Talk:Trout Creek Mountains

Sources to use more

• http://www.andykerr.net/odg-trout-creek-mountains/
• http://web.archive.org/web/20090625004745/http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/research&reports/WildFish/CHAPTER4.html
• http://www.summitpost.org/trout-creek-mountains/511954

--Jsayre64 (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

• •  Done Jsayre64 (talk) 22:47, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cptnono (talk · contribs) 11:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

This is a great article and looks to be a little bit of expansion and decent peer review away from being FAC material. Some suggestions to meet GA criteria:

Prose and MoS:

• The lead should be expanded and broken into paragraphs. There is enough information in the article and sources to make this happen.
• "riparian" may need more of an explanation in the article along with wikilinking it since it is used so often. "alus sloopes" could be useful but is not as prominent.
• Consider the frequency of "The Trout Creek Mountains". It comes across as repetitive. This is especially true when two paragraphs in a row are started with the full name. Maybe "The mountains" or other variations would work.
• The climate section could be improved with information on average temperatures.
• Prose are not my strongest point as a reviewer. There are a couple words I might change and comas that might be substituted with the word "at". These might be personal preferences. Please seek a peer review for more scrutiny.

Factual accuracy (no action needed)

• My initial concern was that Peakbagger may not be RS. It doesn't appear to be a major concern after looking into it more. IS this a common source in the topic area?
• The tool shows a red reference but it links fine. (no action needed)

Breadth of coverage

• Please address the length of the lead as mentioned above.

NPOV & stability (no action needed)

• Pretty much N/A

Images

• The image under flora should be on the right.
• The image under Human uses should use the "upright" parameter.
• The before and after pictures at the end are a great addition. It might be better as a single image. (no action needed)

• Alttext would be appreciated but is not necessary. (no action needed)

Cptnono (talk) 11:38, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

How does it all look now? Regarding Peakbagger, it's a longtime site with tons of information about every mountain you can think of and no biases/opinions. So it's very often used on Wikipedia. Jsayre64 (talk) 23:22, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

You just wrote a Good Article. Please take this to FA. Nice work.Cptnono (talk) 05:32, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing. I'll see when I have time for an FA attempt. Probably not soon, though. Jsayre64 (talk) 16:10, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Peer review

As requested, I've begun a peer review of this interesting and informative article. Here are some preliminary thoughts and suggestions:

1) Add a map. It could be a simple locator map like the one in Oregon Canyon Mountains.

2) Mention the general trend of the range, north–south, in the lead.

3) Is it possible to say how Disaster Peak got its name? What was the disaster? If this proves interesting, a "Names" section becomes a possibility. Oregon Geographic Names (OGN) has information about the origin of "McDermitt", for example, named for Fort Dermit, which was named for Lt. Col. Charles McDermit (p. 624). (The spelling variations are not typos.) The OGN has a fairly long entry for Whitehorse Ranch (pp. 1032–33) and the white horse ridden, it is said, by Black Rock Tom, a Native American, in skirmishes in the 1860s.

4) Geography. Add approximate distances to the three communities (Fields, Denio, McDermitt) and add the distance and direction from Reno. Mention the two relevant counties, one in Oregon and one in Nevada, in the main text.

5) A sentence in the geology section says, "The Trout Creek Mountains are composed mostly of basalt from a series of shield volcanoes that once stood where Steens Mountain is today." This is sourced to Ellen Bishop's book. Alas, someone borrowed my copy of the book, and I have to get it back to check the reference. However, on the face of it, it's hard to see why the Steens' flow would not have filled in the caldera if the Steens flow formed the Trout Creek Mountains two million years after the caldera formation. Geology of Oregon (Elizabeth and William Orr, 5th edition, 1999) says something somewhat different about the mountain formation: "About the same time as the Steens Mountain eruption, extensive Miocene ash-flow tuffs covered southeast Oregon and northern Nevada, originating from more than a dozen different volcanic centers aligned in a northeastern direction across the basin and Owyhee Uplands. Eruptions from volcanic cones in the Lake Owyhee and McDermitt fields resulted in immense calderas. The largest of these is McDermitt caldera which is bisected by the Oregon-Nevada line." (p. 85) A map (p. 86) of the volcanic fields in the region shows flows from the Steens Mountain shield volcano covering an area that is distinct from and west of the McDermitt flows. More research can probably sort this out.

6) Create a separate article for McDermitt Caldera or, if there's not enough information to justify a separate article, delete the red link.

