the detail surrounding helicopters and float planes being available for charter from Iskut as noted above. Sorry about my erroneous edit - I had to read it a few times afterwards but I understand now, and while the name of the route is a bit confusing there's not much that can be done about that. Your adjustments to the captions are great. Once we've cleared up that one detail I'd say this is all good to pass. MediaKyle (talk) 18:56, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've thought about creating an article for the Buckley Lake to Mowdade Lake Route but I'm not sure about it's notability, same for the Buckley Lake and Klastline River trails. Creating articles for these could probably help avoid confusion since they would be linked. Volcanoguy 19:59, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• After another read this morning, nothing else stands out to me, so I'd say we're all good to go. Thanks for another fantastic article. MediaKyle (talk) 10:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]