User talk:Kevmin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] License tagging for Image:Torbernite1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Torbernite1.jpg. Wikipedia gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 02:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of minerals

Regarding azurite edits. I think if you examine the List of minerals article, you will find it does not claim to list all minerals for which there are Wikipedia articles - it is not comprehensive. Also the big list is linked there and needn't be linked in individual mineral articles. Thanks, Vsmith 21:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Grossular_Garnet_Macro_1.JPG

What make you think it is not Grossular_Garnet? It was discussed here and there was no definite answer, but it was leaning toward Grossular. It if you disagree with identification, could you tell me what you think it is so I can change the name? --Digon3 talk 20:27, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

The Triangle shaped faces that are prominent in this specimen are extreemly rare and do not occur in the arangemant of faces on your specimen. This is most likly to be quartz which has terminations that look exactly like this compair the specimens shown in the [[1] gallery and the [[2]] gallery at mindat. Colorless garnets are extreemly rare.--Kevmin 21:16, 19 August 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks for Ammonite Stuff

I just wanted to thank you for helping to flesh out some of the ammonite stubs! <333 Abyssal leviathin 03:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Phamton Crystals

I created a page called Phantom crystal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_crystal Would you mind editing it? Thank you! Neptunekh 03:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cypraeoidea

Hi Kev,

Can I ask you where exactly you found the family "Iviidae" as a part of Cypraeoidea? Is this a fossil family? If so we should indicate that. Since I have been unable to find this family among living mollusks, and because when I google it I get only Wikipedia-derived mentions, I am temporarily deleting the reference until I have some more evidence.

I very much look forward to hearing from you. Thanks, Invertzoo 13:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Fault

Sorry about that one. I was slightly careless. Lack of sleep is a bad thing. lol Do you know of any recently updated scientific articles on T-rex or Giga??Mcelite (talk) 23:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)mcelite

[edit] Scale information

Hi. I am sorry that you removed my additions to a number of mineral articles. It is imporant that an idea of scale is given on images within scientific aricles. This is a fundamental concept, otherwise how are readers to know if the object was, say, 1 millimetre or 10 metres across. It is quite legimate to noted the abscence of this information. I am even more dispointed regarding the actions of an aministrator in relation to my edits. Rather tahn engaing in debate this admin, Dreadstar, accused me of vandalism, threatened me and the blocked my edits. I would have been more than happy to discuss my edits with yourself, the adminstrator and anyone else. This I understand the "Wikipedia way." However this administrator has simply proved what many others have suggested, that admins use theier "powers" for their own enjoyment and to massage their fragile egos rather than for the benefit of Wikipedia. I have now changed by IP address and would still be happy to discuss the need for scale information on the images. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.222.195 (talk) 00:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your changes to articles on Ediacaran fossils

A rough consensus has developed that many of the Ediacaran fossils cannot be reliably assigned to any current kingdom, and should be left unassigned generally at any point above the Genus level. I'm not going to revert you, but don't be surprised if other editors do revert you. -- Donald Albury 21:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ferry County NRHP

Hey, good job on getting these filled out! Murderbike (talk) 01:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey, what good timing. I've been busting my butt getting the Pierce County list filled out, your article does a lot to help. And your citations look fine. Oh yeah, I think Sabalites is still an article that needs writing, not my area of expertise though. I'll see if I can't dig up some sources on those last FC sites. Cheers! Murderbike (talk) 08:12, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, this book has a couple sentences about the school. Not a lot of detail, but it's a start. this one has a picture, maybe more? my library doesn't have it. Murderbike (talk) 08:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
This book has info on the Barstow Bridge, and my library has it. I could photocopy the relevant pages and send them to you if you want. I suspect it also has info on the other bridge. Murderbike (talk) 08:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey, I fixed some minor things in the carousel article, looks pretty good now. As well, I photocopied the pages out of that book having to do with the two Ferry County bridges. If you want, I can mail them to you. I would do the articles myself, but I've bitten off a big project in completely overhauling the NRHP lists with a new table. Let me know if you want those pages. Murderbike (talk) 09:55, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ferry County Carousel DYK

Updated DYK query On 26 February 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ferry County Carousel, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 13:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Smilodon merge

Hi. You recently suggested that Smilodon articles be merged. On that article's Talk page, I mention that at least one member of WikiProject Mammals told me that "every species warrants its own page." I have no idea whether this is the consensus of WikiProject Mammals or not.
In fact, now I think that I'll post to them and ask for a firm declaration on this question. I personally don't care how we do it, but I think that we should be consistent with all Mammals articles. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 02:27, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Nautilus

Wrong age-- nice catch! :) It's people like you that we need more of on Wikipedia! Bob the Wikipedian, the Tree of Life WikiDragon (talk) 20:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Use of the Dagger

Logically, you are correct. I don't know of any wikipolicy - if you come across one, please let me know of it. My view is that "enthusiastic use" does no harm - if you feel differently, feel free to revert. I suppose the one advantage "enthusiastic use" could have is that if the dagger is used only once for a high-level taxon, it could be overlooked by casual readers.WolfmanSF (talk) 00:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Aquamarine

I made a change to the aquamarine page. I thought it was weird that 1) people reading the article would have no idea what the value of the gemstone is. (You indicated that was why you removed it: "Wikipedia is not a price guide" ). 2) I thought it was necessary to include something about aquamarine treatments. So why was that part taken off? I am a bit new to wikipedia: I would like to contribute and I have read the guidelines, but if my contributions are taken off, I guess I need to understand better to avoid wasted time. Thanks (Smartstar10 (talk) 00:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC))