User talk:Volcanoguy/Archive 6

Mount Cayley

Hey, have you considered fixing this up so it can be nominated at GA again? The prose and the lead need work but overall it's a decent article and it's part of the Cascades future good topic. It would be a great article to include. ;) ceranthor 15:26, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

I have not considered to do anything with that article for a long time, mostly because the user that reviewed it pissed me off and lots of the points were really nonsense. People that do not know anything about geology/geography or know little about the subject just make me crazy because they do not normally know what they are talking about. I am not going to put more effort into something that will not pass GA or FA because it is judged by retards. It's just a waste of time. There is always something wrong with this, with that, etc and its hard on a single contribuator to take. Like hello, it would be nice if WP Volcanoes could livein up and give some support insted of nothing. The reason WP Volcanoes was created was to improve topics related to igneous petrology. Sheesh, what a bunch of hypocrites. Volcanoguy 17:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

BTW just to let you know I nominated the Temagami greenstone belt article for GA awhile back if you are interested in reviewing it. Volcanoguy 12:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Shield volcano source question

So, I've been working on Shield volcano (my, um, working schedule is very skewed), and one of the things I need to write up are shields in the California/British Columbia region. Was wondering if you have anything in particular to say, or any really good source to suggest? Thanks. ResMar 03:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Probably. What's wrong with the map? Volcanoguy 12:03, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh, the section needs to be a case study of shield volcano groups. I've done Hawaii, the Galapagos, and Iceland, but I still have New Zealand, East Africa, and the West Coast to go. The map is a good feature. It's just that whenever you layer multiple images on a single one, it gets very messy. Anyway, do you know any good sources? Web searches are pretty bad; I mean, the fourth result is the EAST coast of Africa... ResMar 16:02, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, I don't really have any sources for shields right now because I have not been contributing to shield volcano articles lately. The last major contribution I made to a shield volcano article was either the Mount Edziza volcanic complex or the Level Mountain Range shield. But if you get the article started for the shields in the California/British Columbia region I will probably add some information. Volcanoguy 14:58, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

I meant the west coast shields part of the distribution section of the shield volcanoes article, silly =). ResMar 22:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

You know, I think it would be a good start of you just look for shield volcanoes in the California/British Columbia region. Here are some I know in the area:

British Columbia: Level Mountain Range, Mount Edziza volcanic complex, Maitland Volcano, Rainbow Range, Ilgachuz Range, Itcha Range, Volcano Vent, West Vent, Grizzly Butte and Heart Peaks.

Washington: Bird Mountain, East Crater, Gifford Peak, Lemei Rock, Red Mountain and Sawtooth Mountain. All of these are in the Indian Heaven volcanic field. Trout Creek Hill is the only shield volcano in the West Crater volcanic field.

Oregon: Newberry Volcano and Little Belknap.

California: Medicine Lake Volcano and Brushy Butte.

If you do some research on these volcanoes you will probably find information about their eruptive history, origins, etc. As a start, shield volcanoes in the Northern Cordilleran Volcanic Province (e.g. Heart Peaks, Level Mountain Range, Mount Edziza volcanic complex, Maitland Volcano, Volcano Vent, West Vent, Grizzly Butte) have their origins from continental rifting and shield volcanoes in the Anahim Volcanic Belt (e.g. Rainbow Range, Ilgachuz Range, Itcha Range) have their origins from the inferred Anahim hotspot. I am less certain with the American shields though since I do not normally research them. But I have seen the Medicine Lake and Newberry shields grouped as part of the Cascade Volcanic Arc (origin is subduction), and have also read that the Indian Heaven shields are part of the Cascade Arc. I hope this is helpful. Volcanoguy 07:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

It certainly was, thanks =) ResMar 04:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I recently got more interested in the Heart Peaks shield volcano so I am plaining to recreate its article for GA or FA sometime. Very few studies have been done at it though given its remote location so I doubt there is lots of information about it. Still worth a try though. Volcanoguy 16:31, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Spahats Falls

Hello Volcanoguy - You might want to reconsider the deletion you did. Most visitors to Spahats Falls also go to the Clearwater Valley Overlook, since the 2 viewpoints are so close. Most people drive, but there is also a trail from the falls viewing platform along the top of the cliffs to the overlook, as I noted in the 'Trails' section. Secondly, you could rename the article 'Spahats Falls' since nobody calls it 'Spahats Creek Falls'. That is its official name in the BCGNIS but road signage, BC Parks signage and both Wells Gray Park books use the shorter version. Your choice - since you created the article. Roland Neave (talk) 04:20, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

First of all, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tourist site. Articles are supposed to be focused on whatever the article is about, meaning external material is not needed. If there is an article about the Clearwater Valley Overlook the information would go there. And if "Spahats Falls" is the most commonly used form then maybe the article should be retitled "Spahats Falls". Volcanoguy 15:51, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance (2)

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on February 27, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 27, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 06:47, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

The Mount Cayley volcanic field is a remote north-south trending volcanic zone on the Coast of British Columbia that stretches 31 km (19 mi) from the Pemberton Icefield to the Squamish River. The field is located in the Sea-to-Sky Corridor of southwestern British Columbia, Canada. It forms the central segment of the Garibaldi Volcanic Belt, the Canadian portion of the Cascade Volcanic Arc, which extends from Northern California to southwestern British Columbia. Most of the Cayley volcanoes were formed during periods of volcanism under sheets of glacial ice throughout the last glacial period. These subglacial eruptions formed steep, flat-topped volcanoes and subglacial lava domes, most of which have been entirely exposed by deglaciation. However, at least two volcanoes predate the last glacial period and both are highly eroded. The field gets its name from Mount Cayley, the largest and most persistent volcano, located at the southern end of the Powder Mountain Icefield. This icefield covers much of the central portion of the volcanic field and is one of the several glacial fields in the Pacific Ranges of the Coast Mountains. Eruptions along the length of the field began between 1.6 and 5.3 million years ago. At least 23 eruptions have occurred throughout its eruptive history. This volcanic activity ranged from effusive to explosive, with magma compositions ranging from basaltic to rhyolitic. (more...)

Thanks for the notification. Volcanoguy 15:12, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

It's always possible that it is yet another mysterious vulcanology term, but could you check whether the three occurrences of 'seconed' might really be supposed to be 'second'? There were four occurrences originally, but someone must have changed one of those. Shenme (talk) 02:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice one! (the article I mean). Gonna have to go for hike up there when the snow's done. The Interior (Talk) 02:30, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Might as well get some pics while you are there. And Shenme, they were just spelling mistakes. I have fixed them. Volcanoguy 02:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Congrats on the appearance. ResMar 15:35, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I congratulate u on the appearance too, Volcanoguy ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Does anyone have the time to review the Temagami greenstone belt article at GAN? It has been sitting there for quite some time. Volcanoguy 16:58, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I dunno, I tend to write articles and not review them :/. ResMar 19:14, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, there will be more major articles/contributions from me once I find lots of information so someone has to review them sometime. They will just keep building up. I am plaining to create another "Volcanism of Canada" article, as well as an article about a volcanic vent that produced a large eruption in British Columbia. They will be similar in structure to the MCVF and TGB articles. I might also recreate the Anahim hotspot article and add more geology. Volcanoguy 00:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Ophiolites

I remembered a contribution by User:Woodwalker (Dec.2010, #DYK for Temagami greenstone belt, #Temagami) and I thought these citations might interest you:

• Windley, Brian F. 2003 Continental growth in the Proterozoic: a global perspective. In: Yoshida, M., Windley, B. F., Dasgupte, S. (eds) Proterozoic East Gondwana: Supercontinent Assembly and Breakup. Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 206, 23-34.
• However, the fact that some examples with a full ophiolite stratigraphy do occur (Anon 1972), indicates that oceanic ridge and subduction processes were in operation back in time to at least the Paleo-Proteorozoic.
  • Anonymous 1972 Penrose Field Conference Report on Ophiolites, Geotimes, 17, 24-25.
• The 1.998 Ga Portuniq Ophiolite in the Cape Smith Belt of Canada is situated on the continental margin of an Archean craton. It consists of two magmatic suites (Scott et al. 1992; St-onge et al. 1997).
  • D. J. Scott, H. Helmstaedt and M. J. Bickle Geology; February 1992; v. 20; no. 2; p. 173-176; DOI: 10.1130/0091-7613(1992)020<0173:POCSBN>2.3.CO;2 Purtuniq ophiolite, Cape Smith belt, northern Quebec, Canada: A reconstructed section of Early Proterozoic oceanic crust
  • M. J. Bickle, E. G. Nisbet and A. Martin Archean Greenstone Belts Are Not Oceanic Crust The Journal of Geology Vol. 102, No. 2 (Mar., 1994), pp. 121-137
  • St-Onge, M.R., Lucas, S.B., Scott, D.J. 1997 The Ungava Orogen and the Cape Smith Thrust Belt. In: De Wit, M., Ashwal, L.D. (eds) Greenstone Belts
• The 1.96 Ga Jornua Ophiolite in Finland is situated on the margin of an Archean craton (Kontinen 1987).
  • Kontinen A. 1987 An early proterozoic ophiolite — the jormua mafic-ultramafic complex, Northeastern Finland Precambrian Research Volume 35, April 1987, Pages 313-341 doi:10.1016/0301-9268(87)90061-1
• The 1.901 Ga Elbow-Athapapuskow Ophiolite in the Flin Flon Belt of Canada has pillow basalts intruded by diabase sills, gabbros and mafic-ultramafic cumulates (Lucas et al. 1996).
  • S. B. Lucas, R. A. Stern, E. C. Syme, B. A. Reilly and D. J. Thomas Intraoceanic tectonics and the development of continental crust: 1.92–1.84 Ga evolution of the Flin Flon Belt, Canada GSA Bulletin; May 1996; v. 108; no. 5; p. 602-629; DOI: 10.1130/0016-7606(1996)108<0602:ITATDO>2.3.CO;2
• The 1.73 Ga Payson Ophiolite in Arizona, within the juvenile Yavapai-Mazatzal Orogen, has submarine basalts, sheeted dykes (1-2 km thick) and gabbro, and was erupted upon a magmatic arc (Dann and Bowring 1997).
  • Dann, J.C. and Bowring, S.A. 1997 The Early Proterozoic Payson ophiolite and the Yavapai-Mazatzal orogenic belt, central Arizona. In: De Wit, M., Ashwal, L.D. (eds) Greenstone Belts
• However, the Zambezi Belt between the Congo and Zimbawe Cratons contains the remains of the 1.4 Ga (zircon age of a plagiogranite dyke) Chewore Ophiolite,... (Oliver et al. 1998).
  • G. J. H. Oliver, S. P. Johnson, I. S. Williams and D. A. Herd Relict 1.4 Ga oceanic crust in the Zambezi Valley, northern Zimbabwe: Evidence for Mesoproterozoic supercontinental fragmentation Geology; June 1998; v. 26; no. 6; p. 571-573; DOI: 10.1130/0091-7613(1998)026<0571:RGOCIT>2.3.CO;2
• --Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:23, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Those are interesting. Surprisingly, I have made very few articles about ophiolite formations. The only ophiolite article I created that comes in mind is the Metchosin Igneous Complex on southern Vancouver Island, which if I remember properly has something to do with the Yellowstone hotspot. Volcanoguy 21:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 06:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Temagami banded iron formation

I think File:Temagami BIF fold.jpg needs a scale in the description. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:36, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I do not know the size of the fold or banded iron formation. Volcanoguy 07:43, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I thought u made the picture. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 08:51, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I did. Just don't know the size/length of it. Volcanoguy 09:08, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Then u can tell us if the picture is 10 m wide, 1 m wide, 0.1 m wide or 0.01 m wide ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 11:48, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

That's a bit pointless..... Volcanoguy 18:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Sherman Mine

I've removed a WP:Copyvio from the Sherman Mine article. You added a mineralogy section in March 2007 which appears to have been a copy/paste copyright violation from [1]. Please explain. Vsmith (talk) 13:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

I can not remember, don't even remember adding that in the article. Volcanoguy 00:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, four years does that to memory. I happened on it when I did a google search to find out just what the "FER-3 and FER-4" were. Mentioned it here in case you might recall other possible problems of that sort. Vsmith (talk) 02:42, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Volcano metapage

I'm trying to, posibly, put togethor a template to organize that confused mess that volcano info is. I've made a draft in my sandbox. Feel free to add anything or edit it as appropriate (read: fix it up and we can use it as a scaffold). PS: I see you've seen my talkpage editing banner :P. ResMar 05:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I added 14 more in the list. I will add more latter; a bit busy collecting info to recreate the Heart Peaks article. Volcanoguy 14:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Wilpower volcano chain

Hey man somebody has nominated all your eight articles for deletion HERE.Mark^Dask 10:14, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

That's fine. I was thinking of bringing them to AFD awhile ago anyway because the websites used as sources are no longer available and I am not sure these volcanoes are real. Volcanoguy 17:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Heart Peaks

The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Pyramid Mountain, Wells Gray Park

Hello Volcanoguy - I have made revisions to this article which you have done some work on. As this contradicts your work, can you check Goward/Hickson's book and, although it's a conflict of interest to suggest it, my book? Both discuss the formation of Pyramid Mountain. I have added these references as the article has had a citation for no references since 2009. Hickson calls Pyramid a tuya and defines it differently than Wikipedia's article on a tuya. Other nearby tuyas are McLeod Hill and Fifty-Two Ridge on Battle Mountain. I'll be interested in your comments. Roland Neave (talk) 05:21, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Tuyas are flat-topped steep-sided edifices formed when lava erupts through an ice sheet. From looking at pics of Pyramid Mountain it is not a tuya because it dosen't have that form of structure; it is rounded. According to the Natural Resources Canada website, the eruption that formed Pyramid Mountain did not break through the overlying Pleistocene ice sheet. If the eruption did break through the ice sheet Pyramid would be a tuya. I have the book Volcanoes of North America: United States and Canada and it states this as the image caption: "Wells Gray-Clearwater: Pyramid Mountain is a subglacial mound made of an accumulation of hyaloclastites. If its subglacial eruption had broken through the ice cover, the volcano would have a flat-topped tuya shape." Subglacial mounds form when a subglacial eruption stops before the volcano is higher in elevation than the surrounding ice/water.

After searching "Pyramid Mountain Wells Gray mound", there are a few documents made by Cathie Hickson that state Pyramid Mountain as a subglacial mound. So all I can say is that the Goward/Hickson book statement is most likely an error. Another thing awkward is the name Caribou Tuya for a subglacial volcano in northern British Columbia, which is not a tuya but a subglacial mound. It seems like there is some kind of confusion between tuyas and subglacial mounds. Volcanoguy 13:59, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Mount Nyiragongo VEI 1 or VEI 3 (or 4?)

Hello Volcanoguy, I was just looking at Mount Nyiragongo I see in the history that you listed the volcano as VEI 1 - so I thought I'd best drop you a line, as my very rough calculation from the figures in the article suggested higher. I wondered where you got the info?

The article says "about 20 km north of the town of Goma and Lake Kivu" and "Lava streamed from three spatter cones at the end of the fissure and flowed in a stream 200 to 1000 m wide and up to 2 m deep through Goma." For my rough calculation I took an average 600m ((200m+1000m)/2)wide and assumed an average depth of 1m (2m+0/2) for 20km So .6 x 20 x .001 = 0.012 cubic km, which would put it over .01 cubic meters so it would be vei 3 (not vei 1).

But this reference [2] for the 1977 eruption says "An estimated volume of 50,000 cubic m of lava was expelled by the phreatomagmatic eruption which immediatelyfollowed the collapse of the inner parts of the crater." and possibly significant this reference for the 2002 eruption [3] says "He said he made his prediction after observing that there was 10 times more lava in the volcano's crater than in 1977"

So if that was an accurate assessment that would be approx 500,000 cubic m (so 0.5 km cubed taking it all the way up to VEI-4)

Anyway just thought I'd ask what you thought :) EdwardLane (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

You are refering to how much lava the volcano erupted, which is not the correct usage of the VEI (Volcanic Explosivity Index). It refers to how much ash/tephra a volcano has erupted during a single eruption. So those eruptions were not VEI-3 or VEI-4. According to the Global Volcanism Program website the largest historical explosive eruption from Nyiragongo is VEI-2. Volcanoguy 09:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes you're quite right of course (really obvious if I think about it) - think I was tired :)

EdwardLane (talk) 10:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Swearing about McDougall Lake

Swearing at a fellow editor is not appropriate behaviour on Wikipedia. See WP:CIV for the policy. As for McDougall Lake, I have been there and can assure you that it is not dammed by Kostal lava. It is correct that the lava reached the south end of the lake just west of its outlet and pushed the course of File Creek eastward. The lake is very deep and its basin was scoured by glaciers long before the Kostal eruption. Since you reverted my edit on this matter, I suggest you go to McDougall Lake and look at it yourself – easiest way is to charter a float plane out of 100 Mile House. In the meantime, please add some proper citations to this article. I put in a 'citation needed' on June 13 and you deleted that without providing any.Roland Neave (talk) 04:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to say, but I'm not censored. It's not like I have to follow every rule on Wikipedia. In fact, I follow very few of them, mostly Wikipedia:Ignore all rules as I am a rebel. As a reference to what a "rule" is on Wikipedia, it is Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. As a WP member for over 4 years (unlike yourself), I am well aware of WP's rubbish policies, including the one you noted (WP:CIV). Like what are policies supposed to do, prevent things from happening? Lmao Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia, and being insulted is just part of life.

As for McDougall Lake, I can not get to McDougall Lake as I do not live anywhere near there, nor do I have transportation. In the meantime, I do not care what you or anyone else says. Are you a geologist? Do you think you know everything about Wells Gray? There is already a source on the Kostal Cone article that states Kostal last erupted 400 years ago. And even if that is not true I doubt the cone has erupted more than once as most of the Wells Gray volcanoes are monogenetic, meaning they only erupt once. Volcanoguy 02:13, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Added a citation for the 400 yr. age as requested to the Volcanoes of N. Am. book. It was easy to verify through google books - and we cite things when requested rather than deleting the request.

