Talk:Geyser

Disambiguation required

Countries using British English refer to a Water heater as a geyser ("geezer"). (Perhaps just mentioning this usage will suffice?)

I just came here looking for water heater info, so i added a disambiguation link at the top. --Piet Delport 23:13, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

This strikes me as odd and out of place. There may be a few sentences in here that could be salvaged and either re-entered into this article or other articles (the Leidenfrost effect, perhaps)? Ed Cormany 04:03 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I concur; also, the previous several paragraphs (describing the Great Geysir in Iceland) are badly out of date. I think this whole section must have been taken without attribution from some very old book. The absence of more than a passing mention of the Yellowstone geysers, any mention at all of the geyser fields in Kamchatka, and a paragraph about Californian geysers which just plain do not exist, all bespeak a serious need for someone to rewrite this article from scratch.

(Actually several geysers DO exist in California --- see: (Bryan 1995 and Glennon 2005) May 2005). Except during major tectonic events, they are all quite small – less than a meter high).

I volunteer, but I can't take the time right now. I'll be back in a few days. Evan Hunt 00:05 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

A very hot Bath

Would it not be very convenient to live near a geyser? We might have our victuals cooked by it, and have pipes led from it all round our house, to keep us comfortable in winter; and we might have nice hot baths in our dressing-rooms, arid even a little steam-engine to roast our meat and grind our coffee. But perhaps you may think it might not be altogether pleasant to be kept so continually in hot water.

Were any of the water from the geyser to fall on your hands, you would doubtless feel it rather sore; still more so, were you to be so rash as to thrust your hand fairly into the jet of boiling water, as it ascends into the air. Nevertheless, strange as it may seem, it would be possible for you, without feeling any pain or sustaining any injury, to thrust your hand right into the glowing lava as it flows from the crater of Hekla. The only precaution needful to be observed, is first to plunge the hand into cold water, and then dry it gently with a soft towel, but so as to leave it still a little moist. This discovery was made by a French philosopher, M. Boutigny, and has been practically proved both by him and M. Houdin, the celebrated conjuror, by thrusting their hands into molten iron, as it flowed from the furnace. The latter describes the sensation as like what one might imagine to be felt on putting the hand into liquid velvet. The reason why this experiment proves so harmless is that between the skin and the glowing substance there is formed a film of vapour, which acts as a complete protection. It is this elastic cushion of vapour which imparts that feeling of softness described by M. Houdin; for it is with it alone that the hand comes into contact.

---

I have added a series of photos of Strokkur (Great Geysir's very active next door neighbour), but I know little about page layout and HTML... can anyone with the necessary skills make it look better? Pete 08:55, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)

and climate

which effect has the climate? what kind of climate is necessary for the existence of geysers? --141.53.194.251 13:13, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Geysers exist in all climates. --MrGulli (talk) 00:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

A map

Would be great to have a map showing world distribution of geysers. Is anyone able to create it? --Eleassar777 15:43, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Had a bash, using this page as a guide - not sure what I've done looks very good, but if anyone thinks it looks ok for the article then move it over!

There is a map in hot spring for the USA but that is not limited to geysers. For the USA, see http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/seg/geotherm.shtml and search the database. For example, request Wyoming without otherwise limiting the search, and you'll see several items with "geyser" in their name. One of the other links on that page goes to some more global information. (SEWilco 02:25, 21 May 2005 (UTC))

Geysers and Climate

Geysers exist in all climates, thus I removed "climate" as a factor necessary for geysers.

Geothermal activity on Triton

It seems a little strange that the article discusses the likelihood of geothermal activity on Triton. "Geothermal" seems like a word that could apply to Earth only. Perhaps someone with more knowledge on the subject can comment.

I get you point and agree with you. I do not know whom should i talk with on this. Maybe Geothermal relates to Earth but "geyser" (which the article is) has no restrictions. Indianescence (talk) 14:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

homero

homero chupame un huevooo

About the Table of Contents

Are the TOC and first section supposed to look like that? --Thinboy00 ^talk/_contribs @174, i.e. 03:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hydrothermal vents

Aren't undersea vents a type of geyser? If so, the article needs to be massively overwritten. For example the article claims only 1000 but it seems that underwater there are significantly more the article mentions two types of geysers, but wouldn't the undersea type be a third? etc., Perhaps a comparison of geysers and undersea vents is in order? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.18.146.209 (talk) 05:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

See hydrothermal vent. They are different from geysers, particularly that most vents seem to have a constant flow of water through them, so they're more like a hot spring. However, unlike a hot spring their motion seems to be due to heat-driven convection rather than gravity-driven water pressure. – SEWilco (talk) 05:53, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Article under massive construction.

the article is currently maintained by User:Sushant gupta and User:Indianescence. pls. discuss before making any big change. thank you, Sushant gupta (talk) 14:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Topics required to be coverd

1>An introduction to the geysers talking about how are they formed and where are they found. Just a brief paragraph.

