User talk:Geologyguy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 2 Image:Ak7.jpg 3 re:Glacier NP 4 Geophysical survey article 5 Amchitka 6 Gondwana 7 Glacier 8 Yellowstone 9 AMK152's Geotimeboxes 10 Butte 11 Susquehanna River older than Atlantic Ocean 12 Good work! 13 deletions of otispa 14 Mountain 15 Blue Helmet, 16 New NRHP Collaboration Division 17 Carbonate platform

[edit] Welcome!

I see you created an article Misty fjords and that you are a geologist. You may be interested in joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Protected areas, an attempt to coordinate all protected areas worldwide in standardizations for protected areas. To coincide with the official name of the protect area page you created, I have moved it to Misty Fjords National Monument. It is important that we also not timestamp on the article pages, only doing so in talk pages and on the discussion pages. Let me know if I can be any help to you on future editing as I have been around awhile.--MONGO 09:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

---

Thanks very much. I'm basically a newbie, and I appreciate your revisions greatly.

--Geologyguy 15:25, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ak7.jpg

When you upload images you hold the copyright to, please be sure to tag them with {{gfdl}}, otherwise we can't be sure of the copyright status of the images and may have to delete them at some point. Thanks for your contributions. --Gmaxwell 03:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re:Glacier NP

Thank you for your kind comments. I was born and raised in Montana, so I am very familiar with the park, and that does make it easier to write about it. It would be nice to come home, but my work keeps me elsewhere. I'm sure I'll see your work and help as I can. Happy editing!--MONGO 17:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geophysical survey article

Thanks for your input regarding the "Geophysical survey" article. It has been moved to Archaeological geophysics. When I wrote that article, it was to replace a rather poor one that dealt only with archaeological applications and was linked only from archaeological articles. The Geophysical survey page is now wide open for a really good general article on the subject that I, as an archaeologist, am not qualified to write. ---Tapatio 15:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much for doing that. I'll try to work on the more general article, but it will not be immediately. Cheers --Geologyguy 15:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Amchitka

Hi Geologyguy,

Amchitka is a current featured article candidate. What's needed is a section on the geology of the island, and I wondered whether you might be able to assist? If you could help by summarising this source - and any others you think appropriate - it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Jakew 21:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gondwana

Thanks for the correction with Gondwana. Nurg 09:33, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Glacier

re: "The Great Lakes formed approximately at the end of the Pleistocene period, when the glacier-carved lake basins were filled with melt water from the retreating ice sheet."

I was just about to revert that myself, but I wouldn't call it vandalism, exactly. It's a true statement; it seems more like a kid trying to contribute, albeit a bit sloppily. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 23:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification! Cheers Geologyguy 00:11, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yellowstone

Yes, it has been very difficult to resume working on that article, expand the sections, add better references and the like when dealing with that editor. I posted on the arbcom case some information regarding his edits, especially the one where he removed an entire section and then deliberately altered the spelling in the remaining section. While an accidental removal of a chunk of text can be explained as an accident, altering that spelling is clearly vandalism. Anyway, maybe in a few weeks I can get back to the article and resume where I left off and all assistance to make improvements are always welcome. Thanks.--MONGO 21:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

CamperStrike has been confirmed by checkuser [1] to be a blocked editor evading his blocks and has now been blocked indefinitely. Expect to see some other anon or trolling IP's to make an effort to continue to stir up trouble on Yellowstone and related articles.--MONGO 13:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Interesting! Maybe that page can settle down now! Thanks. Cheers --Geologyguy 14:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AMK152's Geotimeboxes

Thanks, I could use the help in reverting. I also found a couple of articles that didn't have their proper footers, so it is not just two steps back. I have left discussion on some of the associated talk pages, see for example Talk:Pliocene. I am hoping that I can find a project page where this discussion would be appropriate. --Bejnar 02:04, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps on the Template_talk:Geotimebox page? Geologyguy 02:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Butte

No problem -- it sounded like we were trying for the same result! --Walor 16:22, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Susquehanna River older than Atlantic Ocean

I was deeply puzzled by that paragraph of the Susquehanna River article, and spent some trouble trying to find someone to review it: 1 2. Unfortunately, there is no WikiProject Geology.

The paragraph, as written, seems extremely unlikely. Perhaps you know someone who can take a look at it and make an authoritative decision. I would be really grateful if someone could clear this up. -- Dominus 01:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I read your note on the Geologic Timescale project talk page -- I definitely agree that the paragraph in question seems unlikely, but I don't know myself... so I added the "citation needed" tag for the time being. Hopefully someone more knowledgeable than us will come along and either confirm or (I expect) delete it, and I'll keep my eyes open about it as well. Thanks for the original notice. Cheers Geologyguy 01:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not know about the Susquhanna in particular, but there are rivers in the Appalachians that pre-date the opening of the Atlantic. The French Broad River among others has its headwaters near the Blue Ridge escarpment, and flows west across the crest of the Blue Ridge mtns to the Tennessee river, then onto the Ohio. Any river that starts on one side of the mountains and flows to the other through an eroded gap must be older than the mountains. in the case of the French Broad river, its flow away from the Atlantic way probably initiated in the Triassic, when doming of Pangea occurred prior to continental rifting. The Blue Ridge escarpment represents the original rift, eroded back from the shore. See similar relations in Brazil and India. Geodoc 05:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good work!