Since you linked to the essay: ... being deliberately sloppy in your editing and sourcing is a bad way to practice DGAFism. quote from here. Vsmith (talk) 14:17, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I do not see how that is sloppy. It's just pointless to add a citation in such a small article that already has a source for the 400 yr claim. Whether if it's sloppy or not, someone like myself wouldn't care. If you are referring to me as a dick per your link, think again. Being sloppy (if I ever am) dosen't make me a dick, nor am I or try to be perfect. Also, I'm not using "apathy as rationalization for a dickish action". Being careless dosen't make me a dick. I am also not an "angry mastodon". Volcanoguy 02:13, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

And now you modify your comment after I responded to it ... nice touch there. And it was you who initially linked to that essay in your now removed post here. Vsmith (talk) 03:00, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

You have a problem with people revising their comments? I removed the essay simply because it is opinionative. Volcanoguy 20:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

cats

Undid revision 449323417 by Babakathy (talk) the main cat is not ment to be sorted in alphabetical order....

Thanks, I understand.Babakathy (talk) 14:25, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Categorization#Sort keys: "Use a space as the sort key for an article matching an eponymous category, or for a key article for the category. Typically, these eponymous articles or categories are best listed first even if they do not appear first in alphabetical order. For example, the article Barack Obama includes the category sort key [[Category:Barack Obama| ]]. This places the article at the start of the listing for that category. (Note: If the key article should not be a member, simply edit the category text itself to add it, perhaps using {{Cat main}}.)" Volcanoguy 14:31, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Help re volcanic features in W.J.B. Greenwood Provincial Park

I have just created a stub article W.J.B. Greenwood Provincial Park. The park web site mentions volcanic features including dikes. However, the park preliminary management statement does not seem to indicate this. Thought you might know more, and might add text to the article, if appropriate. (Also, as an aside, in case you had not come across these resources, I have stumbled upon historic mining claim maps at the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development, Mines and Forestry; this is the alphabetical index. They are useful for me for determining geographic locations in Ontario, in particular old townships that may today be only geographic townships. I have used them as references most recently at Rib Lake (Ontario) and Latchford, Ontario. Perhaps they might be useful for you for geological reasons.) --papageno (talk) 18:11, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. As for the park I have never herd of it before. But it would be alright to make note of the dikes as they are probably attractions in the park. Volcanoguy 17:31, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 27, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 27, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:11, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

The 2007–2008 Nazko earthquakes were a series of small earthquakes measuring less than 4.0 on the Richter magnitude scale. They took place in the sparsely populated Nazko area of the Central Interior of British Columbia starting on Tuesday, October 9, 2007. Their epicenters were near the upper Baezaeko River, 30 km (19 mi) west of Nazko Cone, a small tree-covered cinder cone that last erupted about 7,200 years ago. The swarm of earthquakes is unique in that it is the only notable concentration of seismicity in the Canadian Cordillera away from the British Columbia Coast. No damages or casualties resulted from the Nazko earthquakes, which were too small to be felt by people, but local seismographs recorded them. The earthquake swarm occurred at the eastern end of a known volcanic zone called the Anahim Volcanic Belt. This is an east-west trending 600 km (370 mi) long line of volcanoes that extends from just north of Vancouver Island to near the small city of Quesnel. (more...)

Volcanoes

Hello. I've been studying volcanoes for around 5 years too. And I am furthermore the author of at least two scientific papers on volcanoes. Thus, you should not try to have your opinion prevail by pretending that your knowledge about them is necessarily better than mine. The fact is that Category:Ornithology is currently in Category:Birds, Category:Sociology in Category:Society, Category:Narratology in Category:Storytelling, etc. Consequently, there is no reason why, as far as I think, Category:Volcanology should not be in Category:Volcanism. You should really revert your edits or quit the project as intended. Thierry Caro (talk) 05:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Volcanism is the process that creates volcanoes. Thus, it is part of volcanology as in how they are formed, how they erupt and so on. The eruption of lava, ash etc is part of volcanism. As for the project, I am not a member as you can see here. There is a difference between around five years (~5) and more than five years (>5). Volcanoguy 05:01, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Furthermore, this document about Mount St. Helens states Volcanology: Explosive volcanism and Volcanology: Effusive volcanism. Volcanoguy 10:53, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Also worthy to note that Category:Ornithology and the associated categories have nothing to do with volcanology. As a result, it dosen't follow the same categorization. Volcanism is a process, birds are a species. Volcanoguy 02:02, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Nice userpage

I even know where you got it :P ResMar 04:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Linking

Hi. I'll start by echoing the plaudits for your User page.

Now, about linking, and this edit. I think you were following wp:overlink, without allowing for wp:repeatlink.

The latter suggests it's ok to repeat a link if the repetition is in an image's caption.

Personally, I feel that a caption with no link looks bland, and adding a link helps a reader to follow up on an unknown aspect, without them having to scan the article for the one link.

As an example, earth, a wp:Featured Article, has links from every image, some of which are repeated.

To end on an upbeat note, kudos to you for your vast work on volcanoes. Best wishes, Trafford09 (talk) 07:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I was not following anything. If it is necessary to link stuff in a caption then fine. Volcanoguy 11:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

OK - thanks. Trafford09 (talk) 18:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

There was a time I did link stuff in captions but I stopped doing that because thought they were not needed. Are you saying stuff that is linked in a caption should be linked again in another caption? I am plaining to bring another article to FA class so it would be good to know. Volcanoguy 23:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'm no authority, and any opinion I've formed is based on the links I mentioned earlier.

But it seems that it's up to personal choice, whether to use links in captions. My own view, for what it's worth, is that links in captions do very little harm, and yet they both brighten up the caption and provide a useful link for a curious reader, without the reader searching for a link in the article text. I'd agree with you that the case for the same link in 2 captions is a bit weaker.

Good luck with the next FA article. Regards, Trafford09 (talk) 12:11, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I do agree links in captions are useful for readers. The links you added in the 2007–2008 Nazko earthquakes article have been readded but I didn't readd Nazko because I have change it to a disambiguation page. Volcanoguy 06:49, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Just in case if you're wondering, Mount Meager is the article I'm attempting to bring to FA. Volcanoguy 07:05, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I was indeed wondering which article you were next improving. I've taken an initial look at it - hope you don't mind - and I like the links you've got there from the captions. I've made a couple of minor changes - trivial ones. Best of luck with your future work. Trafford09 (talk) 22:24, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you think the article is overall complete? Volcanoguy 23:31, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, nice of you to ask me, but I'm afraid I'm no expert on making an article an FA one - I bow to your own experience! No doubt there's a FA Checklist somewhere, on what things one should check.

I'm a novice in geology and volcanoes. To my layman's eyes, the article seems a little technical (e.g. rock types & volcanic terms), even allowing for its subject matter. This is of course alleviated by many helpful links.

It'd be nice if there were a linked article to explain Assemblage (geology) - but I found none.

A repeated phrase that jarred a little with me was "xyz was erupted". Apart from volcanoes, in everyday British English usage, the verb is only intransitive. So, I'm used to something erupting, but not "being erupted".

But I saw nothing else I could improve. I didn't check the references.

Hope your efforts pay off! Trafford09 (talk) 00:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Rock types and volcanic terms are in all FA volcano articles. Without the rock types and volcanic terms, it would be more technical. For example, calling a volcanic rock a "dark rock", "light rock" etc is questionable because that can mean anything and it rises the question "what type of volcanic rock is it?" The phrase "was erupted" is mentioned only four times throughout the article and "erupt" is a common term for volcanoes spewing lava, ash etc. Volcanoguy 01:30, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Because there is no article for "assemblage", I have removed it from the text except for where it is used in a name (i.e. Pylon Assemblage, Plinth Assemblage, Job Assemblage, The Devastator Assemblage, Mosaic Assemblage). It seems like "assemblage" is another term for a geological formation according to the Franciscan Assemblage article, which is also known as the Franciscan Formation. So I replaced "geological assemblage" with "geological formation". Volcanoguy 01:57, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Oh - I've posed a collaborative question at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Volcanoes#Assemblage, so we may get some geological help there, and end up with something we could link into XYZ Assemblage articles. Cheers, Trafford09 (talk) 10:05, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Also, I put in a plug for Mount Meager there, so maybe we'll get more eyes on the FA job, to assist you. Trafford09 (talk) 10:09, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

OK. You might want to try Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geology as well because there is geologists in that project. Volcanoguy 23:58, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

After looking in the dictionary to see if there is a geologic term for assemblage I came across this: "a number of things or persons assembled together; collection; assembly". This is probably what assemblage also means in geology because the examples I mentioned above are all rock formations assembled together. Volcanoguy 01:06, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Mount Meager

