User talk:Maveric149

Meow - princess Mougie proclaimeth from the nerve centre of her empire Add your comment here Cat scratch fever

Mount Garibaldi

Hi Mav. Since you seem to be the creator of the Mount Garibaldi article and have contributed to many featured articles, would you be interested to try and get Mount Garibaldi featured? I've been a major contributor to some Canadian volcano articles (e.g. Mount Garibaldi, Mount Cayley, Mount Meager, Tseax Cone, Anahim hotspot, Mount Edziza) but haven't got any featured yet and probably most of them should be; the Tseax Cone was the source for a tragic eruption during the 18th century that killled 2,000 Nisga'a people. If you're intrested bringing Garibaldi or the other volcanoes I listed above to featured status, contact me on my talk page.

Note: I have been wanting to get some of these articles featured and I'll try and do my best to bring these to featured status, but it's hard for me to do so because I'm almost the main one who works on them. Black Tusk 02:34, 26 2008 (UTC)

I just expanded the history section. As for Meager and Cayley, I don't know what's needed for those volcanoes. Meager almost looks just as good as the Garibaldi article, but Cayley probably needs some expansion; I'm currently working on the "eruption scenerio" for that article.

As for information, if you can't find anymore infomation in your library, search google; that's where I found most of the infomation and there's probably still lots to add (e.g. climbing, climate, recreation). Black Tusk 18:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Mav, can you put something in the article where the eruptions came from during Garibald's three eruption phases? I'm asking you this because you seem to have been the one who added the infomation. I think Atwell Peak was the source for several pyroclastic flows. Black Tusk 01:23, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll take another look. --mav

Thanks. Just letting you know Mount Garibaldi is a current featured article candidate. However, there's problems with some of the references and it's getting questions and comments about the article and probably needs more WikiProject Volcanoes members involved in the dicussion and fix problems in the article to make it Featured Status. Black Tusk 22:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Old peer review

Here is a peer review that slipped through the cracks and was never archived. Meow. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 10:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Hacked?

Was your Wikipedia account hacked? I've noticed that you've put just white spaces to several articles, and I'm reverting them. Warut (talk) 09:02, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Not hacked - I'm just reviewing the articles up to that point. --mav

Oh! Sorry for my misunderstanding! Warut (talk) 16:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

It's OK. I normally make small, but valid edits when reviewing. In the future I'll make sure to put something like 'reviewed' in the edit comment field. --mav

Pre-historic smelting of tin.

As a geologist, would you say the description of high tin-content cassiterite in the article smelting is NPOV and accurate? (" The process through which the smiths learned to produce copper/tin bronzes is once again a mystery. The first such bronzes were probably a lucky accident from tin contamination of copper ores, but by 2000BC we know that tin was being mined on purpose for the production of bronze. This is amazing, given that tin is a semi-rare metal, and even a rich cassiterite ore only has 5% tin. Also, cassiterite looks like any common rock, and it takes special skills (or special instruments) to find it and locate the richer lodes. But, whatever steps were taken to learn about tin, these were fully understood by 2000BC.") I am specifically interested in your view of the wording: "cassiterite looks like any common rock, and it takes special skills (or special instruments) to find it and locate the richer lodes." Is this in your view relevant and accurate? How sophisticated knowledge are we necessarily predicating here, to identify a likely source of tin? -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 23:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

That could certainly be worded to be more encyclopedic and less chatty. But I'm not familiar enough with that mineral to say if it is NPOV or not. --mav

Cambrian explosion task force

Hi,

I'm posting this message because you're listed as a participant in WikiProject Geology. I've set up a task force aiming to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the Cambrian explosion, and I was wondering whether you may be interested in helping out? If you would like to help in any way, you could cast an eye over the task force page and see if there are any articles or tasks that take your fancy! Any contributions would be greatly appreciated. (After that I might be tempted to join you on getting period pages up to a good status...)

Best wishes,

Smith609 Talk 15:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Helium Featured Article Review

Helium has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Itub (talk) 09:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Oxygen

Hey, there is an issue about the article, and is about one of the references you added. I am not sure exactly what is the answer, so please see the talk page. Nergaal (talk) 21:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you know about this ?

