# Talk:El Laco

This review is transcluded from Talk:El Laco/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:52, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
It will be great to review one of your volcanoes again. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:52, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

General
I see some duplinks. You can fix them yourself by this tool.
Lead
Citations are generally excluded from the lead unless you are saying something controversial.
Geology
What is "poryphyric"?
What is "metasomatic alteration"?
Iron-rich deposits
Try adding some subheadings
These iron oxide deposits were found in 1958 By?
Petrology
The iron-containing rocks are subordinate Can you add what exactly "subordinate" means here?
You can try combining a few lines using semicolons.
 crustal contamination or isotopic effects during fractional crystallization Wikilinks possible?
Some atmospheric water influence Does this mean "influence of atmospheric moisture"?
Link sulfur at first mention
What is "hydrothermal alteration" (if you link this, link at first mention in the article) and "alteration halo"?
Environment
Can you explain a bit about "low bushland"? Bushland may be linked, but some readers may not understand "low"
The prose reads well and is quite interesting. Those were all my comments. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:52, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Sainsf Not sure about whether cites in the lead are actually discouraged - WP:LEAD does state there is no blanket rule. The source does not say who the discoverer(s) in 1958 were. Not sure which sentences should be combined, honestly. I think I got the other issues.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Not exactly discouraged, just that it is expected that lead stuff also occurs in the main article, and is cited there itself. So there is no need for citations in the lead, unless it is controversial and can be challenged. Combining sentences is not necessary, and I see the difficulty in such a factual article. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
@Sainsf: I've backed out the now unnecessary sources in the lead section.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:41, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. I am sure this can be promoted now. Awesome article! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:52, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Sources indicating that that there was mining up to 2009 seem wrong. This reported produce appear to have come from the processing of waste rock. Thus its not not new mining but the finishing off piles from past mining. Ingminatacam (talk) 15:04, 4 August 2025 (UTC)

However, that source says that this company had equipment there. Do you prefer that we not mention it? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:38, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
I infer that there must have been some CMP equipment at El Laco at the time for the processing of waste rock. This would not be true mining but the reprocessing of old piles of discarded material. In in 2000s and 2010, but also in the 2020s, old iron mines in Chile have been worked this way. Some material seems to have been extracted as there are reports of ore extracted, so its not just the equipment. Ingminatacam (talk) 11:43, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
I guess this makes sense, are there sources which delineate exactly what occurred at El Laco in 2009? Sorry, been out of the loop for a while. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
I will come back with more specific sources but I remeber that in a report (probably COCHILCOs annual report that show data for the last 10 years) last the production of iron in Antofagasta Region dates to 2009. Then are these news telling of a new CMP project in El Laco in 2009 and that CMP finally desisted from further investments in El Laco in 2013. Ingminatacam (talk) 10:10, 30 August 2025 (UTC)