Hello, Volcanoguy. You have new messages at The Interior's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Check back, sorry for the late reply! The Interior (Talk) 23:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Volcanoguy! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only.  If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Ilgachuz Range panorama.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Ilgachuz Range panorama.jpg, which you've sourced to http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/important-notices/646: "Reproduction of multiple copies of materials on this site, in whole or in part, for the purposes of commercial redistribution is prohibited except with written permission". I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia is too uptight with images. I have contacts with Cathie Hickson and she said it's fine to upload her images under the following licence. It's not my fault I can't prove that she said this over email. It's fine how it is. Volcanoguy 01:52, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Also worthy to note this policy bullshit would also include images that are claimed to be owned by their uploaders, simply because people can still lie about having permission to upload them and themselves being the creator of the image. This website needs to get a grip. I just might called this whole thing Paranoia Wikimedia LOL! Volcanoguy 07:54, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2011_Vancouver_Island_earthquake

Just wondering if you are aware of this deletion proposal? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Johnny Creek (Temagami)

Re User_talk:Qui1che#Johnny_Creek_.28Temagami.29: Sorry was out of town for several weeks and should have added a note to my talk page about it. Not sure I have much more information at hand to add to the Johnny Creek (Temagami) article. If you were able to supply a picture, we could of course add it. I see you have kindly added geological details. --papageno (talk) 16:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

I am going to add more geological details when I have the time. Volcanoguy 14:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Mount Meager, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Springer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Hawaii hotspot

I'm going to try and restart this old project, and your comments would be highly appreciated. Thanks =), ResMar 02:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I thought you gave up bringing that article to FA. If I have time I will take a look at it, but I am kind of busy at the moment. Volcanoguy 14:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I did, and it's been bugging me for the past 2 years. I'm more experienced now so hopefully, fourth time's the charm. ResMar 18:59, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh God, the guy is really young ;) Sorry, for messing up ur talk page Volcanoguy, but I couldn't resist ;) --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

What not cynical enough for you =-). ResMar 05:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I am already collecting information to remake another article for FA. Volcanoguy 18:33, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I just want to get this out of the way, finally =) ResMar 04:55, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Hawaii again

Friendly bump =) ResMar 03:50, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I already posted all of my points on the peer review, so I have nothing more to comment. The Hawaii hotspot is something I do not know much about. Volcanoguy 04:07, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh really? =| ResMar 15:01, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Big Dan Mine

Hello, Volcanoguy. You have new messages at Talk:Big Dan Mine.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Found who owns "Big Dan" (I think).--kelapstick^(bainuu) 08:35, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Mount Price (British Columbia), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Oxidization (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Fixed it while taking a look at the article. Vsmith (talk) 13:07, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Thanks for the copyedit in the Effects section as well. Volcanoguy 17:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

FYI

Wikipedia_talk:FAC#Participation_in_this_process ResMar 01:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Commented. Volcanoguy 02:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, perhaps you should. *sigh* ResMar 22:00, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Hydrothermal exploration. Etc.

• What is Hydrothermal exploration? Plus I may have inadvertently created some errors in the "Landslides" section by discussing various local valleys in an area unknown to me. Ling.Nut3 (talk) 13:33, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It looks great. Hydrothermal exploration is the exploration of hydrothermal circulation. Perhaps hydrothermal circulation should be linked in the article to make it more obvious. Volcanoguy 14:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Exploration of ... maybe exploration for ... as in potential hydrothermal or geothermal power? or in the sense of potential hydrothermal ore deposits? The phrase only occurs in the lead as Hydrothermal exploration is present at Mount Meager and it is one of the several geothermal sites in British Columbia. Note the geothermal link goes to geothermal gradient, was that the intent - or should it go to geothermal power as that potential is discussed in the Human history section. Seems this should be on article talk. Vsmith (talk) 14:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know BC Hydro has been exploring the Mount Meager area to use the heat as an energy resource. Take a look here and here to see if you can figure it out; I am not an expert of the subject. Volcanoguy 15:54, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The BCHydro pdf states solely for internal purposes and as a company document I don't think it works as a WP:RS, also it is ten years old. The BCSEA page is a better source, but as it is an advocacy group, it isn't the best either. Seems the BCHydro pdf is used as a reference in the article and that is problematic, it should be replaced. The BCSEA page discusses the 2004 government permit for exploratory drilling ... what has happened with that in the past 8 years? The GVP page verifies that hot springs exist and the BCSEA ref mentions the exploratory drilling. And that's about all we can say without more info. Not much help yet, maybe I can do some searching ... but that may not be very soon. Vsmith (talk) 02:09, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure what would be a better source. I would have thought the company source was reliable because they are the ones exploring the Meager area to produce power. Volcanoguy 03:59, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

• Another q: Does relevant literature often use "erupted" in passive constructions, e.g., "intermediate to felsic pyroclastic rocks were erupted..."... I suppose I could hit Google Scholar for an answer... Ling.Nut3 (talk) 01:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd redo it as "an eruption of intermediate to felsic pyroclastic rocks occurred" ... - just fits my geobrain better :) in preference to the "were erupted" phrasing. Vsmith (talk) 02:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Works with me. I just revised it. Volcanoguy 03:49, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

• "was erupted" and "were erupted" both have 4 more occurrences. Ling.Nut3 (talk) 04:01, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
• Ah. Google scholar seems to approve. Some of the remaining instances may be awkward, but there's no need to alter all of them... cheers... Ling.Nut3 (talk) 04:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand what is awkward about "was erupted" and "were erupted". They are quite obvious to me. Volcanoguy 07:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

• I'll start asking questions on the article's talk page instead... cheers... Ling.Nut3 (talk) 05:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

• hey there were many questions on the Meager talk page... Tks. Ling.Nut3 (talk) 15:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I replied to all of them. Volcanoguy 11:01, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

• Tks for the answers. I was stuck at an intermediate stage. I have made many changes, but only one changes content. Please check the relvant sections. Also i have posted more questions. In a rush, sorry if i sound formal. Cheers. Ling.Nut3 (talk) 00:11, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

• Final comments on Meager's talk. Good luck!Ling.Nut3 (talk) 10:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Canadian Cascade Arc

I mentioned this on Talk:Garibaldi Volcanic Belt but I thought it would be good to mention it here as well. Later I will change this redirect to an article for a number of reasons: the Canadian Cascade Arc and Garibaldi Volcanic Belt are not necessary the same thing. The Canadian Cascade Arc is a broader and older feature, consisting of at least four subduction zone-related belts. The Chilcotin Group is a product of back-arc volcanism, the Alert Bay Volcanic Belt was formed by fore-arc volcanism, and the Garibaldi and Pemberton belts are main-arc features. Much of the Pemberton Volcanic Belt consists of intrusions (e.g. Salal Creek Pluton, Rogers Creek Pluton, Chilliwack batholith, Mount Barr Plutonic Complex), but after doing research it turns out that these intrusions are generally thought to be the roots of deeply eroded Oligocene-Miocene volcanoes. I found a geology paper that mentions the Salal Creek Pluton, stating that it is possible similar episodes of volcanic activity to that of Mount Meager occurred during the emplacement of the Salal Creek Pluton and the present level of erosion has exposed the upper level of intrusive rocks and volcanics have been eroded away. However, the Salal Creek Pluton (10 km wide) covers a much larger area than Mount Meager (4 km wide). The Salal Creek Pluton may have generated a massive volcanic dome 8 million years ago, but rapid erosion to a depth of about 1 km has exposed the underlying pluton. Volcanoguy 11:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hello

I'm trying to get people who are willing to help me out with a pet project I've begun but realised that it will be extremely hard for me to even make a small dent in. First of all, I got your name from the list of active members on the wikiproject for mining articles. Please disregard this, if you're not interested.

So, here's what I'm trying to do and what you could do to help me. I noticed that there were very few articles that list mines. I've tried (to the best of my abilities) to create a sub-page that lists all of the probable articles for lists of mines that I could think of, you can review this here.

Basically, I need help. Suggestions on different lists to add, I need lists created, if the lede I've been using should be changed, I'd like community consensus on the standard layout (I've been going with listing articles like List of gold mines by country and List of mines in the United States by output. If someone would like to make templates for these articles.

Please, don't feel obligated. I came to you, and others like you because of your implied interest in mining articles. List articles are not exactly in everyone's taste. If you are completely uninterested, but think you might know someone who might be, please let them know about it. I could use all the help I can get.