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		The barnstar of diligence is awarded to you for your excellent contributions. Thank you! MONGO 22:39, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

WOW! Thank YOU! It is a real honor to get my first barnstar from an editor that I respect as much as I do you! Thanks very much. Cheers - Geologyguy 22:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure.--MONGO 07:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] deletions of otispa

rockhead (aka:Geologyguy), good u r watching my op-eds,your first comment was re the content of my webpage oiljetpump.com. I notice the Schlumberger dictionary is added to several articles... the schlumberger web page is a STRICTLY commercial page with information. I have no problem with such an approach. What i have a problem with is rockheads who favor one commercial site over another.

secondly, i decided to add a comment from an AAG web page to see what you would then do. it was also deleted using a different pretext. I will appeal your actions unless your deletion of the AAG link is restored by Feb 28/07. opa —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Otispa (talk • contribs) 16:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

Feel free! (copied to Vsmith) Cheers Geologyguy 17:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

ok rokhead... you say If oiljetpump.com is your site then you are simply not allowed by Wikipedia policies to link to it, we're not here to promote your business so i say ...

If "Schlumberger" is your site then you are simply not allowed by Wikipedia policies to link to it, we're not here to promote your business, "Schlumberger".

You are aware that Schlumberger is a "for profit" commercial enterprise, no? So please provide more clearly the difference between referencing to an article residing on the Schlumberger web page and referencing to an article residing on oiljetpump.com??

Also i ask you to show where i am selling anything on your oiljetpump.com ? .. as best i can see the site is information only.

ok, for the GSA page, i will reference you to slide 11 of http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/viewHandout.cgi?uploadid=6 and it reads "Upper Ordovician Zone, Clean Carbonate, Western Latvia"

and what may i ask was the article about?????

da ordovician, no??? or yes????

but you say it lacked relevancy??? please explain....--Otispa 00:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

ps... since you do not use any variant of your christian name but rather go by the psuedo "geologguy" it seems rockhead is also suitable alias.--Otispa 15:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Answered on his talk page. Geologyguy 17:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mountain

I was thinking about creating an article on Hollowtop Mountain to have as a companion to Mount Jefferson (Montana). Since these two peaks are so close to each other and I see you added a great deal of information on the Jefferson article, I thought maybe you might help us distinguish the two peaks. Do you have any images of either summit?--MONGO 08:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I definitely have some of Hollowtop and have had it on my (back burner) list to add to WP. Mt J is not so distinctive in appearance but I'll see what I can find - I have a few thousand pics of the Tobacco Roots. Cheers Geologyguy 15:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Blue Helmet,

a white flag and a flak jacket. Why on earth does plate tectonics get vandalised so much? Any way, thanks for not 'shooting' me edit and keep up the good work with the protection. Regards, Fred 03:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! There are indeed so many (who knows why?) it's a bit of a battle to be sure to keep the ones that are OK. Cheers Geologyguy 03:49, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

No worries, just I recognise it must be tricky work. I will put a note on the talk page first, next time. Cheers, Fred 04:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, maybe I missed something - did I do something to your addition of the link to S. Warren Carey? If so I didn't mean to - I did (I thought) revert an edit right after yours by a vandal adding "albert einstein" somewhere on the page... I don't think that removed your edit. As far as I'm concerned, your addition of the Carey link was appropriate. Cheers Geologyguy 04:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

No. Not that I'm aware of. A random, yet genuine, thankyou day. I corrected a previous comment, in case clarity was the cause of your concern. I'm unwatching your page, feel free to comment on mine. Regards, - Fred 04:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New NRHP Collaboration Division

Hey, saw you were a participant in the National Register of Historic Places WikiProject. I thought I would let you know that there is a new Collaboration Division up for the project. The goal of the division is to select an article or articles for improvement to Good article standard or higher. There is a simple nomination process, which you can check out on the division subpage, to make sure each candidate for collaboration has enough interested editors. This is a good way to get a lot of articles to a quality status quickly. Please consider participating. More details can be seen at the division subpage. IvoShandor 11:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Carbonate platform

Hi Geologyguy,

I have no idea who you are, but sure enough you knows something about geology... I am a researcher in sedimentology-stratigraphy at the University of Padova. I had to teach 12 hours of English and so I proposed to my students to expand a geology stub here in Wikipedia. It was Carbonate platform, which in fact is no more a stub now... My students would be happy if someone external could take a look to the article and, perhaps, suggest or make changes (to the style, or to the contents).

Would you do that? It would be great... or maybe you know someone here who could do that. The students were enthustastic about the idea, I am suggesting that if they get some feedback they may continue to contribute.

Thanks anyways, either you can find the time to take a look or not. Cheers, --Kaapitone 20:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, thanks for asking, and thanks to your students for expanding the stub. It is much better than it was before! I made a few simple stylistic and English usage changes, nothing major. Thanks again! Cheers Geologyguy 20:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

...well, what you just did is beyond my expectations. THANKS!!! --Kaapitone 20:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)