Jump to content

Talk:Geology of Minnesota

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Scope

[edit]

This article is a general overview of the geology of Minnesota. Highly detailed or technical content should go in the more specific articles, some of which are linked in this article.

To be done

[edit]

Supplement, strike, and edit as appropriate

  • In general:
    • The link to America’s Volcanic Past: Places from the U.S.Geological Survey, Cascades Volcanic Observatory, is now dead, and will have to be replaced by other sources.
It's back. Awickert (talk) 05:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Page has too many images, due to the numerous maps. Consider eliminating pictures?
I'm planning on uploading additional bedrock and surficial maps from the Minnesota Geological Survey, including those of sections of the state, which would be good but might exacerbate this problem, unless we decide on which maps to use. In any case, I'd suggest creating an "additional maps" section at the bottom, if necessary. Awickert (talk) 21:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We could move them into a gallery, which would provide thumbnails readers could click on to get larger versions. Kablammo (talk) 21:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea to me! Awickert (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Precambrian section
    • Improve map to show more detail (esp. in Mississippi valley S of MSP) unneeded, with new bedrock map
I could add a bedrock and/or surficial map of this area. Awickert (talk) 21:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I did the bedrock map I did not attempt to show the older formations exposed by the dissection of the Paleozoic plateau. The MnGS map now shows them, so I won't worry about revising the bedrock map I had added. I think a topographic image of the area, to show the degree of dissection, is sufficient for the SE regional section, but in a clearer format than the present .gif. Kablammo (talk) 21:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like the topo map as well, and can't find any SE-specific map at the survey. Sounds good. Awickert (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have found and uploaded the bedrock map, here: [1]. Is it better than the topo? I think one should be in the article and one in the gallery - which one should be in the article? Awickert (talk) 05:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ice age section
    • Get better image
  • Central Minnesota
    • Add detailed image of at least part of Central Minnesota (esp. showing Wadena drumlin field)
  • Update with Minnesota Geological Survey maps
    • Bedrock geology
    • Surficial geology
    • Maps of regions of MN

Minnesota Reflections

[edit]

The Minnesota Digital Library, [2], has all of the MN Geological Survey maps online, and probably other good stuff too, released in the public domain. Woo-hoo! Awickert (talk) 07:57, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great! We may no longer need the Minnesota bedrock geology map I had added. It's pretty general and also in .gif format, which does not scale well (although the format could be changed). I can't open the full resolution version of the new map from commons however; I don't know if that's a computer issue or commons issue. Kablammo (talk) 11:26, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably because it's between 24 and 25 Mb - I should probably create a scaled, lower-resolution version for the page, which has a link in its description to the full-resolution version. As for the copyright tag, which you mentioned on my talk page, I did exactly what you said: I used {{PD-author|author}}, with a link to the page where the MNGS states that it is in public domain. I'm going to try to figure out how to add a MNGS copyright tag to Wikimedia commons. Awickert (talk) 17:17, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aha! I see what you mean! Wikimedia wants to delete it. I'll take care of that... Awickert (talk) 17:21, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK - I was dumb - late-at-night editing, and I see what you said. I changed it back to PD-author (I had filled in the "author" in both places last night. Maybe I should make a MNGS template, though... Awickert (talk) 17:54, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've started to create a copyright tag for the Minnesota Geological Survey images by using my Wikimedia Commons page as a sandbox. Please go to commons:User:Awickert if you have input: right now, I'm waiting to see if I can use their logo, and I'm wondering what to call the tag. I've also never created a copyright tag before, so input would be helpful. Awickert (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I created the template. {{PD-MGS}}. I'm slowly adding images to the commons.

Directories

[edit]

Should this page or the sections therein contain directories to the related articles? For example, should there be links to the units that constitute the Cambrian-Ordovician sedimentary sequence in that section, or to the various rock formations on the North Shore in that section? Awickert (talk) 08:11, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I've always assumed there eventually be separate articles on features such as the Duluth Complex (already extant), Rove Formation, Saganaga Batholith, Giants Ridge batholith, etc., all linked from here. It may be that eventually there will be sub-articles for regions; certainly Northeast Minnesota would merit that. Maybe add text and links here in the appropriate places, and if the sections get too large they can be split off. (After all, that's how this article came to be, as an offshoot of Minnesota.) Kablammo (talk) 11:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All right. I've tried to start articles on the sedimentary sequence, but so far, I've been just making stubs. So maybe I'll start linking those, at least, and any others I can find, as soon as they're expanded beyond being stubs. Awickert (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the main issue with the article now is the brevity of the history section. I assume (hope?) that you will put your knowledge to work there, and your new articles on sedimentary formations can be linked there (in connection with descriptions of their formation) or in the regional sections, or both. Kablammo (talk) 18:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do what I can. Awickert (talk) 18:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from Minnesota

[edit]

... for soucing and prose review and possible incorporation here:

Earthquakes and Earth tremors

[edit]

Article from the Little Falls Daily Transcript, September 4, 1917. Reports of the damage were exaggerated, but the exceitement was geniune. http://www.morris.umn.edu/earthquakes/glance.pdf Minnesota Earthquake History http://www.morris.umn.edu/earthquakes/history.html Minnesota experiences tremors to this day all the way from International Falls to the renowned Twin Cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis. Sometimes excessive drilling and mining shift stratum of rock and sediment as the planet resettles tremors and earthquakes still occur in the State of Minnesota. Several theories regarding the connection between the existence of the "dust bowl" of earlier states in correlation with the earthquakes of the Minnesota region have evolved. The last recorded earthquake in in Minnesota which had a magnitude of 3.1 was on February 09, 1994 at 08:45:35 UTC at a depth of 5 kilometers according to the USGS NEIC. http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/last_event_states/states_minnesota.html Seismic events are recorded on a daily basis at all types of depths and are reported by the ANSS and other sources.

SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:38, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Geology of Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Geology of Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Geology of Minnesota. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:50, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Geology_of_Minnesota&oldid=1198780199"