Oh, and if you happen to create any new articles on mines, please add them to any of my recently created lists. Sorry for this being so wordy, have a good day and happy editing! Ncboy2010 (talk) 22:30, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I will help as much as I can. There is at least one mine list I created and that would be List of mines in Ontario. From looking at your list of mines by metal/mineral, would List of quartz mines be an appropiate list? I know quartz is used in electonics and jewlery, but I don't know if it's mined as a main product. Volcanoguy 23:44, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I suppose the quartz mine would be appropriate, if there were enough mines. From just a preliminary search, I failed to find any specifically named mines but Arkansas is apparently one of the "few places worldwide where commercial mining of quartz is economically viable." It may be better to just have a small section on Lists of mines unless we can find enough. As for the mines in Ontario, I'm glad I'm not the only one who's interested in working on this. If you want, go ahead and add those to the subpage I created above, along with the other provinces of Canada. =] I'm really excited that you're gonna help out. Thank you so much! Ncboy2010 (talk) 01:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I haven't really had time to find any quartz mines but I did find one in Canada called "Fletcher Lake Quartz Mine", apparently mining quartz for silica. Volcanoguy 03:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, as im able to Id like to get them all in the table. Ncboy2010 (talk) 18:48, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
	Thanks for creating the new articles O'Connor Mine and Norrie Mine, and for your efforts to improve Wikipedia's coverage of mining-related topics. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:11, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. There will be more mine articles for the Temagami region. Volcanoguy 18:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

1918 Vancouver Island earthquake

Greetings! I have been making my way around some of the earthquake articles that we have and expanding some here and there. The 1663 Charlevoix earthquake was one that you had created that was built up with the help of another editor. I came across this 1918 Canadian earthquake article that you also started. On the other coast this time, and a little more current; only a century old or so :)

Well, I did get a start on it, but thought that since it is a rather low key event (minimal damage, magnitude 7 or less, and no deaths) I should check with other folks first on whether the article should be kept. To get a feel for what others think I am going to do an AfD on it. I can only go by the guidelines that were put together as to whether it "meets the minimums" or not and want to do this to prevent getting surprised down the road. Would rather get it out of the way before expanding any more since the article is sort of right on the cusp of being notable. I just don't know if it should be merged into one of the other Vancouver Island earthquake articles or if it can stand alone. There's other earthquakes in that area that we don't have articles on yet too, so again, just want to get ideas, not necessarily get rid of it. In a few edits I have added about another paragraph or so. Please do chime in on the AfD. Dawnseeker2000 01:04, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

It is still a major earthquake if it did minor damage and didn't kill anyone. From doing a simple search on Google there appears to be lots of results for this earthquake so I wouldn't say it's not notable. Furthermore, I don't follow or care for Wikipedia's notability policies. Volcanoguy 01:58, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of 1918 Vancouver Island earthquake for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article 1918 Vancouver Island earthquake is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1918 Vancouver Island earthquake until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dawnseeker2000 01:07, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

List of mines in Temegami

Wow, you did really good! The article is amazing. Good work, Volcanoguy! Ncboy2010 (talk) 22:13, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Black Tusk

I have put a cleanup tag on the Black Tusk article. Can you have a look at it? You have done some work on it so I thought that you may be able to help. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:49, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

If you are referring to the layout problem with the refs I can't help because I do not know what is wrong with it. Also, all of the volcano links on the GSC website appear to be broken so I can not help there either. Volcanoguy 02:26, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

1996 Rocky Mountain House earthquake

Hi Volcanoguy, I've just redirected 1996 Rocky Mountain House earthquake to the List of earthquakes in Canada, as there had been no response on the talk page to my proposal to do just that. I have no objection if you want to revert that and go through an AfD to generate a more complete (well actually some) discussion. Mikenorton (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

You didn't get a responce from me because I don't monitor any earthquake articles or lists. Also worthy to note I am well against notability so I do not normally participate in such AfD discussions. Who cares about notability? Actually I should start a write up for anti-notability. Volcanoguy 22:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Volcanoguy. You have new messages at Killervogel5's talk page.
Message added 23:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Big Dan Mine

I would recommend going through the Good Article process before attempting FA. I had the same lack of participation with Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, both at WP:MINING, and at WP:SCOTUS (although I just notified the projects, didn't request feedback at peer review). Coeur failed FA, based on lack of information on some things. I thought it was good enough, but I was wrong (shows what I know about the FAC). As it is now, I think that it could pass GA fairly easy, with not a whole lot of changes, but I don't know what scope FA would look for articles about mines, the main reason I never attempted to bring one up to that level. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 01:05, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I will probably post it at GAN after the peer review is achieved. However, there dosen't seem to be much more information to add in the Big Dan Mine article, which is why I am attempting to bring it to FAC. From my point of view, the article seems to pass the featured article criteria. Volcanoguy 18:24, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Maybe it is, but I have never seen an FAR done on an individual mine, so I don't know what they would be looking for. Best of luck with it. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 01:43, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Your contributed article, Traditional mining

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I notice that you recently created a new page, Traditional mining. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page - Mining. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at Mining - you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think that the article you created should remain separate, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. TheLongTone (talk) 07:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I removed the speedy tag, aside from they are two distinct articles, there is a lot of information that could be covered in it, and the article should have been created ages ago. I need to dig out my drill and blast handbook. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 07:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

I would disagree with a merge because there are other articles about mining methods. For example, sulfide mining, Gold panning, placer mining, mountaintop removal mining, surface mining, etc. This is an article that should have been created long time ago. Volcanoguy 18:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Who said anything about a merge? --kelapstick^(bainuu) 01:41, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

At first I thought the information on the traditional mining article was going to be merged into the main mining article but it turns out after reading it again it was going to be deleted all together. After looking through the mining article I do not see traditional mining mentioned anywhere. There is a section about prehistoric mining but not all traditional mining is prehistoric. Volcanoguy 01:54, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually it is still used in some countries. Volcanoguy 01:56, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, it was tagged for speedy deletion because the tagger said it was covered in the mining article, which it wasn't. See also ninja miner. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 02:00, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

That article reminds me of the work I have been doing lately :) No panning but digging into the side of a hill with hammer and chisel to look for quartz veins. This is what made me think about creating an article for traditional mining. Perhaps the ninja miner article could be added in Category:Traditional mining? There is probably more articles that could be included in this category. Not sure if hand steel should still have its own article since the traditional mining article has been created and there is only little information about hand steel. Volcanoguy 04:10, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I also added artisanal mining and bootleg mining in Category:Traditional mining because they seem to be done by hand. Volcanoguy 04:58, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

I am reminded of a presentation I once saw, presented by a friend of mine, about his time in Mali, the townspeople used to dig holes in the ground (mostly clay), shimmy down the sides, and pick gold nuggets out of the walls. Eventually they may tunnel (about the height one could crawl through) in the clay, chasing nuggets. One group of individuals got inventive and rigged up a scaffold type invention, with a pulley on the top, which was used to pull bags of dirt up the hole. I referred to it as a 1 horsepower armstrong hoist. The name of the presentation was, appropriately enough, Mali Mining Madness. This would have been going on in about the mid 90s, although I am sure it continues today.--kelapstick^(bainuu) 08:24, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure lots of that occurs in Africa given all of the poor people there. At some point I watched a video on youtube of Indonesian miners driving an adit through hard rock by hand. Not sure if they were mining independently or were associated with a mining company. The adit at the time had to have been at least 100 feet long. Volcanoguy 10:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Big Dan Mine PR

Hello, Volcanoguy. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Peer review/Big Dan Mine/archive1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Just in case you forgot to watchlist this. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 12:27, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I replied to some of your comments. Volcanoguy 08:11, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

WP Geology in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Geology for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 22:46, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Dan O'Connor

"People from City" categories are not applied solely on the basis of where a person was born. Rather, a person can be categorized as being from any place where they lived for long enough to merit it being mentioned in the article at all — if a person lived in 10 different cities over the course of their lives, then they can go in all ten "People from City" categories and not just the one for where they were actually born. And under no circumstances does a person ever go directly in a "City" category, so if you really insist that he not be categorized as "people from" those cities, then he does not go in either Category:Greater Sudbury or Category:Timmins instead. And, in fact, you missed the even more crucial detail that O'Connor was a mayor of Sudbury during his time living there, meaning he actually belongs in Category:Mayors of Sudbury, Ontario. Bearcat (talk) 17:18, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Whatever. I didn't miss anything as I read through all of the sources. Volcanoguy 19:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Except that one of the sources quite clearly does say that he served as the mayor of Sudbury... Bearcat (talk) 20:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes I know that. I didn't add the article in Category:Mayors of Sudbury, Ontario because I didn't know such a category existed. Volcanoguy 07:38, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Lava Fork lava flow.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Lava Fork lava flow.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk•edits) 21:00, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

You're one of the 1000 most edited Wikipedians

Out of curiosity, how do you feel about that? ResMar 20:06, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Kind of surprising. I can't remember the last time I looked at the list, but I have probably been slipping downwards for quite awhile because I haven't been doing as much editing as I used to. Volcanoguy 07:47, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, you have me beat by miles and miles; I think I'm 3700 or thereabout. ResMar 18:32, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

I haven't done much volcano editing since at least February, but I am going to see if I can get myself back into it again. There is quite a bit of volcanological information stored on my computer that I want to get rid of. I was collecting it to make WP articles but I got into other subjects then I never finished working on them. The most complete is the Canadian Cascade Arc, which includes the Chilcotin Group and the Alert Bay, Garibaldi and Pemberton belts. Volcanoguy 09:00, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I've gotten back around to Wikipedia on occasion and have made great strides on Kilauea, but my editing will probably be low-key and erratic for a long time ^.^ ResMar 02:40, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

It's too bad how silent the project's become, though. A year ago me, you, and Ceranthor were tearing stuff up. Now Ceranthor's AWOL, you've "left entirely", and I'm only half around...ResMar 02:48, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, I am willing to tear stuff up again. The reason I left WP Volcanoes was because it turned into a mess. Most members didn't know what they were talking about. I might rejoin if the project is more organized. Volcanoguy 19:03, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

New York volcanoes

ResMar, while I was doing some research I found information here about a bentonite layer in eastern Ontario, southern Quebec and New York called the Russell Bed, which apparently formed by volcanic activity about 451 million years ago. There are also several small diatremes in the Finger Lakes region according to this. I just wanted to inform you about these things because I remember you mentioning "too bad there arn't any volcanoes in New York" in 2010. Volcanoguy 21:19, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Canadian Cascade Arc (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Talus, Conglomerate, Bluff and Brandywine Falls

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Blake River Megacaldera Complex

Hello, Volcanoguy! When you posted your map request last year I was interested but didn’t have the time or energy to pursue it; now I’d like to help with the geological map, if I can. (Sorry, I don’t know how to make a map that’s compatible with the location templates, although that’s one of many things I want to look into some day …) Anyway, I’ve downloaded the article you linked to, but I’m not clear on exactly what you’d like done. Do you still want the satellite/air-photo background, or a plain outline/plan map? (I think the latter would be clearer WRT the geological info.) Do you want to show the principal surface-hydrographic features? (They, with the ON/PQ border, might help a reader establish the location.) Please let me know what you can recover of your thoughts from back then, either here or on my Talk page.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:28, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm not completely sure what I wanted done back then since I can't really remember. But if you look on the article's talk page I did mention this year that I am collecting information to remake and expand the article. Surely there will be graphics needed to help explain the content. For example, its structure and formation. A better map than the current one would be great and I agree a plain outline/plan map with the lakes and Ontario-Quebec border would be clearer.

If you can also make schematic diagrams there are 5 in figure 11 here that would be useful to explain the Blake River Megacaldera Complex's formation. Volcanoguy 07:19, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, I’ll start with the map; I’ll see what I can scrounge for a base. No promises re timelines. ;) As for the diagrams, I doubt I can match the standard of that figure, but I’ll see what I can do.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 06:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Lady Lou, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page German (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Beanland Mine, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sudbury (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 15:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Start of Mount Price review

Here's the start of my review. I'll try to finish sometime this week, but it's going to be crazy likely every day. I see you already made a few changes, so disregard my comments if they no longer apply.

In general:

• Diction could probably be raised a bit, but that's not a major concern at all.
• A little more active voice and a little less passive voice. You know, such and such are prepared, is associated... always more powerful and stronger as action verbs.
• In the lead image, there are three peaks. I'm assuming the huge one to the center-left is Price, then the one next to it is Clinker... what's the third one?

The image in volcanic history is hard to read. Perhaps a slightly larger file would be more useful.

Lead:

• which extends from the Ha-Iltzuk Icefield in the north to Watts Point in the south. - Any idea of how long this portion is? I know I for one just like using numbers as a reference - not a requirement whatsoever.
• Is there a specific reason proper and Mount price complex are italicized?
• If this were to happen, relief efforts would be quickly organized. - I think this is a little too much assumption. There must be a better way to suggest at it, without stating directly that relief would just occur instantly and without a doubt. It may, after all, not be a major eruption, even if there is one.

Geology

• In contrast to most stratovolcanoes in Canada, Mount Price proper has a nearly symmetrical structure. - Citation likely needed after this statement.
• The red colour of Mount Price proper is from oxidation of the volcanic rocks.[3] - A thoroughly dull sentence. Better as "Oxidation of the volcanic rock gave it a red color", or something similar.
• There is also very little seismic evidence that the Juan de Fuca Plate is actively subducting. - I'm not so sure that's true... 1700 isn't so long ago in terms of geology. The area still has decently powerful, if intermittent earthquakes. I think it's actively that's bugging me in particular. Obviously it's still subducting.

ceranthor 18:00, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

First of all, the highest peak in the lead image is Mount Price. Clinker Peak is the smaller glaciated double summit peak just on its flank. The rounded forested peak is unnamed and I'm not sure if it's related to Mount Price. But from looking at that picture it seems like it was taken from the north because Clinker Peak is on Price's western flank. With that said, the rounded forested peak might be the lava dome on Price's northern flank, which is mentioned the "Volcanic history" section. While I was doing some copyedits I did think about making the image in the "Volcanic history" section bigger so it would be easier to read. I deleted the proper and complex bit because it wasn't really necessary, but I'm a bit puzzeled with your citation suggestion. The sentence about Price being nearly symmetrical in contrast to most other Canadian stratovolcanoes is already backed up with the Volcanoes of North America: United States and Canada book.

As far as I am aware of, the 1700 Cascadia earthquake was the last big one related to subduction of the Juan de Fuca Plate. Subduction zones usually have big earthquakes like that one more commonly. For example, at least three major earthquakes have occured at the Peru-Chile Trench within the last 52 years: a magnitude 9.5 earthquake in 1960, a magnitube 7.7 earthquake in 2007 and another one in 2010 with a magnitude of 8.8. In contrast, the Cascadia subduction zone dosen't seem to have had a major one in 312 years. That's a big difference. Also, most of the latest eruptions in the Cascade Arc occurred a few hundred years ago. The book backing that sentence is a reliable source, so I don't think there is a need to remove it. Volcanoguy 23:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't see anything in the FA criteria that states it has to have a more active tone, just that it needs to be well-written. Volcanoguy 15:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I have revised the sentence about Price's oxidation. Volcanoguy 01:59, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay; my ancient computer is undergoing repairs. I'm editing on my tablet right now. I'll try to give you more feedback ASAP. ceranthor 16:11, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

No big hurry. By the way, I swapped File:Garibaldi Lake area map.jpg with File:The Barrier Cliff.jpg and added alt texts to the images. Volcanoguy 03:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Now that I'm back, I think it's shaping up nicely. Getting closer. ceranthor 22:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Shield volcanoes

Hi VolcanoGuy, I presume shield volcanoes are on your watchlist already, but in case they are not I thought I'd let you know I've made a talk page edit there suggesting a tweak to the definition on that page - I'm not keen on the the draft I suggested that much - especially given the comment further up the talk page about the rhyolite shield volcano, so I think that still needs some reworking. EdwardLane (talk) 10:32, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Meager

Hi VG, hope all's well. I am curious as to why Mount Meager hasn't been renominated at FAC; I certainly think it has the potential to pass and doubt that it won't get enough attention like the last run. Is there another reason you haven't renominated? ceranthor 22:05, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I have been busy working on other articles. Currently, I am collecting information to rewrite and expand the Itcha Range article. Volcanoguy 02:32, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

WP Earthquakes in the Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Earthquakes for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. –Mabeenot (talk) 08:19, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Volcanoguy. You have new messages at Talk:List of the 100 largest municipalities in Canada by area.
Message added 04:42, 8 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hwy43 (talk) 04:42, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Volcanoguy. You have new messages at Talk:List of the 100 largest municipalities in Canada by area.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hwy43 (talk) 04:24, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Moving categories out of process

Stop moving categories out of process. I've just found a ton of "volcanism" categories that you've moved without discussion, and in many categories despite "keep" results at CFDs. It's going to take me a ton of work to restore them, and people who persist in moving categories out of process (especially those who have been around for several years and thus know better) will be blocked. Nyttend (talk) 14:08, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Um, excuse me but this has been discussed at WP Volcanoes months ago. "Volcanism of XXXX" is misleading. Volcanoguy 14:30, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

And who gives a shit if it's out of process? Volcanoguy 14:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You're destroying tons of page histories and going against consensus at CFD, as well as disrupting our category layouts. Nyttend (talk) 14:37, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Well can you help then please? The reason I want to change them is because "Volcanism of XXXX" is actually misleading. Volcanism is a process. The articles that go into those categories are actually about volcanology per se, not volcanism. It is something that seriously needs to be delt with. Volcanoguy 14:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems like the users that wanted these cats kept misunderstood. Volcanoguy 14:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Deal with it by a new CFD. I couldn't care less about volcanoes and have no opinion about which of these titles is correct, but you may not break our category system without CFD consensus. Nyttend (talk) 14:44, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

What is the link to the old CFD so I can get all of the categories I organized? Perhaps I just need to explain more and make my points clearer. Volcanoguy 14:54, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You can see it by going to any of the categories that you emptied and clicking WhatLinksHere. Nyttend (talk) 15:00, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I will wait until you have changed them all to "Volcanism of XXXX". Let me know when done. Volcanoguy 15:05, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You know your contributions better than I. It would be appreciated if you would self-revert when possible. Nyttend (talk) 15:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Volcanoguy, I realize this is frustrating you, but slightly inaccurate categorization is by no means something to get yourself upset over! Relax a little bit, submit a CFD, and we will see what happens from there. No need to get yourself worked up over something so trivial, my friend. :) ceranthor 19:36, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Volcanoguy; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library!

World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you!

