Talk:Eastern Block of the North China Craton

Geology Low‑importance

	Geology portal Talk:Eastern Block of the North China Craton is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

China Low‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles 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.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Eastern Block of the North China Craton appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 17 January 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the oldest rock in the Eastern Block of the North China Craton is a 3.8- to 3.6-billion-year-old trondhjemitic piece of gneiss?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eastern Block of North China Craton.

Wikipedia

Comment from Ariel[edit]

Hi Yancy, Nice contents and use of language. Very fluent, precise and concise.

Some suggestions:

Refine the figures: it would be great if you could add names of the places you've mentioned in the text (e.g. Anshan) on the map in "Lithology & geological formation". Also, add scales for the cross sections.
In part two (summary), add a line or two to breifly explain why the evidences you've mentioned are evident for corresponding geological processes (or maybe include it in the text in part one).
Add some sections discussing issues other than hard rock geolog, e.g. structures, paleontology, mineral resources.

All in all, great job!

Recommendations from Alex[edit]

In "Neoarchean" sections, you can use bullet points to summarize each formations and its tectonic origin so that this would be more reader-friendly.
In reference list, you can solve "Check date values in: |date= (help)" problem by removing "month". (E.g. (2013-09) --> (2013)).
Using full name rather than an abbreviation (E.g. BIF --> Band Iron Formation) so that this makes readers easier to read.

--Alexnlk (talk) 13:19, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Recommendation[edit]

Good and well-elaborated topic. Some suggestions are as below: 1. Some terms are technical, maybe some simple explanations in the paragraph could be added. 2. Enlarge all the figures so that people could look at it without clicking into it. 3. Reason why "Magmatic arc model" and "Large igneous province (LIP)" has been objecting should be elaborated a little bit more. Kenwongtk (talk) 15:05, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Recommendations from Abraham

Maybe you can use a table to compare the two models based on their hypothesis, evidence, and limitations.
The legend of the diagram of "Map of exposed Archean basement rocks and Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt. Modified from Zhao et al., 2005." may include all the colors.
Some terms can be hyperlinked.

--AMLSIU (talk) 13:30, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Message from Tommy[edit]

The evolution diagrams are easy to understand.
It would be great to show how massive the tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite is, so you may need a map.
It would to great to show the dome structure of the tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite, so you may need a cross section.
You present a very organized section on geological formation, but it would be great if you can sum up several key features of the lithology.

Makhkugeo (talk) 17:40, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Jacqueline[edit]

Good use of table to summarise the lithology and geological events
Figure 1: the colour of the shaded area is a bit light, maybe try using a darker / contrasting colour?
Some terms are a bit technical even if they’re hyperlinked, you can try to add a sentence to explain or describe it
You can also add a table showing the characteristics of rocks, e.g. what rocks are found in Jiao-Liao-Ji Belt (If you feel like it’s redundant you can make it collapsable too)

JacqCLSin (talk) 19:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 17:41, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the oldest rock in the Eastern Block of North China Craton is 3.8–3.6 billion-year-old trondhjemitic gneiss? Liu, D.; Wilde, S. A.; Wan, Y.; Wu, J.; Zhou, H.; Dong, C.; Yin, X. (2008-03-01). "New U-Pb and Hf isotopic data confirm Anshan as the oldest preserved segment of the North China Craton". American Journal of Science. 308 (3): 200–231[1]

Reviewed: Dein Lob, Herr, ruft der Himmel aus

Created/expanded by Yansytang (talk) and then moved to mainspace. Nominated by Graeme Bartlett (talk) at 02:12, 30 November 2019 (UTC).[reply]

This article is new enough and long enough. The hook facts are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright or plagiarism issues. A QPQ has been done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]