Talk:Mount Jackson (Antarctica)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mount Jackson (Antarctica) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Mount Jackson (Antarctica) has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 27, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 5, 2013.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Mount Jackson (pictured) with an elevation of 3,184 metres (10,446 ft) is the highest mountain in the Antarctic Peninsula?

British Overseas Territories

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Overseas Territories, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Overseas Territories 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.British Overseas TerritoriesWikipedia:WikiProject British Overseas TerritoriesTemplate:WikiProject British Overseas TerritoriesBritish Overseas Territories articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Antarctica Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Antarctica, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Antarctica 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.AntarcticaWikipedia:WikiProject AntarcticaTemplate:WikiProject AntarcticaAntarctica articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mountains Low‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comment

The initial information for this mountain was obtained by a query search at GNIS Antarctica Data Base Query Form. RedWolf 17:53, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

Opening line

The opening line possibly needs rewording IMO as the word massive, in it's context, doesn't sound very encyclopedic. Rob van vee 05:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mount Jackson (Antarctica)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 17:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dr. B, I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

On first pass, this looks quite strong. Well written and well sourced, and though brief, this seems appropriate to its subject. I'll do a search in a moment to make sure "main aspects" are indeed covered.

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is good, and spotchecks show no evidence of copyright issues.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Article is brief, but appears to cover main aspects.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass

Mount Hope

The information at [1] is consistent with two of my satellite sources. If it is correct then Mount Jackson is not the highest point of the Antarctic Peninsula or even an ultra prominent peak. Mount Hope, its replacement, appears to be at S 69:47:52 W 64:27:18. Viewfinder (talk) 05:14, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the press release from British Antarctic Survey. - 4ing (talk) 08:37, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]