Hi Volcanoguy! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editors are welcome! (But being multilingual is not a requirement.) Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch (talk) 21:46, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Canadian Cascade Arc, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Brandywine Falls (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Re Meager

How comes the progress? ceranthor 15:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

I have left a few replies but you have not answered any..... Volcanoguy 22:04, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Pacific

Hi. I'm planning on articles on Geology of the Pacific Ocean and Topography of the Pacific Ocean. You probably have other things to do but can you recommend some active editors who might be interested. We need some real experts to assist with these as they're very important topics. After doing we'll write condensed summaries in the main article.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:38, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to say but I do not know much about the Pacific Ocean. So I am no expert on the subject. Volcanoguy 22:00, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Lava Lake

Good day,

I've spent this summer surveying Lava Lake B.C. with an imaging sidescan sonar. One of the interesting discoveries was that while the lava dam extended to a depth of 80 ft below the current surface, the depth of the lake exceed 186 ft. Conclusion is that this lake was there prior to the Tseax event of the 18th cent, though the lake was certainly deepened by this event. Given that I can see a river bed at 20 ft deep in the Southern part of the lake, it would seem that the increase in depth is between 20 and 80 ft.

I hope this will be sufficient to allow you to correct the Wiki article which states the lake was formed by the eruption, as it surely was not.

Best Regards, Bill

I didn't remove it because it wasn't incorrect it's because you didn't provide any reliable sources per WP:RS. Volcanoguy 00:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Meager

Hi!

I was away for a short break but I'm back and ready to get this baby to FAC! I posted my replies to your comments. ceranthor 22:06, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Silverthrone Caldera and Talk:Öræfajökull

I knew I shouldn't have trusted anything that IP is putting in. On a slightly related issue please see Talk:Öræfajökull. the same IP has got me scratching my head on several different pages. Thank you. --RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 10:53, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have been having a problem with the Silverthrone Caldera as well. The Global Volcanism Program and the book Volcanoes of North America: Canada and the United States seem to give the caldera's elevation as 3,160 m. But mountaineer websites give the elevation of Mount Silverthrone as 2,864. This is the confusing part because Mount Silverthrone might be the caldera's highest point but I have not seen any reliable sources that state it as such. In addition, bivouac.com and peakbagger.com (both of which give Mount Silverthrone's elevation as 2,864 m) appear to fail WP:RS so I don't really trust them. Volcanoguy 11:45, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Aerial Kostal Cone.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Aerial Kostal Cone.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:57, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Caribou Tuya.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Caribou Tuya.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:27, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Dragon Cone.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Dragon Cone.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 20:56, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

All of your permission problem notes are bullshit. Volcanoguy 01:05, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Move of Rabbit Lake (Ontario)

You may wish to comment about a move of Rabbit Lake (Ontario) to Rabbit Lake (Temagami), at the former's talk page. --papageno (talk) 21:55, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done OK, have completed the move to Rabbit Lake (Temagami), and changed pages that used to link to the former name to the new name. --papageno (talk) 17:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

There are probably other articles about lakes in the Temagami area that could be be moved to XXXX (Temagami) as well. Volcanoguy 22:56, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, this is likely. I will move them as I slowly but surely come across them! Will try and keep you abreast of any changes, since you know the area better than I and might suggest better alternatives as the case may be. --papageno (talk) 21:45, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Are you interested in starting an article about Rabbit Creek in the Temagami area? I have a picture of it taken from Rabbit Creek Road. Volcanoguy 01:20, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. I see there are just two in Ontario per Canada Geonames. Let me finish the Rabbit Lakes, and I will ping you when done. Thanks. --papageno (talk) 19:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Do you know what the source and mouth is for the Anima Nipissing River? Volcanoguy 02:27, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Here is the link for the Anima Nipissing River at the Geographical Names Board of Canada (GNBoC), which gives the mouth coordinates (it's always mouth coordinates for river entries). I find the source coordinates by looking at the Atlas of Canada topographic map manually; not always obvious! One can link to a topogrpahic map of the area of the geographic entity from that entry's GNBoC page. And this is the general link to look up something at the GNBoC. --papageno (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Alright. I made an article for that river a few nights ago just wasn't sure if the source/mouth information was correct. Volcanoguy 01:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

If it's always the mouth coordinates then the information about Johnny Creek in the Link Lake article is incorrect. According to the Johnny Creek coords here it's mouth is at the east end of Link Lake. But in the Link Lake article it states that Johnny Creek is the primary outflow. Volcanoguy 02:59, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, interesting re Link Lake / Johnny Creek. You're right about the coords, which are given correctly in the Johnny Creek article. However, there are no outlets from Link Lake except: to Turtle Lake (looking at the Atlas of Canada), and Turtle Lake exits no where: and Net Lake Confusingly, though, looking at elevations via Google Earth: Link Lake is higher than both Turtle Lake and Net Lake. Can you look that over and see if I have got that right? We might have to contact the Ontario Geonames people to ask if they've got the creek backwards. Or perhaps Link Lake drained both ways? --papageno (talk) 16:40, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Turtle Lake still exists it's just smaller in size than it used to be (the original size is seen on the Atlas of Canada) because it was drained during the Sherman Mine operations. After looking closely on Google Earth to see if there is a creek connecting Turtle Lake and Link Lake I certainly see one: south end at 47°03'35.90" N, 79°50'13.39" W and the north end at 47°04'00.57" N 79°50'12.57" W. I have been at the south end of that creek before but I can't remember what direction it was flowing. Volcanoguy 10:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

@Qui1che: I went past Johnny Creek yesterday and looked to see what direction the creek was flowing. Turns out it flows from Link Lake into Net Lake so I have corrected the Johnny Creek article accordingly. Volcanoguy 12:19, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Volcanoguy. You have new messages at Qui1che's talk page.
Message added 20:03, 4 February 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Canada volcano workgroup

Have you thought of turning your workgroup into a task force? It certainly is large enough to be a task force or small project, and having it as part of the Canada or volcanoes project might get some more coverage. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:29, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

No I haven't unfortunately. I'm not sure how to make it into a task force or as part of the volcano of Canada projects. Volcanoguy 13:31, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I have no problem doing it in the next day or so, as it can go under both the Canada and Volcano projects. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:34, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for changing the workgroup to a task force; I have not had the change to look at it until now. However, it looks like Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup articles by importance and Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup articles by quality were not deleted. Volcanoguy 10:40, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, let's try it now, as I didn't realize I forgot to tag them earlier. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 12:13, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

{{Volcanism of Canada Workgroup}} is not needed either since the task force shares {{WikiProject Volcanoes}}. Volcanoguy 12:30, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup

A tag has been placed on Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• The category has been empty for four days or more and it is not presently under discussion at Categories for discussion, or at disambiguation categories. (See section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 22:49, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jack Souther, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page North Vancouver (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:57, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Jack Souther

Hello! Your submission of Jack Souther at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! I am One of Many (talk) 22:57, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Shield volcano

Hey, you think you can take a look at Shield volcano and give me some to-do pointers in terms of what content is still needed (also, any good sources you know)? Much appreciated, ResMar 15:50, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

One thing I noticed is that it focuses too much on mafic shields. Doesn't even bother mentioning the less common felsic shields in detail. Volcanoguy 18:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Jack Souther

Gatoclass (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup articles by importance

A tag has been placed on Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup articles by importance, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This and the sub-categories have been usurped and are no longer needed.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 12:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup articles by quality

A tag has been placed on Category:Volcanism of Canada Workgroup articles by quality, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

This and the sub-categories have been usurped and are no longer needed.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 12:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Puy de Dôme

No. The source clearly gives the summit elevation of the Chaîne des Puys, i.e Puy de Dôme itself, as 1,464, not 840m. But the reliablity of 1,464 in the source is questionable seeing as every map of the area gives 1,465. (Try the Michelin map for size.) Given that, I would be suspect of any dates given by the site, but in any case, "Western Puy de Dôme" is not Puy de Dôme itself. Emeraude (talk) 09:23, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

I accept the date of the last eruption can be contentious, as it is for any volcano that erupted before recorded history. The latest research seems to suggest 10,700 years ago. (D. Miallier, Pierre Boivin, C. Deniel, A. Gourgaud, P. Lanos, M. Sforna, Thierry Pilleyre "The ultimate summit eruption of Puy de Dôme volcano (Chaine des Puys, French Massif Central) about 10,700 years ago", Comptes Rendus Géosciences 342 (2010) 847-854) I suggest that's a reliable and up-to-date source that ought to be used.

However, when I say that Puy de Dôme has an elevation of 1,465m asl I am right, the GVP source is wrong and so are you if you use it! Your figure of 484 is pure fantasy! Are you denying that Puy de Dôme is the highest point of the Chaîne des Puys? Have you taken the very simple step of looking at a map to check? You might also check the following:

• "Physical and optical properties of 2010 Eyjafjallajökull volcanic eruption aerosol: ground-based, Lidar and airborne measurements in France" in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 12, pp1721–1736, 2012 - "The Puy de Dôme (PdD) research station is located in the centre of France (45^o460 N, 2^o570 E) at 1465m a.s.l.."
• Clermont-Ferrand Tourism - "From its summit, towering at 1,465 metres,...."
• Larousse map
• Planète Puy de Dôme - "Avec ses 1 465 mètres d’altitude,...."
• Nicola Williams, France, p592 - "The ice-flecked summit of Puy de Dôme (1465m)...."
• Lonely Planet - "The shapely summit of Puy de Dôme (1465m)...."
  