 Done formation and working have been discussed. Sushant gupta (talk) 08:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

2>Relation between geysers and Volcanoes.
 Done by Sushant in paragraph of formation. 3>Geothermal Energy (important topic)
4>Uses of Geysers should cover:

a]Geothermal Energy

b]Other uses like heating of houses, industries etc.

c]Medical use by humans.

 Done

Comments welcome. Indianescence (talk) 07:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

So ultimately work is done. Commercial Medical Use is still disputed as Hot Springs are used for this purpose and not geysers. So i would say it should not be considered. Hot Springs article should look into the matter. Indianescence (talk) 08:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Survey

WP:Good article usage is a survey of the language and style of Wikipedia editors in articles being reviewed for Good article nomination. It will help make the experience of writing Good Articles as non-threatening and satisfying as possible if all the participating editors would take a moment to answer a few questions for us, in this section please. The survey will end on April 30.

• Would you like any additional feedback on the writing style in this article?

• If you write a lot outside of Wikipedia, what kind of writing do you do?

• Is your writing style influenced by any particular WikiProject or other group on Wikipedia?

At any point during this review, let us know if we recommend any edits, including markup, punctuation and language, that you feel don't fit with your writing style. Thanks for your time. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 01:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Indianescence

Ans. 1 Yes, i will always welcome additional feedbacks as they help in improving the article.

Ans. 2 Well, i am a student and i currently study English as a subject, therefore there is a lot of writing practice done by me in the form of Essays, reports etc.

Ans. 3 I have learnt a lot about writing through wikipedia. I had initially started with Gwen Stefani related articles and the language used in them has influenced me a little bit. But overall, i still write with the language style i usually use.

I am still not comfortable with the use of &nbsp but i do put in the essential punctuations.

I'm hoping we'll have some good news for you there soon; there's a current proposal in front of the software developers (at bugzilla) to have the software handle many of those line-break issues so that we don't have to. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 13:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I hope so too. Things like these (&nbsp and others) become a reason for people to oppose during FAC and GAC etc., which i feel is not correct. If such things are made mandatory then the real matter in the article remains ignored. And many a times it is not easy to give special attention to such line-break things. Indianescence (talk) 17:31, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Good article nomination on hold

This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of April 13, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: Overall, the article has high quality prose. There are some Manual of Style issues and writing style problems though. First, GA-class encyclopedic articles should never use self-referential language such as "Some types are stated below.". Simply state your facts, the organization of the article should be in a natural enough flow to suggest that what comes next elaborates on your previously stated points. In Artificial geysers, you refer to a pair of terms in italics. According to the MOS italics and quotes guidelines, words referred to as themselves should be in quotes not italics(example: "sheep" is the word for a domestic animal with wool). Last and of least importance: some of your image placement violates WP:MOS#Images and interferes with the readability of the text. I'm going to try and fix these myself. There are few other smaller MOS or layout concerns I can address personally as well. One I will note (because you talk about it above I think) is using of long dashes i.e. emdashes. If you're going to use these, don't put spaces around them. They should be touching the adjacent text.

2. Factually accurate?: Plenty of reliable sources are provided, but the use of in-line citations to these sources needs some work. With some notable exceptions, the general rule of thumb for GA citation standards are at least one citation at the end of each paragraph. Thus, the sections Formation and working, Eruptions, General categorization, the middle paragraph of Nitrogen geysers on Triton, and the end of Biology of geysers (when you claim things such as "first" and "most important", you should have in-line cites)should have additional citations added after the punctuation.

3. Broad in coverage?: Definitely broad in coverage. I have one suggestion though: the section Nitrogen geysers on Triton feels like too much detail about one minor aspect for a general overview. My understanding of the subject is limited, are these the only non-Earth geysers? If no other planets/moons have geysers, then this should be stated early on to make clear why so much detail is given.

4. Neutral point of view?: Gives fair representation to all significant points of view.

5. Article stability? Obviously stable, no edit wars etc.

6. Images?: All images have sources provided and proper licensing information.

For readability, please place any comments or questions pertaining to the review below rather than within the body of the review. Thank you!

Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. VanTucky 00:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

One more thing about the dashes. There is strong support both in and out of Wikipedia not to have spaces around very long dashes, and on most people's screens, those em-dashes are almost 2 m's long. However, on some screens, they're a little shorter, and the unspaced em-dashes look funny to some people. There is a lot of support at WT:MoS for saying, "If you see a spaced em-dash, change it to a spaced en-dash (–)", rather than asking people to take away the spaces. Do whichever looks better to you. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 11:38, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to give advice at the moment on meters vs. feet, because it's part of a current debate. Please look at WP:UNITS and think about how you want to handle these issues. For instance, should "feet" be the first units given? Remember to use the same or almost the same number of significant digits in conversion. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 13:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

(copied from my talk page) so what do you want! shall we use reversal of units. Sushant gupta (talk) 13:28, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

What I'm saying is that my own feelings are a little different from what WP:UNITS (which is part of WP:MoS) says, and a little different from what most people on WT:MoS and WT:MOSNUM have said ... I'd rather not say until we're finished with the conversations. When we get finished, I'll come back and post a message on the talk page, but my work on this isn't part of your Good Article nomination. VanTucky, do you have a preference? - Dan Dank55 (talk) 13:33, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I hope that all these discussions and debates going on don't affect the GA nominations. I would not like to see GA nominated articles to remain on Hold till all these debates are resolved. It will be a long process and time consuming. I am not being impatient here, but logical. The articles should be reviewed as usual and when a decision is taken, then the changes should be made. Just because of dashes and spaces, articles should not be kept on LONG holds. Indianescence (talk) 15:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Indianescence! thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 15:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not your GAN reviewer; you only have to listen to VanTucky, and he's not going to say anything unreasonable. I'm not going to review articles until May 1 when the survey is done. The most important thing is to be consistent in which units you choose, and whether you convert the units or not. Since every country except the U.S. uses SI units (sometimes called the metric system), there's some preference to use SI, especially in a "popular science" article like this one. But you can see in WP:UNITS that, for the benefit of US-Americans, we prefer that feet, miles, etc be added in parentheses. The {{convert}} template is quite useful, and one editor has already used it in your article. The reason I'm pointing out this one issue is that it's not really a style issue IMO; it's an accuracy and "free exchange of information" issue. The English Wikipedia has 2.3 million pages, but all of the Wikipedias have 10 million pages. Everyone knows that, if a conversion number is given in parentheses, you can't count on the accuracy of the second number as much as the accuracy of the first number; there will be a rounding error, at the least. So if the U.S. unit is given first, that makes it less likely that accurate information will travel between other Wikipedias and the English Wikipedia, or travel from or to anyone outside the U.S., which after all has only 300 million people in a world of 6.6 billion people. That's my thought, anyway. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 16:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

(unindent) My understanding of units is that the goal (at least for GA) is to: 1. use one system primarily. 2. when possible, convert the units to the other form in parentheses. It would be great if you could do that, but the GA criteria does not require that article comply 100% with the Manual of Style in every detail. Let me know what you prefer to do, I'll be passing the article once I hear from you in all likelihood. VanTucky 22:27, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

i think VanTucky is absolutely right. well Dan is currently busy with his discussion on WP:UNITS. as soon he reaches his conclusion we can change the layout. anyway user:Indianescence and i would rather suggest that the article should be reviewed with respect to fundamental criteria for GA. thanks, Sushant gupta (talk) 02:53, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

My previous note:

I have removed those sentences and i have also removed spaces around emdashes. Thank you for shifting those images. It was very kind. As you can see now, there is a citation at the end of every paragraph. I have worked on the inline citations.Indianescence (talk) 05:43, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

As you all can see now, the conversions are as follows uniformly:

Meter (feet)

Celcius (farenheit)

Kilometer (miles)

cubic kilometres (litres)

Its uniform in the whole article. I hope that is good enough. Indianescence (talk) 04:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

That's perfect. Thanks very much. I'll pass the article forthwith. Congratulations, VanTucky 02:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much.Indianescence (talk) 04:28, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks VanTucky! i appreciate your efforts in reviewing this article. Sushant gupta (talk) 14:46, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Requirements for FA

FA does not look far now! A little expansion here and there with some more effort, FA will be easy to achieve! I feel the following are essential now:

1.A section explaning working of Geothermal energy plants (brief explaination) and how does it depend on Geysers, how much energy they produce, the future of geothermal energy, should not be very long).

2.Tourism and Geysers (i don't feel its a bad idea at all!)

3.A little more expansion of Major Geyser fields to make them decent paragraphs.

 Done I have expanded those lines to paragraphs. I have even added some more reliable references. I feel that section is done. I think the only thing which is remaining is a proper map. But if this is the only map we can afford, then we can keep this also. Indianescence (talk) 14:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

4.It seems there are many style-related requirements which have to be fulfilled. The web site references should be renamed uniformly and properly. The book references look good. If they too have some requirements, they should be fulfilled.

