Talk:Erg (landform)

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

Geography Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Geography To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles. Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes Map : See Wikipedia requested maps Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places Stubs : See Geography stubs

I've added some interwikis. The German one, de:Erg (Sahara), isn't perfect, since its scope is limited to the Sahara, but it's pretty close. Melchoir 03:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technically speaking Antarctica is the world's largest dessert not the Sahara as mentioned on line 4 in the first paragraph. Pel99 18, February, 2007

Looks like it has been corrected. By the way, it's desert, dessert is slightly different :) Richard001 03:29, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Pel99 meant (Ant)arctic roll? 86.148.48.248 (talk) 15:03, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a read of the article and checked it against the criteria. There being no major problems, I've passed it. All I can suggest is adding an image to go with the extraterrestrial ergs, if possible. The list of ergs was a little long so I made a second column. Although it's not a problem with the article itself, it would definitely look better with few red links.

As for length, it is a little short, but I'm not sure how extensive the article should and could be. I don't see length as a problem, but going into greater depth would in no way harm the article either. This is only the first review I've done, and I know very little about the subject, so comments from more experienced editors would be welcome. Richard001 03:24, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another possibility is creating an image gallery on Commons to go with the article. I can't find anything there on ergs in particular. Richard001 09:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is

transcluded from Talk:Erg (landform)/GA1

. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

• As this article is largely a list of ergs it fails 1b of the
  talk) 14:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • I disagree that the list of ergs makes up the majority of the article. Would moving the list to a separate article warrant the restoration of the article's GA status?
    chat} 19:02, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Moving the list would certainly address my major concern, but there are other problems as well. For instance this is an article about ergs, not sand dunes, yet the Extraterrestrial ergs section is largely about dune fields on Venus and Titan, not ergs, thus failing criteria 3b. Reference #11 seems to have been moved as well. --
      talk) 21:51, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • If you read the lead paragraph, you would know that ergs are large dune fields. And the term "dune field" is only used in reference to Venus. Checking the source, the size of those fields definitely qualifies them as ergs, so I will change the wording accordingly.
        chat} 17:57, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • The lead defines a dune field as an area of sand dunes less than 125 square kilometres. If it is the case that the dune fields on Venus are greater than 125 square kilometres, should they not be called ergs then? The information on Titan is even more vague, "sand dunes". This is not an article on sand dunes or dune fields, but on ergs. If you feel that I have been overly harsh in delisting this article then I would encourage you to take your concerns to
          talk) 18:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply
          ]