Image:Wi-TableImage.png

Thanks for your time. --triwbe (talk) 12:03, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Nope - Glad it was deleted. --mav

Rating

Hi Mav. Could you take a look at Garibaldi's article and see what its current rating might be? It's currently GA but it has been expanded and better organized since it was last reviewed. It's also very similar in structure to some FA volcano articles (e.g. Mount St. Helens and Mount Pinatubo). I'm not saying it's FA status, but the article looks nearly complete; the introduction probably needs expansion because of the article's great size and expansion about the indigenous people (which does in fact have several sources of infomation for expansion). Anyway just asking you because I know you have made several contributions to FA articles and you said you would love to collaborate if additional source can be found. Black Tusk (talk) 04:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

With that being said, there seems to be more infomation about Garibaldi's ancestral activity in a book called Volcanoes of North America: United States and Canada and about Canadian volcano monitoring on the Geological Survey of Canada website. Black Tusk (talk) 05:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Certainly is GA, but I'd like to see an expanded lead section and more book references before this goes to FAC. Thanks for the book suggestion - I've added it to my Amazon wish list. Side note: I wish there were more (and longer!) books like that. One of the reasons I add more to the element articles than anything else is due the relative ease I've had in finding several good books on the subject. --mav

The book is actually being used as one of the references in the article if you want to have a look. I have also recently created and majorly contributed to the Mount Edziza volcanic complex article which is already 43 kilobytes long and GA status. Maybe this is this something you would find interesting as well since it's a huge volcano (an area of about 1000 km² and consists of about 775 km³ of basalt, trachyte and rhyolite) that is studied in detail and is a long-lived volcanic center ranging in age from about 7 million years old to present. It's a volcano that can catch someones interest since volcanoes don't usually last for 7 or 8 million years. I'm sure that can be turned into a FA no problem since there appears to be lots of infomation about it, see here for example. I have also completed a new map of the volcano as Image:Mount Edziza volcanic complex2.jpg. Give me your thoughts ;-). Black Tusk (talk) 05:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

And I ment to tell you there appears to be some conflicting infomation about Garibaldi's ancestral activity in the book I mentioned above compared to your original version of the article for some reason. Maybe when you get the book you could figure something out. Black Tusk (talk) 02:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I used the first edition of Fire Mountains of the West by Harris. I just put the revised 2005 edition on my wish list (along with some other volcano books). I've been bogged down with chemical element articles and FARs lately (not to mention work) but really need to switch focus back to geology. Hopefully soon... --mav

No problem. The infomation is actually fine, but some sources seem to consider Dalton Dome as the final stage of activity insted of Opal Cone being the last. I searched the area on Google Earth and I had no luck finding a crater or lava flows at Dalton Dome. However, Opal Cone seems to have a small summit crater with a long dacite lava flow; see Image:Ring Creek lava flow.jpg. Black Tusk (talk) 03:56, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I recently received a couple books on N. American volcanoes and will be coming back to this area before too long. --mav

You are invited...

to join the Volcanoes Wiki! Questions can be directed to my main user page. MeldshalP (talk) 14:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

hey

hey this is jesse jills son its been awhile since i have seen you i was just wondering how things were going? btw very impressive wikipage jessebdawg (talk) 11:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC) jessebdawg

Hi Jesse! Nice to hear from you again. :) --mav

Yeah I was thinking of making an article about Mather Youth Academy. And there have been a few articles I've wanted to edit but couldnt find any sources for bibliography or whatever.Have you heard from dee lately? My mom said she thought she was moving back to Sacramento but wasnt sure. U got an email? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessebdawg (talk • contribs) 06:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Excellent suggestion at WT:FAC

My reply (which comes 23827 pages later, since I made the mistake of sleeping for 8 hours instead of keeping up with the discussion), was:

I support whatever works for Sandy and the active reviewers. If you're going to go with a shorter timeframe, I think the prize for best idea (among many) above goes to User:mav (with 22 FAs btw): "I've never really understood why FAC does not require an article to have recently gone through a successful PR or a WikiProject A-class assessment or a GAN or whatever prior to submittal to FAC." I'd support either a requirement or a recommendation. If all of the 4 review processes (FAC, PR, A-class and GAN) encourage the others to produce tight descriptions of why the article passed, including why the sources are good for what they're used for, and all encourage the others to start new reviews by reading the summaries of the previous ones, then we could save some time and have better reviews. - Dan Dank55 (send/receive) 15:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the vote of confidence. :) --mav

Pr request

Could you look over Nevado del Ruiz? I've been working and picking at it for a while, and I finally want to bring it to FAC. Thanks. —Ceranthor (formerly LordSunday) · (Testify!) 23:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure - I'm not familiar with mountains/volcanoes in South America but I'll give it a shot (at least by the end of the weekend). --mav

Hi Mav!

One of my favorite pages here on wikipedia is the wikipediaholism test. Did you know that you are the first editor that is still active on wikipedia as of 10/7/08 to edit that page? In other words, you were the first editor to edit that page, and you are still active on wikipedia. And I beleive you've been contributing since 2001 or 2002. That's a long time! Just wanted to say hi. Drop my talk page sometime! Thank You- entertainU (talk) 03:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

This wikiaddiction looks like it will be a lifelong obsession. :) My goodness is there still so much work to do. Thanks for the note. --mav

FACR

Mav, you posted at one or more of the recent discussions of short FAs. There's now a proposal to change the featured article criteria that attempts to address this. Please take a look and consider adding your comments to the straw poll there. Mike Christie (talk) 20:04, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. --mav

Old page histories

Hi Mav. For a while now, I've been working on fixing very old (circa 2002) cut and paste moves, at first on place names, then in other topics. I've noted down some observations about page history, including page history that has disappeared from Wikipedia, at User:Graham87/Page history observations.

Your name popped up often while I was doing this work, because you enforced the naming conventions so consistently by using the only available method, cut and paste moves. I found a tool that listed the articles created by a user, and used this URL (which takes a long time to load), to find articles where you made the edit with the lowest ID number (which often isn't the first edit for some of the early stuff). I think I've corrected all the cut-and-paste moves on that list.

How did you makethis edit? I thought that the move function was introduced in late August 2002, and before that, only cut and paste moves were possible. How about this edit, which you probably didn't make? Was there something screwy in the software that munged the page histories when moving a page? Graham 14:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

IIRC the move function was first enabled for admins but it was experimental and did not always work cleanly. The screwy things you see are likely the result of that. --mav

Wyoming picture

I saw your picture of Kemmerer, Wyoming, taken in June of 2003. If you have regular access to Kemmerer, could you please get a picture of the Lincoln County Courthouse in the city? Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure - although it might be some time before I re-visit that part of the country. --mav

Heelllpp

Its monday morning here and I really shouldn't be on the computer but I have a problem at FAC with major depressive disorder...some of the harvard formatting isn't working, and can it be done with cite book instead of citation format? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:48, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Looks like the content of the references are the major referencing issue. If those are resolved, then I can help with any technical referencing issues. --mav

Policy question

Since you have been around for a while maybe you could take a look at this: Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not#Not censored versus not anarchy. In a nutshell: An Editor made a post that starts off "I am about to make a WP:BOLD edit..." I replied with the "Any edit to this page should reflect consensus" and to please not make edits. The Editor replied back "No - that's not how consensus works on policy pages". Thanks Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:04, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Following up

Not that is did any good but thanks for the response. The Editors reply to you starts off with "I'll edit how I please" and concludes "You don't like it, revert me or take me to AN/I or arbitration.". That Editor aside there is a borderline edit war going on as well with other editors. (Edit History) I am hesitant to "be bold" here because it seems like editing this policy without consensus has been going on for years. Soundvisions1 (talk) 12:25, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

It looks like this has been resolved through the reverts of others. Trust in the system worked in this case. --mav

Bryce Canyon National Park

Bryce Canyon National Park has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Rod Serling1.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:Rod Serling1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Cirt (talk) 12:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Niobium

You uploaded the image:Nb-TableImage.png and for the FAC Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Niobium a auther would be nice for the image! Thanks --Stone (talk) 19:17, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

for "Image:Charles Hatchett.jpg" also. Nergaal (talk) 19:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)