Talk:Tectonics of the Tian Shan

Untitled

Very thoroughly covered and I liked the tectonic map of the Tian Shan was because it should were the Mt range is located on a broad view and then shows a more zoomed in view of the area. A cosmetic fix may be to go back and change the terms that do not have links so that they are not in red. -Taylor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.207.236.136 (talk) 23:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Post-live wiki review for class by Erin

Excellent work, very well cited. Your figure is technically complete, but could use more color for units, maybe have it be better scaled in the thumbnail so it's a more useful image on the same page with the text?

One concern I have is how technical this article is: after Wikiproject tags were added to our articles, I started reading them and it's clear that the wiki/geology community thinks accessibility is desirable in geology articles. I do understand that it's difficult to talk about a contractional system as complex as the Himalaya in ways a layman could understand, but wikipedia is intended to be available to the layman. I don't think that the article needs to be 'dumbed down', but I think that a small introduction before the (excellent) overview could let them know what they're in for? Graeme, thoughts? Ewalde1 (talk) 05:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes there is too much specialist geological language in here for the average reader to understand it. It could be heavily illustrated to make the meaning clear, but otherwise it is going to need far more explanation of the terms used. And you are right about the map. I did not include it in the Did-you-know as you could not see anything useful in the thumbnail image. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Wiki review for class by Marielle

One small technical problem I noticed is you have bracketed several terms that do not link to other wiki articles (hence they are showing up in red). I do find the article a little dense, especially for your average wiki reader. Having terms like "intermontane" in the introduction sets a tone for the reader that might read as inaccessible. The map you have could use some color and additional detail. I do like the inset map giving a more general location of the Tian Shan. Also maybe have the source for the image of the West Tian Shan mountains listed in its caption. Overall, the article is very well written and gives a great deal of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mausbu1 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Aagwebb (talk) 02:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)That cross-section is very lumpily schematic, which is ok but doesn't look like a representation of plausible processes. The bigger problem: it's mainly unlabeled. Who knows what the central blob is?

Removed unsupported statement

I took out the sentence at the end of the Cenozoic section that said, "This type of deformation is also referred to as non-plate tectonic deformation because it does not follow the fundamental ideas of plate tectonic theory." It had been marked as needing a citation ten months ago. After searching the web and reading abstracts of the references in this article, I found nothing that mentioned the concept in this locality. I found the term "non-plate tectonic deformation" only a few times, mostly in comparisons with other planets' evolutions. If the concept is important to the subject, I hope CinColon or other editors will find a way to add the information more clearly. - Gorthian (talk) 07:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)