Talk:Salar Ignorado

Discussion of mining

According to USGS 2014 Minerals Yearbook (CHILE) First Potash Corp. neé Pan American lithium Corp. owns lithium resources at Salar Ignorado but per wasn't planning to use them in 2011. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:13, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Smallchief (talk · contribs) 00:07, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Little is needed to qualify Salar Ignorado as a "good" article. Here are the following changes I believe are needed and the questions I have:

• (1) I'm curious how the salar acquired its unusual name: "Ignored Salt Flat." Any insight on that? Not necessary to get to good article status -- but it is a question I have.

  That's a good question that I have myself, but I didn't find anything that answers it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• (2) I get an error message when I click on the coordinates. That needs repaired.

  I don't understand it either. I'll ask at WP:VPT

  Abductive fixed this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• (3) I would like to see the elevation of the salar mentioned in the summary paragraph. Language such as: "The elevation of the salar is ________." Google Earth can get you an approximate elevation.

  Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• (4) I think it needs to be mentioned somewhere that the salar is located in an Endorheic basin or closed basin. (I would assume that all salars are in closed basins, but it needs mentioned.)

  Probably it is, but none of the sources I can find explicitly says so. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

  • Bingo! https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29748902/

    • Added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• (5) On first reading I found part of the first paragraph of the geography section to be confusing. I think you're trying to pack too much information into one sentence. Plus what is now in the note is needed in the main text for clarity. Thus, I think Salar Gorbea deserves its own sentence or two. How about: "Salar Ignorado is sometimes considered a sub-basin of the larger Salar Gorbea to its northwest, but the watersheds of the two basins are clearly separate. Salar Gorbea has an elevation of ____ and an area of ___."

  Did a rewrite. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• (6) The next sentence, "The area is hardly accessible," doesn't tell me much. Can you elaborate? Not reachable by road, only accessible by 4 wheel drive vehicle, 20 miles from nearest populated place? Or something like that.

  The source only says "of difficult access", sorry. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know enough about chemistry and geology to be able to judge much of the science in the article. You could tell me the liquid in the salar is pink lemonade and I wouldn't be able to dispute you. But, it all sounds credible to my ignorant mind. Good article. Salar Gorbea also needs an article. Smallchief (talk)

I've certified this as a good article for geography.-- although I'm going to make one drafting change. "Hardly accessible" grates on my ears. Should I also certify this as a good article for the other templates or does that require a separate review? Smallchief (talk) 09:36, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

@Smallchief:I think that GA certification is an all-or-none deal, so yes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 19:14, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Better map

Could you provide. a better or additional map. The current one locates the Salar Ignorado but does not show its boundaries or scale. DGerman (talk) 19:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)