A fact from Black Buttes appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 22 January 2018 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
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
As is standard for me, I shall put comments that aren't directly about GA criteria and thus not necessarily a problem here: "Climbers should approach as though intending to climb Lincoln Peak, but instead they should follow heather to the southwestern ridge, then ascend a ridge to a false peak." reads a bit like a how-to guide, which is frowned upon per WP:NOT
I changed it to "Climbers are recommended to approach as though intending to climb Lincoln Peak, but instead to follow heather to the southwestern ridge before ascending a ridge to a false peak." ceranthor22:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
"and lasts for approximately four hours"? Not sure that the "Heather" link you are mentioning there points to the correct place. "the rest of its remnants" is odd verbiage.
Fixed the first and third comments. The source wasn't more particular about heather so I just linked it non-specifically. ceranthor22:40, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
I see that source #1 in the "Colfax Peak" subparagraph does not mention "East Butte" which instead is supported by source #8 elsewhere in the article text. I am not sure what source #2 supports in the lead, and the source apparently does not say anything about glaciers. I take that 500,000 to 300,000 was rounded; generally that source would work better with page numbers since I can't find 140,000. Source #7 does not give the alternative name. "that reach thicknesses of up to 1,950 feet (590 m), though they were likely larger prior to erosion." does sound fairly different from the source.
East Butte and West Butte are mentioned earlier in the article with a citation, though. Removed source 2 in the lead. Removed the Hildreth ref altogether. Fixed the thickness bit. ceranthor22:40, 15 March 2018 (UTC)Reply