This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 7 |
Saw your addition of WP:Volcanoes to Coaswt Mountains. Thing is, then so also the Alaska Range, the Interior Mountains, maybe the Hazelton Mountains, theYellowstone, Great Basin and all of the Sierra Mader (incl. del Sur) and every other range int he Ring of Fire; the Andes, the Kuriles, eveyr island chain with volcanoes etc a=tc. I dont' think it's meant to be that broad in scope/definition. Skookum1 ( talk) 05:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I finally got a chance to take a look at this and it looks like you took care of it yourself. Your image looks good, sorry I wasn't able to help. Kmusser ( talk) 19:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sémhur. I'm plaining to make a major expanson for the Coast Mountains article and I noticed there are images on the website here that would be useful for my expansion. Is there a possibility you could make these images? Black Tusk
Thank you for your interesting additions to the volcanic group listing. They contribute significantly, especially for Canada and the North American continent generally. Gubernatoria ( talk) 16:03, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks Gubernatoria ( talk) 16:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Will do Gubernatoria ( talk) 06:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Blacktusk-- I see you deleted some categories from Duluth Complex. The article also covers the North Shore Volcanics (which, as you see, redirects there). The two formations seem to be treated together a lot, and they interleave both temporally and spatially. I don't get too worked up about categories, but there was a reason why the editor added them there. When I find a public-domain map which shows the relationship (at least in two dimensions) of the intrusive and extrusive rocks, I'll add it (or create one myself). Best regards, Kablammo ( talk) 20:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Category:WikiProject Earthquakes categories, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Category:WikiProject Earthquakes categories has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (
CSD C1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Category:WikiProject Earthquakes categories, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
here
CSDWarnBot (
talk) 19:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Black Tusk: This article on a Colombian volcano is now being reviewed for promotion to a featured article. Would you be willing to take a look at it, and post your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nevado del Ruiz? The featured article process is short of reviewers, and additional folks are needed to look at articles. As you can see, this article has been reviewed for sources, images, and citation and manual of style compliance, but it would be helpful to have one conversant in the field (such as you) give it a critical review to see if it is comphensive on its subject matter, and represents Wikipedia's best articles. The featured article criteria are what articles are judged by. Even if you have not reviewed an featured article candidate before, your contributions should be welcomed. Most writers want their articles to be reviewed by objective outsiders who can spot things they overlooked, or make suggestions for improvement. Kablammo ( talk) 00:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
No proof it's a volcano, so far, but I thought you might find this interesting, given its location (Lava Fork et al. is to the SE). Skookum1 ( talk) 02:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm just stubbing this up, all I can really provide is elevation and give a basemap-calculated estimate of its area; but check out this page, about 3/4 of the way down on the right, for a neat picture. Hard to believe it's anything but a lava plateau when it looks like that; been trying to find geology reports but no luck so far; even though the area to the south of it is extensively surveyed for mineralogy. Skookum1 ( talk) 02:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know, this park includes most of the Rainbow Range as well as the Charlotte Alplands; Itcha-Ilgachuz is a different park, of course. Just thought you might want to expand it some as it obviously has volcanic features, no? Skookum1 ( talk) 02:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Don't know if you noticed this or not....I'm uncertain whether to include the Niut and Pantheon Ranges; Holland says the northwestern boundary is the upper Klinaklini River, but whether he means the near stretch of that or the far stretch isn't clear from his text. Most summits in it currently are SE of Taseko, and that's the only area that there are named subranges other than Niut and Pantheon; I guess you did see it re Dil-Dil Plateau, and I should probably note in its lede that it's not a subcategory of Category:Chilcotin Country as parts of the ranges are in Category:Bridge River Country....I suppose it could have both "countries" as parent-cats though.... Skookum1 ( talk) 02:25, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
No problem. :) I'll try and get some pictures from the top eventually. If there is anything specific the article might need just let me know and I'll put it on my ever growing to-do list. :) vıd ıoman 07:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
— Mizu onna sango15 Hello! 04:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Figured you might want to have a look at this and decide if these belong in the Volcanoes WP. Been bugging myself to get around to making this stub for a while, knew they were there frmo my bivouac days...there's several other buttes in Montana, right up near the SK/AB border, prob similar in formation...(hot spots?) Skookum1 ( talk) 17:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Ditto on the above, but the geology page I found says even more pointedly "igneous". These need an article; see Whitlash,_Montana and this google for West Butte, which is their highest summit. They're in the prominence sequence connecting the Cypress Hills in SK-AB to White Calf Mountain and the Rockies. Boy do I ever know that....took me a while poking around all the elevation points on USGS maps to trace teh sequence when I did my work for bivouac..... Skookum1 ( talk) 18:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd be glad to. Give me a couple of days, and I'll contact you when I'm ready. Happy new year! ₪ Ceran →( cheer→ chime → carol) 21:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
1946 Vancouver Island earthquake does deserve more than that. I'll get around to helping in the next few days, from prior-to-now searching I know there are plenty of sources. Personally, I find Canada fascinating, I hope to travel there someday. :/ ₪ Ceran →( cheer→ chime → carol) 01:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
.. occurring at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains. You're welcome to join in the discussion. Thanks! hike395 ( talk) 05:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi; figured I'd better clue you into User:Thompsma's brave but deeper-than-he-knows-deep-water attempt to tidy up this misnamed article and the complexities of physiographci belts/divisions; already he's confused ecozone/ecoregion content with montane/landform content but I've explained that to him; see my sections laying out issues at the bottom of the talkpage (starting with the one titled "from bad to worse").... Skookum1 ( talk) 03:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I tried to teach him a lesson; now he's telling me that he doesn't have to listen to me, that he feels it's not a phyisography article, he wants to make it into a physiogeology+ecozone+whatever article, with a dash of molecular systematics - blatant OR...I'm getting real sick of it. I've gone to User:Spireguy who I know from prominence work/corerspondence from my bivouac days and while "polling" isn't supposed to be on, we're faced with a real arrogant rookie here, and as you know, me, I'm a WOOKIE and don't suffer fools gladly; the article is supposed to be about the montane classification/toponymy system, not about the geology of the mountains or what botanists like to call their regimes, it's about mountain ranges; fine to embellish them as you do so well, but you see the point of a distinction between volcanic system articles and mountain range-system articles (e.g. Cascade Volcanoes vs Cascade Range, Garibaldi Ranges vs Garibaldi Volcanic Arc etc...) He refuses to and is insistent that new definitions have to be created out of all the bad references