This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Mountains Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Antarctica High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Louisiana State University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

Above message substituted from {{WAP assignment}} on 13:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Great intro. Right off the bat you say why the mountains are important and lay out what you will be talking about in the rest of the article. Good job.

Three Main Causes of uplift section <--- this section seems to be lacking. I don't know if I got the full gist of each mechanism from the descriptions given. You could either explain each a little more, maybe using two to three sentences for each, or include a figure for each showing the mechanisms.

West antarctic rift sequence section ---- This section might need just a little more background info. I know you go into the history next but you may want to just include an age associated with the rifting.

uplift history section seems to cover all the necessary bases

In the exhumation history section, you could include more data associated with fission track dating. What elements were dated, what data was acquired? Were there multiple studies that elucidated information over time? It would be good to show the history based on the order things were discovered in. If something was or still is the topic of some debate, include both sides of the argument.

Figure: Paleogeographic Reconstruction of WARS and TAM. <--- a map with a zoomed out map of where this close up is from would be good. i don't know what part of the world i'm looking at

Regional Tectonic Events Associated with Exhumation <--- this list is good but I don't know if I would just slap it on the end. It might be better before or within the uplift history section to help break up that larger block of text

Solid introduction and changes you made after your first draft have paid off. You explain importance and models that you will present at the beginning that intrigues the reader.

For your section on West Antarctic Rift Influence a large scale geologic map would be nice and be a good transition into your image that shows the reconstruction of the WARS and TAM.

Uplift history flows well and the images are nice, neat, and easy to understand.

The exhumation history is on the right track but I'm not sure how you're relating that to the evolution of the Transantarctic Mtns. Include examples for your study area and once this is done I think you'll have a good page.

Overall i like the paper and it is better then your original. But there are still changes that can be made.

There are many grammar errors such as missing commas throughout; #3 in the last section needs capitalization; "seafloor spreading" in the third sentence needs parentheses to denote that it is the same as rifting and not a different mechanism; and substitute "is" for "are" in the second to last sentence of the first paragraph.

The way you ended the paper with a list just seems weird. Maybe you could put that list somewhere else or add a conclusion after.

The image that is not yours was kind of confusing and could be explained better.

The biggest thing you could do to enhance you paper is provide a broad satellite/geologic/topographic image of Antarctica/Transantarctic Mountains, because it helps provide a mental image of what your talking about as the reader reads. Your information you gave was great but I still didn't know exactly what you were talking about because I couldn't visualize in my mind what the area looks like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbouch2 (talk • contribs) 04:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]