5.Removing references from the lead and shifting them to the article.

6.Some little things here and there do require more references.

7.Relationship between geysers and volcanoes need expansion,maybe a new section.

I feel if these are done, then FA will be very easy. General expansion is a must. becomes 43,000 to 45,000 bytes long, it will be perfect. If the article The article already has a good framework for FA. Geyser is a article of Geographical importance and requires to be FA. Comments always welcome.Indianescence (talk) 17:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Enceludus

While Triton gets a mention, Enceladus also has (predominately) water geysers. Ref 'Cassini Observes the Active South Pole of Enceladus' DOI: 10.1126/Science, 1123013 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.233.237.117 (talk) 08:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Hot soda water geysers

“The world’s only hot soda[!?] water geyser” is allegedly to be found in Te Aroha, New Zealand. I wonder if somebody could add a passage about this and include it under the subdivision Taupo Volcanic Zone, New Zealand (or under the main article Taupo Volcanic Zone. Soda water in connection with geysers is mentioned in neither of these articles, but is cropping up “everywhere” in tourist brochures covering the NZ region. Hirpex (talk) 11:55, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

physics of geyser eruption

The article states that a geyser eruption begins with boiling at the bottom, and the surface waters are cooler (at least implied that they are not boiling). This does not appear to be the case for all geysers, and some of the more famous ones (such as Old Faithful) actually seem to reach the critical temperature near the top of the column. I need to dig at this a little more (this is my first wiki edit), but the "shock tube" model of Kieffer should probably be mentioned as a more modern alternative mechanism.

Brian 42 Davis (talk) 16:32, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Why no link to the Andernach Geyser page?

Hi, I was looking for info on the Andernach Geyser, and naturally I came to this page. It had a photo of the geyser, but a "page does not exist" tag on the Andernach Geyser name. When I clicked on the photo, I found a link in the description to a German language page on this particular geyser (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geysir_Andernach). Is there a reason why this German page is not linked to the Geyser page? Although it's a German page, I was still able to get the gist of it using the automatic translation. I'm simply not sure of the rules regarding linking pages of different languages, or on different Wikipedia sites, and would appreciate it if someone could clarify standard practice, before I go adding a link. Thanks, Resinguy (talk) 19:08, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Geyser. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.geocities.com/dmonteit/ov_quick_guide.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:07, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Geyser. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081122075312/http://www.rsnz.org/publish/nzjgg/1993/40.php to http://www.rsnz.org/publish/nzjgg/1993/40.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Geyser. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070630141427/http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~glennon/geysers/world.htm to http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~glennon/geysers/world.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Geyser. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070902032519/http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~glennon/geysers/index.htm to http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~glennon/geysers/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040903203044/http://www.iogen.ca/news/28_03_2003.html to http://www.iogen.ca/news/28_03_2003.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040207004906/http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~glennon/geysers/ to http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~glennon/geysers/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Geyser. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070416140350/http://geysircenter.com/english/geology.html to http://geysircenter.com/english/geology.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:33, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

"not playing league or mounds"

Under the "General Categorization" section the page says, "There are two types of geysers: fountain geysers which erupt from pools of water, typically in a series of intense, even violent, bursts; and musa geysers which erupt from not playing league or mounds of siliceous sinter." I suspect "not playing league or" can be deleted, but because I don't know much about geysers I left it up in case it was an awkward translation of some useful information. Can someone knowledgeable take a look? Alianoraree (talk) 10:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@Alianoraree: Thank you for spotting this. It was part of some vandalism a few days ago. I have reverted it. DuncanHill (talk) 20:05, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

GA concerns

I am concerned that this article no longer meets the good article criteria. Some of my concerns are listed below:

• There are uncited statements in the article, including entire paragraphs.
• There is a "better sources needed" orange banner from Nov 23.

Is anyone interested in fixing up the article, or should it go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 08:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Geyser

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result pending

There are uncited statements, including entire paragraphs. There is also a "better sources needed" banner from November 2023. Z1720 (talk) 22:32, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Fixed the "better sources needed" issue by finding reliable sources. Which paragraphs are uncited? Paragraphs in the lede that summarize the article may not need citations, per WP:CITELEAD. — hike395 (talk) 19:51, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@Hike395: I have added cn tags to the article where they are missing. Z1720 (talk) 20:18, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

@Z1720: I fixed all of the {{cn}} tags, removed material I could not source, replaced unreliable sources, and cleaned up the references in general. The article looks GA to me at this point: what do you think? — hike395 (talk) 10:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)