very good with nice images and lots of information Avala 19:51, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Tentatively support. Well-written, but perhaps it could be longer - citing specific papers, people, &c. in the history section, perhaps? I'm not sure... Also, did plate tectonics actually contribute anything other than theoretical understanding, because, if it did, I didn't get such an impression from the article -- perhaps something on resultant predictions/findings, or theories based on this? James F. (talk) 20:27, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
This needs a list of the major plates in the article. Morwen - Talk 21:17, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- there is separated article- List of tectonic plates and List of tectonic plate interactions and List of plate tectonics topics
- Yes. But that doesn't mean that info shouldn't be summarised in this article! Morwen - Talk 21:49, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Added this now. Morwen - Talk 20:51, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- why don`t you give a support now?Avala 21:06, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- It doesn't really matter whether she does or not, since the real question is whether anyone opposes. So long as she's withdrawn her objections, you're in the same position whether she supports or not. Snowspinner 14:45, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)
- (not a vote) Does the plate image really need to occur twice? Jeronimo 17:57, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- they are differenr
- Umm, what? There are two images, one a map of the major plates, and one a diagrammatic over-view of subduction &c. James F. (talk) 19:13, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Comment: Please edit the captions. See Wikipedia:Captions. -- ke4roh 21:46, Jul 5, 2004 (UTC)
- Support after recent changes. Anarion 08:40, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)
- Support without reservation. An excellent article, rendering a sometimes-thorny concept readily accessible to the interested layperson. Denni☯ 22:27, 2004 Jul 11 (UTC)