7) A sentence in the "Human uses" section says, "Commercial mining has not occurred because mineral deposits in the area have not been economical to extract." The reliable source, [1] cited in support of this claim only deals with the Disaster Peak Wilderness Study Area of about 32,000 acres out of 811 square miles (519,000 acres) in the Trout Creek Mountains. Its findings do not extend to the rest of the mountain range. Furthermore, the authors of the source report recommend setting aside 2,000 acres or so within this 32,000 acres for geothermal exploration and a proposed open-pit gold mine; this seems to contradict the claim about mineral deposits. In addition, Geology of Oregon says, "Within the McDermitt caldera complex, the Opalite Mining district, which includes the McDermitt Mine, the Bretz Mine, and the Opalite Mine, have had a total output of 270,000 flasks of mercury, the richest supply of mercury in the western hemisphere." The article says that mining continued through "as late as 1957 when the ore was sent to Salt Lake City for processing."(p. 93) It may be that no commercial mining has gone on in the Trout Creek Mountains in recent years, but the claim in the article seems incorrect as stated. There may actually be enough material about historic mining in the Trout Creek Mountains to devote a section to it. Geology of Oregon mentions tunnels "driven 80 feet below the ore body" and "a large rotary furnace completed here in 1926" for roasting ore. There may still be tailings, old machinery, and other remnants of the mining operations on the floor of the caldera. I think I could find more about this by searching JSTOR, which I'd be happy to do, if you like.

These are the main things so far. Finetooth (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Tasks 1, 2, and 4 are done. I will research more about Disaster Peak. I added approximate distances to communities as the crow flies (The National Map has a tool for that under the "Advanced" tab). I don't think in this case that there's a standard or practical way to measure those distances by road. Information from Geology of Oregon would be great. I don't have that book, neither do I have In Search of Ancient Oregon, and Google Books isn't letting me read either of those. I probably should get around to creating an article for McDermitt Caldera. There seems to be plenty of information on it, but almost exclusively in scientific journals. Your points about mining are good ones. It would be great if you could add relevant things from Geology of Oregon. And thanks for the helpful suggestions. Jsayre64 (talk) 23:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Will do. About five minutes ago the guy who had my copy of In Search of Ancient Oregon returned it. I'll look at what Bishop has to say and see if I can reconcile the differing accounts. Finetooth (talk) 00:23, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks also for mentioning how you determined the straight-line distances between cities. I've sometimes looked at non-RS sites that have a tool like that, but this one would be RS. I didn't know it was there. Finetooth (talk) 00:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

I found some interesting stuff about the origin of the name "Disaster Peak." Nevada Place Names, by Helen S. Carlson, says that the peak was named such because prospectors were attacked by Bannock people there in 1864. By finding Disaster Peak in the GNIS here, I found some old correspondence between Lewis McArthur and the Board on Geographic Names. The fourth file listed under "Correspondence" contains a clipping from a Winnemucca newspaper back in 1948. It tells a much longer tale, and I'm doubtful about some of the details—mainly that a prospector named the peak "Mount Disaster" just minutes before the supposed disaster. Jsayre64 (talk) 04:15, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes. In my experience, newspaper articles are not always reliable, and it helps to have a backup RS for doubtful claims. Budget constraints may induce low-circulation newspapers to hire part-timers who specialize in news from outlying towns or in colorful local history. They may or may not be really careful about details and sources. On another matter, I found a DEQ article with photos of one of the abandoned mine sites. I don't necessarily think it's of any use for the Trout Creek Mountains article, but I found it interesting nonetheless. Finetooth (talk) 23:21, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Those before, after images at the bottom are really a nice way to show the difference in the riparian zone. Better than words. Finetooth (talk) 01:05, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

I think this is almost ready for FAC. I made a few more minor changes this morning. Please revert or alter any you don't think are wise. The one remaining thing that jumps out at me is that the last paragraph of the "Human uses" section and the following section about the compromise seem to echo one another a bit too much. Maybe that last paragraph could be squashed and merged with the section below. Finetooth (talk) 17:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree. Those paragraphs should flow better now. (Another thing I was considering was whether the last section should be changed to a sub-section of "Human uses," but I think either way works just fine.) Thanks for the careful review, and let me know if you catch other issues. I'll soon nominate this for FA. Jsayre64 (talk) 23:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Climate

The Climate section states "Over half of the annual precipitation occurs between the beginning of March and the end of June.". However, the figures in the table below it don't bear this out. Total precip for Mar-Jun is 22.1 + 23.4 + 23.6 + 14 = 83.1 mm, which is only 41% of the annual total of 202.7. The inclusion of June in the statement seems particularly odd, as it's the second-driest month of the year (but even including the wettish month of February in the total still won't bring the proportion up to 50%). Colonies Chris (talk) 10:13, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

That's from the source cited: [2], page 13. It says the data comes from the McDermitt station, not Whitehorse Ranch. I tried to clear up that confusion in the climate section just now. Jsayre64 (talk) 21:25, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations to all the contributors to this featured article. You deserve a lot of applause, recognition and appreciation. What a wonderful article.

  Bfpage |leave a message  17:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! Check out all the other great stuff we've made at WikiProject Oregon. Jsayre64 (talk) 05:51, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Major kudos, indeed! Well done! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 06:01, 25 November 2015 (UTC)