from people in other fields, or good references from six diferrent fields/nomenclature systems as if they shoudl all be united....that's OR/synthesis and I'm getting real tired of him..this is my note to Spireguy User_talk:Spireguy#Chaos_at_Western_Cordillera_.28North_America.29 who hasn't been around since November; I have his email somewhere, so.....we need "mountain range geography 'people in on this before teh biologists and geneticists make it over in their own image.... Skookum1 ( talk) 05:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Found it - Holland's map which shows the break-out of all the different regions/ranges/plateaus/etc within this four "Systems". As far as I'm concerned this is "official" in the same way that BCGNIS and CGNDB are - from the horse's own mouth, though the horse is no longer Holland but the person who told me his work is the main foundation for all since; and that this is an Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources publication/offering to this day - particularly for use by the mining industry (and its geologists) makes you wonder why academic geologists have to come up with their own noemcnalture, i.e. not for things like Intermontane Belt but mistaken terms like "Stikine Mountains" and "Coastal Mountains" or the ecologists' wishy-washy take on waht "Fraser Basin" means (zoom in on the Prince George-Nechako area and you'll see hwat I mean; he also, via this map, points out the fragmentary nature of the Dease Plateau. This map/link canbe used as an "official cite" for pages like Dease Plateau - and note he titles it "Canadian Cordillera"; I'd be intersted to see a comparable USGS map and how his boundaries and theirs may or may not convergaa at the border; in 1964 he made an effort to correlate with American and "Yukonian" and Alaskan geographic terms; it's a pity that it seems like even the UNBC has smoe other kidn of toponymic agenda, along with U.Calg's (or U.Wash for that matter). "there can only be one". I see I made some "sometimes" wheedlings re the Kawdy, Taku and Stikine Plateaus being part of hte Yukon Plateau; I see only the Nisutlin is and I dno't know what the BCGNIS has redfined the BC portion of the Yukon Plateau as (they list it as 'rescinded" - but maybe only because the centrepoint is in the Yukon and not in BC. Only the Nisultlin Plateau seems to be part of it in this map, not sure about the Dease Plateau, which is an upland flanking the lower Dease River's share of the Liard Plain; and Liard Plateau is a southward (and lower) extension fo the....Mackenzies rather than the Seylwns I think, I'd ahve to refer to a larger scale map. One reason I wanted you to have this is because of all his volcano markings, or whatever all those red dots are (presumably volcanoes...??) I don't have it open now - memory crunch - so I'll ponder it later. Note that the many subranges of the Cassiars, Selkirks etc he doesn't bother trying to lay out, just to many to begin representing....gotta hit the hay now, sorry if I sounded like I was criticizing; I guess it was frustrating that I was trying to keep the tsunami or extraneous detail at bay and you added stuff that set things in motion that I woudl ahve preferred to contain; I'm recusing because of WP:OWN although may tweak the range-list some; if he starts adding too many lower-tier ranges the appropriate response (in true NPOV fasion) is to add them all - "and let God sort 'em out". BTW do you think we could come up with a better picture than the one of the North Shore Mountains (with cloud instead of summits?. Maybe I've got something in my own collection from up Bridge River way, though most of my stuff is dryland shots from around Lillooet that aren't really representative....do we have a good Tantalus Range shot? Skookum1 ( talk) 04:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm working on creating a Good topic for the Washington Cascade volcanoes, and I think that Glacier Peak will be the last on my list! Can you help me copy edit this before I send it to GAN? Thanks in advance, ₪ Ceran →( slip→ sled → snow) 21:36, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Yo; moving to here from Talk:Archipelago and Talk:Western Cordillera (North America) our discussion about the "North Coast Archipelago"; I'll let pfly know it's here too as he was the other interested party; it may belong on Western Cordillera's talkpage but the waters there are pretty muddy for now....it's just I happened to find a reference to another, albeit older, term - Columbian Archipelago - used in a Klondike/Alaska Boundary dispute-era NYTimes article (or hmm maybe it was an Alaska purchase-era article, by Frederick Schwatka, not sure, read about thirty archival articles this morning...); "Columbian Archipelago" in google will turn up both this reference, and also (the more primary and logical-name reference) the Greater Antilles of the West Indies, i.e. the islands mostly discovered by Columbus (Cuba, Hispanolia, Jamaica etc). I think it's fairly safe to create North Coast Archipelago as it's the more modern usage, really just noting I'd found the older term; there isn't an article or redirect for Columbian Archipelago; the primary redirect should probably be the Caribbean one, just noting it here as an aside re the North Coast Archipelago....which I guess the best cite will be maybe a BC Govt ministry document using it.... Skookum1 ( talk) 16:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I designed an svg graphic based on Volcano.svg:
Scalable; good for use as a placeholder or as the logo for the project. What do you think? Resident Mario ( talk) 16:21, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I expanded this article with desrpitions of its subplateaus, working from Holland's map. I'm nominating you to at least do the subs for th other plateaus to go with teh Kawdy. It's interesting Holland's map shows the Tahltan Highland as being Stikine Plateau, as opposed to Coast Mountains, since his text says something along the lines of the opposite (though he's always non-committal about the various Highlands....on the map the Highlands are all shown as part of the adjoining plateaus, instead of the adjoining ranges, though...). Skookum1 ( talk) 17:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Coining that name on the premise there may not be one. Found this in Holland while looking up Sharktooth just now:
Quoted bit is from "Hanson, G. and McNaughton, D.A., Geol. Surv. Canada,, Mem. 194, 1936. p.11." This passage is on p. 61 of Holland's Landforms of British Columbia. Skookum1 ( talk) 03:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
[undent]I made the Dark Mtn stub, even though it's not by any means one of the more notable summits in the region, just "might as well" in case this or that turns up...I sorta remember its location, even, to the west of Cry Lake and against hte bend in the upper Dease River as it turns northeast; Cry Lake doesn't haev a provincial park but I think there's either a lodge there or a protected area or recreation area; I googled "Dark Mountain"+MINFILE and found an interesting page giving prospector's reports - only for 2000 at that link, I think probably substitute 2001, 2002 etc and other reams of prospector reports will abound; I'm downloading hte one from Dark Mtn right now, if I see anything interesting I'll let you know; can't vouch for the verifiability/reliability of prospector's reports, though, geology or otherwise; mining promotion can involve a lot of puff'n'stuff, though usually concerning assays and not core geology; they've probably fairly verifiable for core geology....13:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
found this on p.62 in the Omineca Mountains section, which of course we could knit into both articles (and perhaps in Western Cordillera):
That last phrase seems important enough, as also the arbitrary nature of the division (other divisions are topograhically-defined and/or geologic). Skookum1 ( talk) 03:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, we've been invited into the milestones list: (from Project talk page)
Milestone Announcements
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! -
Jarry1250 (
t,
c) 22:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good to me..what do you think?
P.S. the reason I keep bugging you is becuase, being relatively new, I'm bound to make stupid mistakes a lot, so I do concensus. Some other stuff:
Cheers,
Resident Mario (
talk) 23:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
god this talk page is active...
Hey, I'm HAU too. I'm supposed to be studying for a badass Spanish exam now...Instead, I'm here.
Moving disscussion down here...
With scenery, just as suggested. Lots 'o room ofr improvement though, but this is getting a bit complex. Well Skookum1, how's it look? PS.See that red reed in the far lef? That was me trying to make a crab, and utterly failing...you can still see the claws... Resident Mario ( talk) 01:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
No, that doesn't work. Blue overlays fades the colors, unfotunatly, and slipping it under doesn't look real.
Resident Mario (
talk) 01:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
WTF? When I tried to reupload, it told me I was overwriting. Ummmm...that's not supposed to happen, right?
Resident Mario (
talk) 02:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
<unindent>494 edits; see, I TOLD you I'm still a newbie. :) I'll get to it, just give me a bit of time, currently working on comepleting Wikipedia:WikiProject_Seamounts/Images. I'll try to make it look good, but remember that it would require a blue background on pages to look natural (without a frame, of course). I'll think of something...by the way, you should get Inkscape. It's the best freeware in the world. Resident Mario ( talk) 00:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Portal:Seamounts is built, but now it needs material for the "random images" and "random article" slide. Also, I did a bit of editing to the mainspace page. Anyway, I found this nifty little template that renders placemarkers on blank maps (altough I'm sure you already know abou this).
Emperor_of_China_(volcano) is, I think, a good example. So I put up a snippet about that on the WikiProject Page.
How dark do you want the ocean to be? Sould it be regular blue at the top and dark blue/black at the bottom?
Resident Mario (
talk) 01:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
That doesn't look too good:
Gosh, glare. Well, unfortunatly it's 8:41 in
NYC so I can't really do anyrhing major until tommorow afternoon. Tommorow I'll fix the glare and change the ridge surrounding it to a diff. color. I think the last thing I'll do today is pollute my page with this :). See you tommorow.
Resident Mario (
talk) 01:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
"""::No, not fishes - fishies. LOL....sharks would be fine, maybe a giant squid wrestling a whale...but goldfish/angelfish is more along hte lines I was thinking of ..... I used to have a Windows wallpaper that was animated with different kinds of fish....some could eat others, it was pretty cool. Somewhere on a stashed hard drive I still have the fishies; if it was easy to get at I'd post 'em here....haven't seen any wiki-fishes....though I did get a wiki-beer once..... Skookum1 ( talk) 02:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Ah, fishies. GTG. See yah Resident Mario ( talk) 02:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey Skookum1, have you seen this? Robin must have been tampering with other mountain range names. Black Tusk ( talk) 20:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Funny, it's an unofficial name in Bivouac (if it's there) - I know because when I plotted it it was such-and-so-number Toozaza Creek, RT has renamed it but oddly enough Toozaza Creek isn't in BCGNIS, though it is in CGNDB 59°49′00″N 129°52′00″W / 59.81667°N 129.86667°W. But looky looky what's in Catalogue of Canadian Volcanoes. Fire away....always thought it was a cool name...a MINFILE claim aroudn there is "GAZOO".... Skookum1 ( talk) 04:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
It would have been Toozaza 49-52, or close to (48-51 conceivably); the numbers are taken from the minutes of the latlogn; and it was never "renamed", the old 49-52 Toozaza Creek was just a bivouac designation; now it would be something like Zus NE125 (that's the "Zus" prominence region and the direction/distance from Zus), but that's just antoher bivouac designation, and not a name. When Robin switched the systems over, I only vaguely remember; it was shortly afterwards I quit.... Skookum1 ( talk) 19:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I just found this in the physiographic provinces category.....it's a US usage, seems inclusive of two "systems" of Holland's.....see Talk:Pacific Border province....maybe the Pacific Coast Ranges are just a subset of it (and PCR isn't a USGS usage either, maybe)....The wording of hte article currently is all US-based - "Puget Trough" (Georgia Depression/Coastal Trough).....the Coastal Trough, Georgia Lowland, Nahwitti Lowland, Argonaut Plain (where Tow Hill is), Hecate Trough ( Hecate Depression?), Nanaimo Lowland etc are all lowland topographic landforms/physiographic objects in need of articles; Fraser Basin also....I think what I'll do later is make a List of physiographic regions of the Canadian Cordillera, using "Canadian Cordillera" so as to keep it to Canadian nomenclature...there's also the confusing matter of Mackenzie Mountains, which can be used to mean only the range, or can be used to mean a physiographic province (see the upper of the two insets on Holland's map)...I think....anyway easy enough to stub up the lowlands/troughs, I'm just thinking we ahve to work on integrating all this with the US articles...and any corresponding Mexican ones.... Skookum1 ( talk) 15:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
[undent]Oh, I agree we need all the subrange articles and other lower-tier ones; I'm obviously concerned in the above discussion only with the macro systems and how frustrating it is to tie them together....the Connelly Range, for instance, I meant to do as a spin-off of Fort Connelly, given the naming history, and I wish we had a way fo coming up with range names of our own LOL (ilke what's between the Jennings and Rancheria Rivers....simple enough I guess, it's the northernmost subrange of the Cassiars, stated as such, doesn't need a name huh? But of the named ranges there's lots in the Skeenas, Ominecas, Hazeltons that need doing yet (also the Selkirks)..... Skookum1 ( talk) 02:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I started a discussion about changing Category:Sub-surface mining to Category:Underground mining, I wanted to see what the thoughts of other participents of WikiProject Mining were.-- kelapstick ( talk) 17:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Coming along just fine. I'm not done with it yet, though; there's still a wealth of information to be retrieved from this database that I haven't added yet. So tell me, does it look ready for a GAN reeval so far? I'm a bit sloppy with my spelling, so can you please copyedit it to correct what I missed? Thanks, Resident Mario ( talk) 01:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Updating you on what I've finished lately:
The user who did the reassesment tought so too; see User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum#Ferdinandea. Unfortuanly, I can't get to that today. Resident Mario ( talk) 20:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
There's a gold mine of information that is still to be added, from this. I'll get to refining it once I extact that. Do you think that there might be a problem with reliable refs? Resident Mario ( talk) 21:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
From what I've looked at, they're really strict when it comes to refs; most of the articles used are news stories. Now that Breaks starting, I can finish what I started. I also want to nom it for a DYK, eventually; this dif proves how much the article has developed so far; can't be too hard to push it to 5x now that I can contribute actively. Resident Mario ( talk) 20:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I created it as a separate article because of hte different categories that apply, and also because the park doesn't include all of it; fine for little parks, but I think on ones of this scale, where the geologic content and such can be quite expansive, best to keep them separate; a park is an administrative region, a plateau is a landform. I didn't know what volcanoes categories - I tried "lava plateaus" but no such cat exists - to add so I'll leave that to you, and of course there's lots of formation geology and volcanic features to be put into the article. There's also Spatsizi Headwaters Provincial Park....I guess I'll make the Klastline and Tanzilla Plateau article-stubs too. Skookum1 ( talk) 14:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
The BCNGIS description varies from Holland's map, e.g. on the Klastline, it says between Mess Creek adn the Klappan River; on the map it's between the upper Iskut and the Klappan (Mess Creek is east of the Edziza/Spectrum formation); maybe I'm reading Holland's map wrong though, it's not terribly detailed.... Skookum1 ( talk) 20:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)what are teh two volcanoes in the Hogem Range, btw, between the upper Omineca and the river coming down into Tatla Lake? guess I'll look on basemap.... Skookum1 ( talk) 20:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you, but I figured you'd know. I'me looking to use this image in Ferdinandea. Would a drawing whose copyright expired on a liscensed network still be considered Free Use Per Copyright Expirey? Res Mar 23:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
GAN filed. All the information I could extract from the sources is present. Since it was me, you, and Malleus_Fatuorum that did the work, you can put another GA star on the register! As for the file...well, I posted on WP:VPP. Should get a response today. Cheers, Res Mar 19:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I just happened to look it up tonight while research Wrangell placename stuff on GNIS....I added Level Mtn to the See also as couldn't see how to fit in mention of it, as I wouldn't konw the size comparison; the lede has a comparison to Shasta, I'm uncertain if a stratovolcano and shield volcano are the same kind of thing, but thought maybe you might have a stat on Meszah/Level Mtn to add in, or even Edziza.....BTW you've seen Edziza's BCGNIS name-history right? Skookum1 ( talk) 03:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I can't remember if I already provided you this link:
I was compiling NYT links to do with the boundary dispute in that area and found it again. There's also items in the British Columbia Colonist archives (i.e. teh Times-Colonist archive) Skookum1 ( talk) 16:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
The news article in question clearly refers to the Ruby Mtn event (Atlin Volcanic Field). With no physical evidence, and no reported observations of actual eruptive activity, it is definitely uncertain. It may have just been a big fire. As far as Pleistocene volcanoes goes, some with thermal activity are listed on the website (seismicity is NOT a criteria for inclusion). The change was made to list those online for various reasons, but a comprehensive review has not been done to include all such situations. Cases like Cayley, where work has been done that clearly indicates it is not Holocene, are not listed. GVP Webmaster ( talk) 16:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
[undent]I know oral history isn't dateable, but worth noting re Cayley that Skwxwu7mesh oral tradition does point to it having erupted during an era of local human occupation ("Landing Place of the Thunderbird", though, may have to do with the possible propensity of volcanic ores in attracting alpine thunder/lightning). Similarly the Lil'wat/In-SHUCK-ch story of the Great Flood is suggestive of a cataclysmic event, though it doesn't sound like Meager directly, it may be some kind of volcanic/tectonic-induced damming of the Lillooet River (before the Flood, the Lil'wat/In-SHUCK-ch had lived around Green Lake, i.e. at Whistler). To our friend from the GVP I'd suggest that a section on oral traditions possible relating to cataclysmic activity be asssmbled; the oral sources are there, whether among the Shishalh, Sto:lo, Owikeno/ Heiltsuk, Tsimshian, Tahltan and others; in Barbeau's Totem Poles, which I read long ago, there's at least a dozen stories up and down the coast which have volcanic assocaitions; these may not be dateable, but surely they point to evidence that perhaps hasn't been found re precise "scientific" dating.... Skookum1 ( talk) 01:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
All areas are originally vulcanic. The Lake Superior area has not been active since the Jurassic, at the very latest. It's hardly "hot" now. BTW, whether I'm Canadian or American,a little civility would be in order. Spoonkymonkey ( talk) 00:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Could you name one volcano in the Lake Superior area? Having studied the geology firsthand, I know of some very old intrusions, but the Canadian shore, except the Grenville and Huronian basement rocks of the east shore, are almost all sediments. This includes the gold-bearing Hemlo region. West of Schreiber, the landscape is pre-cambrian carbonates with some diabas sills. So, again, please explain why you talk of vulcanics in the Lake Superior region. Spoonkymonkey ( talk) 23:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Spent the last hour on this. I'm a firm believer in better looking = better to see and understand. User:Resident Mario/sandbox. Based loosly on Wikipedia:D&D. In v.8, right now. Still a couple of things to be added (like, a departments tab bar and a few more parts) . Cheers, Res Mar 00:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Done. Res Mar 17:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm a designer in principal, after all. Credit to WP:WikiProject Military History for the tabs and WP:D&D for the "Announcements" thing. Cheers, Res Mar 18:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
OK, now 100% standardized across Project. The "Big Red One" is /History. You came up with the idea, after all. Res Mar 19:28, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Beat ya to it. Mid, Low, NA, Cat importance filed. Res Mar 19:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Could you comment at the FAC? Ceran thor 17:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Category:Tuyas, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold ( talk) 02:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi; just to let you know you "did that wrong". Manual redirects wind up losing all the edit history, or rather leaving it on the page that's now the redirect; so long as there's "no title in the way", the thing to do in future is to use the "move" tab at the top of the article (not the talkpage), and move it that way, the redirect will auto-create, adn it will automatically also move the talkpage. Skookum1 ( talk) 13:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi BT. I deleted the text from Helmcken Falls only because it doesn't make any sense. "As a result, if it had not been for the volcanic eruptions, it is unlikely the Wells Gray wilderness region would have been made." Either I'm missing something, or it's just bad English. Cheers. -- Qyd ( talk) 05:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Skookum1 the Geological Survey of Canada is finally updating their website. There is volcano infomation in the Cayley area that was previously not posted, including Ring Mountain, Slag Hill, SlagHill tuya, Cauldron Dome, Mount Cayley, Little Ring Mountain, Pali Dome East, Pali Dome West, Ember Ridge Northeast, Ember Ridge North, Ember Ridge Northwest, Ember Ridge West, Ember Ridge Southwest, Ember Ridge Southeast, Mount Brew, Tricouni Southwest, Tricouni Southeast flows, Tricouni Southeast knob. Black Tusk ( talk) 19:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Spam Attack!!! Give me something to hack away at! Res Mar 21:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Ferdinandea has been promoted!
Res
Mar 23:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Res Mar 23:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC) has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!
It was originally about a Camp in Ontario? ok.... well it is also in vermont and is now united by the Keewaydin Foundation, which is based in Salisbury, Home of Keewaydin Dunmore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.209.127.65 ( talk) 06:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
It's a bit confusing I know; the articles carry both categories, their own and their own's parent cat, but not the grandparent. In the case of the cats I'm not really sure mabye someone at WP:Mountains can clarify it; I think teh "grandparent" or "granpappy" cat for any given jurisdiction (BC, AK, AB, WA etc.) means that in the main listing all ranges are shown, plus the group-subcats of course, so that you don't have to hunt through the subcats looking for the one you want.... Skookum1 ( talk) 19:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, there are some discussions you may want to weigh in on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mining about:
Cheers -- kelapstick ( talk) 16:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 7 |
Saw your addition of WP:Volcanoes to Coaswt Mountains. Thing is, then so also the Alaska Range, the Interior Mountains, maybe the Hazelton Mountains, theYellowstone, Great Basin and all of the Sierra Mader (incl. del Sur) and every other range int he Ring of Fire; the Andes, the Kuriles, eveyr island chain with volcanoes etc a=tc. I dont' think it's meant to be that broad in scope/definition. Skookum1 ( talk) 05:17, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I finally got a chance to take a look at this and it looks like you took care of it yourself. Your image looks good, sorry I wasn't able to help. Kmusser ( talk) 19:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi Sémhur. I'm plaining to make a major expanson for the Coast Mountains article and I noticed there are images on the website here that would be useful for my expansion. Is there a possibility you could make these images? Black Tusk
Thank you for your interesting additions to the volcanic group listing. They contribute significantly, especially for Canada and the North American continent generally. Gubernatoria ( talk) 16:03, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Many thanks Gubernatoria ( talk) 16:11, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
Will do Gubernatoria ( talk) 06:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Blacktusk-- I see you deleted some categories from Duluth Complex. The article also covers the North Shore Volcanics (which, as you see, redirects there). The two formations seem to be treated together a lot, and they interleave both temporally and spatially. I don't get too worked up about categories, but there was a reason why the editor added them there. When I find a public-domain map which shows the relationship (at least in two dimensions) of the intrusive and extrusive rocks, I'll add it (or create one myself). Best regards, Kablammo ( talk) 20:36, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Category:WikiProject Earthquakes categories, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Category:WikiProject Earthquakes categories has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (
CSD C1).
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Category:WikiProject Earthquakes categories, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click
here
CSDWarnBot (
talk) 19:40, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Black Tusk: This article on a Colombian volcano is now being reviewed for promotion to a featured article. Would you be willing to take a look at it, and post your comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nevado del Ruiz? The featured article process is short of reviewers, and additional folks are needed to look at articles. As you can see, this article has been reviewed for sources, images, and citation and manual of style compliance, but it would be helpful to have one conversant in the field (such as you) give it a critical review to see if it is comphensive on its subject matter, and represents Wikipedia's best articles. The featured article criteria are what articles are judged by. Even if you have not reviewed an featured article candidate before, your contributions should be welcomed. Most writers want their articles to be reviewed by objective outsiders who can spot things they overlooked, or make suggestions for improvement. Kablammo ( talk) 00:02, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
No proof it's a volcano, so far, but I thought you might find this interesting, given its location (Lava Fork et al. is to the SE). Skookum1 ( talk) 02:35, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm just stubbing this up, all I can really provide is elevation and give a basemap-calculated estimate of its area; but check out this page, about 3/4 of the way down on the right, for a neat picture. Hard to believe it's anything but a lava plateau when it looks like that; been trying to find geology reports but no luck so far; even though the area to the south of it is extensively surveyed for mineralogy. Skookum1 ( talk) 02:03, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know, this park includes most of the Rainbow Range as well as the Charlotte Alplands; Itcha-Ilgachuz is a different park, of course. Just thought you might want to expand it some as it obviously has volcanic features, no? Skookum1 ( talk) 02:22, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Don't know if you noticed this or not....I'm uncertain whether to include the Niut and Pantheon Ranges; Holland says the northwestern boundary is the upper Klinaklini River, but whether he means the near stretch of that or the far stretch isn't clear from his text. Most summits in it currently are SE of Taseko, and that's the only area that there are named subranges other than Niut and Pantheon; I guess you did see it re Dil-Dil Plateau, and I should probably note in its lede that it's not a subcategory of Category:Chilcotin Country as parts of the ranges are in Category:Bridge River Country....I suppose it could have both "countries" as parent-cats though.... Skookum1 ( talk) 02:25, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
No problem. :) I'll try and get some pictures from the top eventually. If there is anything specific the article might need just let me know and I'll put it on my ever growing to-do list. :) vıd ıoman 07:14, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
— Mizu onna sango15 Hello! 04:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Figured you might want to have a look at this and decide if these belong in the Volcanoes WP. Been bugging myself to get around to making this stub for a while, knew they were there frmo my bivouac days...there's several other buttes in Montana, right up near the SK/AB border, prob similar in formation...(hot spots?) Skookum1 ( talk) 17:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Ditto on the above, but the geology page I found says even more pointedly "igneous". These need an article; see Whitlash,_Montana and this google for West Butte, which is their highest summit. They're in the prominence sequence connecting the Cypress Hills in SK-AB to White Calf Mountain and the Rockies. Boy do I ever know that....took me a while poking around all the elevation points on USGS maps to trace teh sequence when I did my work for bivouac..... Skookum1 ( talk) 18:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd be glad to. Give me a couple of days, and I'll contact you when I'm ready. Happy new year! ₪ Ceran →( cheer→ chime → carol) 21:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
1946 Vancouver Island earthquake does deserve more than that. I'll get around to helping in the next few days, from prior-to-now searching I know there are plenty of sources. Personally, I find Canada fascinating, I hope to travel there someday. :/ ₪ Ceran →( cheer→ chime → carol) 01:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
.. occurring at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mountains. You're welcome to join in the discussion. Thanks! hike395 ( talk) 05:05, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi; figured I'd better clue you into User:Thompsma's brave but deeper-than-he-knows-deep-water attempt to tidy up this misnamed article and the complexities of physiographci belts/divisions; already he's confused ecozone/ecoregion content with montane/landform content but I've explained that to him; see my sections laying out issues at the bottom of the talkpage (starting with the one titled "from bad to worse").... Skookum1 ( talk) 03:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I tried to teach him a lesson; now he's telling me that he doesn't have to listen to me, that he feels it's not a phyisography article, he wants to make it into a physiogeology+ecozone+whatever article, with a dash of molecular systematics - blatant OR...I'm getting real sick of it. I've gone to User:Spireguy who I know from prominence work/corerspondence from my bivouac days and while "polling" isn't supposed to be on, we're faced with a real arrogant rookie here, and as you know, me, I'm a WOOKIE and don't suffer fools gladly; the article is supposed to be about the montane classification/toponymy system, not about the geology of the mountains or what botanists like to call their regimes, it's about mountain ranges; fine to embellish them as you do so well, but you see the point of a distinction between volcanic system articles and mountain range-system articles (e.g. Cascade Volcanoes vs Cascade Range, Garibaldi Ranges vs Garibaldi Volcanic Arc etc...) He refuses to and is insistent that new definitions have to be created out of all the bad references from people in other fields, or good references from six diferrent fields/nomenclature systems as if they shoudl all be united....that's OR/synthesis and I'm getting real tired of him..this is my note to Spireguy User_talk:Spireguy#Chaos_at_Western_Cordillera_.28North_America.29 who hasn't been around since November; I have his email somewhere, so.....we need "mountain range geography 'people in on this before teh biologists and geneticists make it over in their own image.... Skookum1 ( talk) 05:24, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Found it - Holland's map which shows the break-out of all the different regions/ranges/plateaus/etc within this four "Systems". As far as I'm concerned this is "official" in the same way that BCGNIS and CGNDB are - from the horse's own mouth, though the horse is no longer Holland but the person who told me his work is the main foundation for all since; and that this is an Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources publication/offering to this day - particularly for use by the mining industry (and its geologists) makes you wonder why academic geologists have to come up with their own noemcnalture, i.e. not for things like Intermontane Belt but mistaken terms like "Stikine Mountains" and "Coastal Mountains" or the ecologists' wishy-washy take on waht "Fraser Basin" means (zoom in on the Prince George-Nechako area and you'll see hwat I mean; he also, via this map, points out the fragmentary nature of the Dease Plateau. This map/link canbe used as an "official cite" for pages like Dease Plateau - and note he titles it "Canadian Cordillera"; I'd be intersted to see a comparable USGS map and how his boundaries and theirs may or may not convergaa at the border; in 1964 he made an effort to correlate with American and "Yukonian" and Alaskan geographic terms; it's a pity that it seems like even the UNBC has smoe other kidn of toponymic agenda, along with U.Calg's (or U.Wash for that matter). "there can only be one". I see I made some "sometimes" wheedlings re the Kawdy, Taku and Stikine Plateaus being part of hte Yukon Plateau; I see only the Nisutlin is and I dno't know what the BCGNIS has redfined the BC portion of the Yukon Plateau as (they list it as 'rescinded" - but maybe only because the centrepoint is in the Yukon and not in BC. Only the Nisultlin Plateau seems to be part of it in this map, not sure about the Dease Plateau, which is an upland flanking the lower Dease River's share of the Liard Plain; and Liard Plateau is a southward (and lower) extension fo the....Mackenzies rather than the Seylwns I think, I'd ahve to refer to a larger scale map. One reason I wanted you to have this is because of all his volcano markings, or whatever all those red dots are (presumably volcanoes...??) I don't have it open now - memory crunch - so I'll ponder it later. Note that the many subranges of the Cassiars, Selkirks etc he doesn't bother trying to lay out, just to many to begin representing....gotta hit the hay now, sorry if I sounded like I was criticizing; I guess it was frustrating that I was trying to keep the tsunami or extraneous detail at bay and you added stuff that set things in motion that I woudl ahve preferred to contain; I'm recusing because of WP:OWN although may tweak the range-list some; if he starts adding too many lower-tier ranges the appropriate response (in true NPOV fasion) is to add them all - "and let God sort 'em out". BTW do you think we could come up with a better picture than the one of the North Shore Mountains (with cloud instead of summits?. Maybe I've got something in my own collection from up Bridge River way, though most of my stuff is dryland shots from around Lillooet that aren't really representative....do we have a good Tantalus Range shot? Skookum1 ( talk) 04:38, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm working on creating a Good topic for the Washington Cascade volcanoes, and I think that Glacier Peak will be the last on my list! Can you help me copy edit this before I send it to GAN? Thanks in advance, ₪ Ceran →( slip→ sled → snow) 21:36, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Yo; moving to here from Talk:Archipelago and Talk:Western Cordillera (North America) our discussion about the "North Coast Archipelago"; I'll let pfly know it's here too as he was the other interested party; it may belong on Western Cordillera's talkpage but the waters there are pretty muddy for now....it's just I happened to find a reference to another, albeit older, term - Columbian Archipelago - used in a Klondike/Alaska Boundary dispute-era NYTimes article (or hmm maybe it was an Alaska purchase-era article, by Frederick Schwatka, not sure, read about thirty archival articles this morning...); "Columbian Archipelago" in google will turn up both this reference, and also (the more primary and logical-name reference) the Greater Antilles of the West Indies, i.e. the islands mostly discovered by Columbus (Cuba, Hispanolia, Jamaica etc). I think it's fairly safe to create North Coast Archipelago as it's the more modern usage, really just noting I'd found the older term; there isn't an article or redirect for Columbian Archipelago; the primary redirect should probably be the Caribbean one, just noting it here as an aside re the North Coast Archipelago....which I guess the best cite will be maybe a BC Govt ministry document using it.... Skookum1 ( talk) 16:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I designed an svg graphic based on Volcano.svg:
Scalable; good for use as a placeholder or as the logo for the project. What do you think? Resident Mario ( talk) 16:21, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
I expanded this article with desrpitions of its subplateaus, working from Holland's map. I'm nominating you to at least do the subs for th other plateaus to go with teh Kawdy. It's interesting Holland's map shows the Tahltan Highland as being Stikine Plateau, as opposed to Coast Mountains, since his text says something along the lines of the opposite (though he's always non-committal about the various Highlands....on the map the Highlands are all shown as part of the adjoining plateaus, instead of the adjoining ranges, though...). Skookum1 ( talk) 17:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Coining that name on the premise there may not be one. Found this in Holland while looking up Sharktooth just now:
Quoted bit is from "Hanson, G. and McNaughton, D.A., Geol. Surv. Canada,, Mem. 194, 1936. p.11." This passage is on p. 61 of Holland's Landforms of British Columbia. Skookum1 ( talk) 03:37, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
[undent]I made the Dark Mtn stub, even though it's not by any means one of the more notable summits in the region, just "might as well" in case this or that turns up...I sorta remember its location, even, to the west of Cry Lake and against hte bend in the upper Dease River as it turns northeast; Cry Lake doesn't haev a provincial park but I think there's either a lodge there or a protected area or recreation area; I googled "Dark Mountain"+MINFILE and found an interesting page giving prospector's reports - only for 2000 at that link, I think probably substitute 2001, 2002 etc and other reams of prospector reports will abound; I'm downloading hte one from Dark Mtn right now, if I see anything interesting I'll let you know; can't vouch for the verifiability/reliability of prospector's reports, though, geology or otherwise; mining promotion can involve a lot of puff'n'stuff, though usually concerning assays and not core geology; they've probably fairly verifiable for core geology....13:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
found this on p.62 in the Omineca Mountains section, which of course we could knit into both articles (and perhaps in Western Cordillera):
That last phrase seems important enough, as also the arbitrary nature of the division (other divisions are topograhically-defined and/or geologic). Skookum1 ( talk) 03:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, we've been invited into the milestones list: (from Project talk page)
Milestone Announcements
|
I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! -
Jarry1250 (
t,
c) 22:19, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good to me..what do you think?
P.S. the reason I keep bugging you is becuase, being relatively new, I'm bound to make stupid mistakes a lot, so I do concensus. Some other stuff:
Cheers,
Resident Mario (
talk) 23:45, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
god this talk page is active...
Hey, I'm HAU too. I'm supposed to be studying for a badass Spanish exam now...Instead, I'm here.
Moving disscussion down here...
With scenery, just as suggested. Lots 'o room ofr improvement though, but this is getting a bit complex. Well Skookum1, how's it look? PS.See that red reed in the far lef? That was me trying to make a crab, and utterly failing...you can still see the claws... Resident Mario ( talk) 01:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
No, that doesn't work. Blue overlays fades the colors, unfotunatly, and slipping it under doesn't look real.
Resident Mario (
talk) 01:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
WTF? When I tried to reupload, it told me I was overwriting. Ummmm...that's not supposed to happen, right?
Resident Mario (
talk) 02:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
<unindent>494 edits; see, I TOLD you I'm still a newbie. :) I'll get to it, just give me a bit of time, currently working on comepleting Wikipedia:WikiProject_Seamounts/Images. I'll try to make it look good, but remember that it would require a blue background on pages to look natural (without a frame, of course). I'll think of something...by the way, you should get Inkscape. It's the best freeware in the world. Resident Mario ( talk) 00:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Portal:Seamounts is built, but now it needs material for the "random images" and "random article" slide. Also, I did a bit of editing to the mainspace page. Anyway, I found this nifty little template that renders placemarkers on blank maps (altough I'm sure you already know abou this).
Emperor_of_China_(volcano) is, I think, a good example. So I put up a snippet about that on the WikiProject Page.
How dark do you want the ocean to be? Sould it be regular blue at the top and dark blue/black at the bottom?
Resident Mario (
talk) 01:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
That doesn't look too good:
Gosh, glare. Well, unfortunatly it's 8:41 in
NYC so I can't really do anyrhing major until tommorow afternoon. Tommorow I'll fix the glare and change the ridge surrounding it to a diff. color. I think the last thing I'll do today is pollute my page with this :). See you tommorow.
Resident Mario (
talk) 01:44, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
"""::No, not fishes - fishies. LOL....sharks would be fine, maybe a giant squid wrestling a whale...but goldfish/angelfish is more along hte lines I was thinking of ..... I used to have a Windows wallpaper that was animated with different kinds of fish....some could eat others, it was pretty cool. Somewhere on a stashed hard drive I still have the fishies; if it was easy to get at I'd post 'em here....haven't seen any wiki-fishes....though I did get a wiki-beer once..... Skookum1 ( talk) 02:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Ah, fishies. GTG. See yah Resident Mario ( talk) 02:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey Skookum1, have you seen this? Robin must have been tampering with other mountain range names. Black Tusk ( talk) 20:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Funny, it's an unofficial name in Bivouac (if it's there) - I know because when I plotted it it was such-and-so-number Toozaza Creek, RT has renamed it but oddly enough Toozaza Creek isn't in BCGNIS, though it is in CGNDB 59°49′00″N 129°52′00″W / 59.81667°N 129.86667°W. But looky looky what's in Catalogue of Canadian Volcanoes. Fire away....always thought it was a cool name...a MINFILE claim aroudn there is "GAZOO".... Skookum1 ( talk) 04:42, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
It would have been Toozaza 49-52, or close to (48-51 conceivably); the numbers are taken from the minutes of the latlogn; and it was never "renamed", the old 49-52 Toozaza Creek was just a bivouac designation; now it would be something like Zus NE125 (that's the "Zus" prominence region and the direction/distance from Zus), but that's just antoher bivouac designation, and not a name. When Robin switched the systems over, I only vaguely remember; it was shortly afterwards I quit.... Skookum1 ( talk) 19:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I just found this in the physiographic provinces category.....it's a US usage, seems inclusive of two "systems" of Holland's.....see Talk:Pacific Border province....maybe the Pacific Coast Ranges are just a subset of it (and PCR isn't a USGS usage either, maybe)....The wording of hte article currently is all US-based - "Puget Trough" (Georgia Depression/Coastal Trough).....the Coastal Trough, Georgia Lowland, Nahwitti Lowland, Argonaut Plain (where Tow Hill is), Hecate Trough ( Hecate Depression?), Nanaimo Lowland etc are all lowland topographic landforms/physiographic objects in need of articles; Fraser Basin also....I think what I'll do later is make a List of physiographic regions of the Canadian Cordillera, using "Canadian Cordillera" so as to keep it to Canadian nomenclature...there's also the confusing matter of Mackenzie Mountains, which can be used to mean only the range, or can be used to mean a physiographic province (see the upper of the two insets on Holland's map)...I think....anyway easy enough to stub up the lowlands/troughs, I'm just thinking we ahve to work on integrating all this with the US articles...and any corresponding Mexican ones.... Skookum1 ( talk) 15:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
[undent]Oh, I agree we need all the subrange articles and other lower-tier ones; I'm obviously concerned in the above discussion only with the macro systems and how frustrating it is to tie them together....the Connelly Range, for instance, I meant to do as a spin-off of Fort Connelly, given the naming history, and I wish we had a way fo coming up with range names of our own LOL (ilke what's between the Jennings and Rancheria Rivers....simple enough I guess, it's the northernmost subrange of the Cassiars, stated as such, doesn't need a name huh? But of the named ranges there's lots in the Skeenas, Ominecas, Hazeltons that need doing yet (also the Selkirks)..... Skookum1 ( talk) 02:29, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I started a discussion about changing Category:Sub-surface mining to Category:Underground mining, I wanted to see what the thoughts of other participents of WikiProject Mining were.-- kelapstick ( talk) 17:48, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Coming along just fine. I'm not done with it yet, though; there's still a wealth of information to be retrieved from this database that I haven't added yet. So tell me, does it look ready for a GAN reeval so far? I'm a bit sloppy with my spelling, so can you please copyedit it to correct what I missed? Thanks, Resident Mario ( talk) 01:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Updating you on what I've finished lately:
The user who did the reassesment tought so too; see User_talk:Malleus_Fatuorum#Ferdinandea. Unfortuanly, I can't get to that today. Resident Mario ( talk) 20:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
There's a gold mine of information that is still to be added, from this. I'll get to refining it once I extact that. Do you think that there might be a problem with reliable refs? Resident Mario ( talk) 21:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
From what I've looked at, they're really strict when it comes to refs; most of the articles used are news stories. Now that Breaks starting, I can finish what I started. I also want to nom it for a DYK, eventually; this dif proves how much the article has developed so far; can't be too hard to push it to 5x now that I can contribute actively. Resident Mario ( talk) 20:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
I created it as a separate article because of hte different categories that apply, and also because the park doesn't include all of it; fine for little parks, but I think on ones of this scale, where the geologic content and such can be quite expansive, best to keep them separate; a park is an administrative region, a plateau is a landform. I didn't know what volcanoes categories - I tried "lava plateaus" but no such cat exists - to add so I'll leave that to you, and of course there's lots of formation geology and volcanic features to be put into the article. There's also Spatsizi Headwaters Provincial Park....I guess I'll make the Klastline and Tanzilla Plateau article-stubs too. Skookum1 ( talk) 14:33, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
The BCNGIS description varies from Holland's map, e.g. on the Klastline, it says between Mess Creek adn the Klappan River; on the map it's between the upper Iskut and the Klappan (Mess Creek is east of the Edziza/Spectrum formation); maybe I'm reading Holland's map wrong though, it's not terribly detailed.... Skookum1 ( talk) 20:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)what are teh two volcanoes in the Hogem Range, btw, between the upper Omineca and the river coming down into Tatla Lake? guess I'll look on basemap.... Skookum1 ( talk) 20:48, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you, but I figured you'd know. I'me looking to use this image in Ferdinandea. Would a drawing whose copyright expired on a liscensed network still be considered Free Use Per Copyright Expirey? Res Mar 23:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
GAN filed. All the information I could extract from the sources is present. Since it was me, you, and Malleus_Fatuorum that did the work, you can put another GA star on the register! As for the file...well, I posted on WP:VPP. Should get a response today. Cheers, Res Mar 19:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I just happened to look it up tonight while research Wrangell placename stuff on GNIS....I added Level Mtn to the See also as couldn't see how to fit in mention of it, as I wouldn't konw the size comparison; the lede has a comparison to Shasta, I'm uncertain if a stratovolcano and shield volcano are the same kind of thing, but thought maybe you might have a stat on Meszah/Level Mtn to add in, or even Edziza.....BTW you've seen Edziza's BCGNIS name-history right? Skookum1 ( talk) 03:50, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I can't remember if I already provided you this link:
I was compiling NYT links to do with the boundary dispute in that area and found it again. There's also items in the British Columbia Colonist archives (i.e. teh Times-Colonist archive) Skookum1 ( talk) 16:10, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
The news article in question clearly refers to the Ruby Mtn event (Atlin Volcanic Field). With no physical evidence, and no reported observations of actual eruptive activity, it is definitely uncertain. It may have just been a big fire. As far as Pleistocene volcanoes goes, some with thermal activity are listed on the website (seismicity is NOT a criteria for inclusion). The change was made to list those online for various reasons, but a comprehensive review has not been done to include all such situations. Cases like Cayley, where work has been done that clearly indicates it is not Holocene, are not listed. GVP Webmaster ( talk) 16:48, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
[undent]I know oral history isn't dateable, but worth noting re Cayley that Skwxwu7mesh oral tradition does point to it having erupted during an era of local human occupation ("Landing Place of the Thunderbird", though, may have to do with the possible propensity of volcanic ores in attracting alpine thunder/lightning). Similarly the Lil'wat/In-SHUCK-ch story of the Great Flood is suggestive of a cataclysmic event, though it doesn't sound like Meager directly, it may be some kind of volcanic/tectonic-induced damming of the Lillooet River (before the Flood, the Lil'wat/In-SHUCK-ch had lived around Green Lake, i.e. at Whistler). To our friend from the GVP I'd suggest that a section on oral traditions possible relating to cataclysmic activity be asssmbled; the oral sources are there, whether among the Shishalh, Sto:lo, Owikeno/ Heiltsuk, Tsimshian, Tahltan and others; in Barbeau's Totem Poles, which I read long ago, there's at least a dozen stories up and down the coast which have volcanic assocaitions; these may not be dateable, but surely they point to evidence that perhaps hasn't been found re precise "scientific" dating.... Skookum1 ( talk) 01:02, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
All areas are originally vulcanic. The Lake Superior area has not been active since the Jurassic, at the very latest. It's hardly "hot" now. BTW, whether I'm Canadian or American,a little civility would be in order. Spoonkymonkey ( talk) 00:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Could you name one volcano in the Lake Superior area? Having studied the geology firsthand, I know of some very old intrusions, but the Canadian shore, except the Grenville and Huronian basement rocks of the east shore, are almost all sediments. This includes the gold-bearing Hemlo region. West of Schreiber, the landscape is pre-cambrian carbonates with some diabas sills. So, again, please explain why you talk of vulcanics in the Lake Superior region. Spoonkymonkey ( talk) 23:47, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Spent the last hour on this. I'm a firm believer in better looking = better to see and understand. User:Resident Mario/sandbox. Based loosly on Wikipedia:D&D. In v.8, right now. Still a couple of things to be added (like, a departments tab bar and a few more parts) . Cheers, Res Mar 00:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Done. Res Mar 17:37, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm a designer in principal, after all. Credit to WP:WikiProject Military History for the tabs and WP:D&D for the "Announcements" thing. Cheers, Res Mar 18:41, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
OK, now 100% standardized across Project. The "Big Red One" is /History. You came up with the idea, after all. Res Mar 19:28, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Beat ya to it. Mid, Low, NA, Cat importance filed. Res Mar 19:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Could you comment at the FAC? Ceran thor 17:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Category:Tuyas, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Cgingold ( talk) 02:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi; just to let you know you "did that wrong". Manual redirects wind up losing all the edit history, or rather leaving it on the page that's now the redirect; so long as there's "no title in the way", the thing to do in future is to use the "move" tab at the top of the article (not the talkpage), and move it that way, the redirect will auto-create, adn it will automatically also move the talkpage. Skookum1 ( talk) 13:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi BT. I deleted the text from Helmcken Falls only because it doesn't make any sense. "As a result, if it had not been for the volcanic eruptions, it is unlikely the Wells Gray wilderness region would have been made." Either I'm missing something, or it's just bad English. Cheers. -- Qyd ( talk) 05:12, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Skookum1 the Geological Survey of Canada is finally updating their website. There is volcano infomation in the Cayley area that was previously not posted, including Ring Mountain, Slag Hill, SlagHill tuya, Cauldron Dome, Mount Cayley, Little Ring Mountain, Pali Dome East, Pali Dome West, Ember Ridge Northeast, Ember Ridge North, Ember Ridge Northwest, Ember Ridge West, Ember Ridge Southwest, Ember Ridge Southeast, Mount Brew, Tricouni Southwest, Tricouni Southeast flows, Tricouni Southeast knob. Black Tusk ( talk) 19:14, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Spam Attack!!! Give me something to hack away at! Res Mar 21:35, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Ferdinandea has been promoted!
Res
Mar 23:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Res Mar 23:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC) has bought you a pint! Sharing a pint is a great way to bond with other editors after a day of hard work. Spread the WikiLove by buying someone else a pint, whether it be someone with whom you have collaborated or had disagreements. Cheers!
It was originally about a Camp in Ontario? ok.... well it is also in vermont and is now united by the Keewaydin Foundation, which is based in Salisbury, Home of Keewaydin Dunmore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.209.127.65 ( talk) 06:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
It's a bit confusing I know; the articles carry both categories, their own and their own's parent cat, but not the grandparent. In the case of the cats I'm not really sure mabye someone at WP:Mountains can clarify it; I think teh "grandparent" or "granpappy" cat for any given jurisdiction (BC, AK, AB, WA etc.) means that in the main listing all ranges are shown, plus the group-subcats of course, so that you don't have to hunt through the subcats looking for the one you want.... Skookum1 ( talk) 19:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Hi, there are some discussions you may want to weigh in on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mining about:
Cheers -- kelapstick ( talk) 16:19, 23 March 2009 (UTC)