Emeraude (talk) 09:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Meager FAC

Hi Volcanoguy. I still think Mount Meager is nearly ready for a second go at FAC, provided you're still willing and you don't mind fixing a few of my prose quibbles before nominating it. Hope all's well with you! ceranthor 23:32, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello Ceranthor. I will eventually get back to Meager at some point. However, right now I am trying to finish some research to remake the article for the Itcha Range shield volcano. Volcanoguy 04:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, keep in touch and let me know when you'd like to start working on Meager again. ceranthor 21:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I did some copyediting and replaced one of the photos with a better one earlier but there is probably more copyediting needed. Volcanoguy 21:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I agree. I started making a list of comments here, and I think that's a good place to start. I'll definitely run through and copyedit as I see fit as well. It's in great shape already, though! ceranthor 23:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I gave a source for your third comment. Your last comment was discussed during the FAC. As far as I know there are no more recent examinations for activity. Volcanoguy 02:17, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Stricken accordingly. More to come soon! ceranthor 03:29, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

As for your first comment, the source backing that statement does not say who the scientists are. It is agreed upon many of them. Volcanoguy 06:11, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

That's fine. I'll amend my comments. The Cascade Volcanic Arc section has one sentence that needs a copyedit, the one about the fault zone created by the Juan de Fuca plate subduction zone. ceranthor 04:50, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Changed that sentence to This is a 1,094 km (680 mi) long fault zone lying 80 km (50 mi) off the Pacific Northwest from Northern California to southwestern British Columbia. Volcanoguy 19:26, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Better. The article's shaping up rather nicely. I'll run through once or twice more and ce / leave suggestions for you. After that, if you want to go ahead and nominate it, I can't imagine it won't be ready. Hopefully you'll have better luck with getting commentary! ceranthor 20:06, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

FYI I just remade/expanded the Itcha Range article. Volcanoguy 21:01, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Stub to 18K? Fabulous! ceranthor 13:31, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Could bring it to FA after Meager if you want. Volcanoguy 17:13, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmm. I've got a few things on my plate at the moment, but I'd be glad to help you if you need sources / prose suggestions. ceranthor 03:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I nominated the Itcha Range for GA. Volcanoguy 17:29, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Privite

Volcanoguy, a portion of your edit, "young First Nations men who would privite themselves at the at the springs to acquire power and knowledge", has been questioned and removed.[4] I wonder if you could have a look, please? Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 15:15, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Itcha Range, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Creek. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Meager questions and comments

All in all, I'm very happy with Meager's present state. Here are some comments.

Garibaldi Volcanic Belt

• Technically the parenthetical for the Holocene is incorrect, since the Holocene actually began ~11,700 years ago. Maybe we should say this, or just leave out the parenthetical and keep the link. Your call, though we can't keep the inaccurate date span. Also changed period to epoch, since a period is a different unit of geologic time.

That is not what the given sources say. In those sources it gives the date span of the Holocene as 0-0.01 Ma (present to 10,000 years ago). As far as I am aware of the exact timing of the start of the Holocene is in dispute. Volcanoguy 21:10, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• The latest explosive eruption in the Garibaldi Volcanic Belt occurred at a crater on the northeastern flank of Mount Meager, which forms a clearly defined depression.[10][11] - Think we should mention how long ago here, since this is the first mention in the body of the text.

Done. Volcanoguy 21:17, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Cascade Volcanic Arc

• This is a 1,094 km (680 mi) long fault zone lying 80 km (50 mi) off the Pacific Northwest from Northern California to southwestern British Columbia. - Still not happy with this sentence. What is the fault zone? Was it created by this subduction? I'm a little confused what this "zone" is.

I don't understand what your problem is with this sentence. A subduction zone is a fault zone. Volcanoguy 22:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• However earthquakes along the Cascadia subduction zone are less common than expected - I changed this to uncommon because "expected" seems vague and forces you to cite a point of reference and perspective. Correct me if that is incorrect, and we'll figure out another alternative.

Local geography

• I can't help but think the first paragraph of this section would be better as one (or two) list-like sentences. Ie. "Six main summits constitute the Mount Meager massif: Plinth Peak with an elevation of 2,680 m (8,790 ft), the highest and northernmost summit; Mount Meager proper with an elevation of 2,650 m (8,690 ft); ...". Let me know what you think.

Bridge River Vent

• The Bridge River Vent is a relatively young volcanic crater that formed during an eruption - eruption... at Meager. Need to say this.

Ain't it obvious the eruption occurred at Meager since the Bridge River Vent is part of the volcano? Volcanoguy 06:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Eh I added it anyway. Volcanoguy 06:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

• although it is breached on the northern side.[31] - Breached should be briefly explained for the lay reader.

Eh? Volcanoguy 06:21, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Human history

• In the mid 1970s the second hirer W.H. Willes - Second hirer?

I have changed hirer to owner. Volcanoguy 03:19, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Volcanic history

• or at least create zones of crustal weakness that are exploited by rising magma batches.[10] - Exploited? I think there's a better word choice for this.

Don't know what a better word would be. Volcanoguy 21:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Intruded? Volcanoguy 22:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• Basal breccia, which may be an exhumed vent, underlies andesite and tuffs, flows, lava domes and breccia of Devastator Peak.[15 - I think this would be better as "Basal brecchia, perhaps from an exhumed vent...".

Done. Volcanoguy 22:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• You should clarify that the "Pylon assemblage eruptive period" is the third period.

Revised. Volcanoguy 09:51, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

• Prevailing westerly winds carried volcanic ash from this explosion eastwards to as far as Alberta. - How far is this distance?
• shows strong genetic relationships - Not sure what this means.
• indicating magmatic heat is still present.[11] - I think it would be best to just say magma is still present. Magmatic heat sounds jargon-y. Unless of course, that's misleading?

That statement goes by what the given source states. Can you explain how "magmatic heat" is jargony? I'm sure most people know magma releases heat. Volcanoguy 05:35, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

It makes magma heat sound more complicated than it is. If you like it, keep it. It's hardly a major concern! :) ceranthor 05:39, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Eruptions

• the Geological Survey of Canada plans to create hazard maps and emergency plans for Mount Meager as well as Mount Cayley to the south. - Any word on this yet?

Not that I know of. Volcanoguy 20:58, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

General

• WP:NBSPs need a bit of work throughout. It got a bit tedious for me to cleanup. Haha. :)

I thought NBSP was only for numbers but after looking at the WP page just now it looks like I was wrong. Volcanoguy 21:38, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

• Keep an eye out that you're consistent in omitting the serial comma - my search of the article didn't turn up any more, but I could've missed some instances.

I was not the one who added the serial commas. It might have been User:Ling.Nut3 when Meager was listed at FAC. Volcanoguy 21:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Once these are resolved, I think it's ready for FAC! Stupendous work on your half. ceranthor 03:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

After thinking about it I'm not sure if I'm going to bring articles to Featured status anymore. I just no longer see the point in FA articles. Everybody has their own views/understanding of things and the next thing you know another user changes your text then another user questions the rewritten text then you have to rewrite again because they aren't comfortable with it. It's all a cycle and a waste of time. Volcanoguy 04:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely fine by me, and I understand your stance well. As long as you're comfortable with what you're doing, no need to think about FAs. Your articles are stellar anyway. ceranthor 04:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what I was thinking when I wrote that but I am still up for a FA. Volcanoguy 20:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, it's fine. I'm glad to help improve this article, regardless of whether you decide to nominate it for FA or not. Here are some responses to your comments:

• Since Holocene is in dispute, I think it would be best to just link the Holocene epoch and leave out a timespan.

I removed the Holocene epoch and just stated the volcanoes have been active in the last 10,000 years. Volcanoguy 20:03, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

• You're right about the fault zone. It was late at night and I missed the end of the previous sentence where you mention the subduction zone, so I was confused. My bad.
• Should be okay on the serial commas anyway.
• Exploited gives them human characteristics to me. Can you clarify what your intention is with "or at least create zones of crustal weakness that are exploited by rising magma batches"? Do you mean that eruptions can occur there? - If so I'd use penetrated. If you mean that the magma pushes up the crust, I'd probably reword this part of the sentence to explain that more clearly. ceranthor 23:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Done. Volcanoguy 19:47, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

More replies

• So I'm not sure why I made that breached comment, but it's fine as is.
• Happy with everything else you've responded to, except for the exploited sentence still. ceranthor 19:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

I replaced exploited with penetrated. Volcanoguy 02:22, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Cool. Only a few comments left: the hirer one, the nbsps, and the local geography suggestion. ceranthor 03:05, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

I added {{nowrap}} throughout the text. Anything else that still needs clean up? Volcanoguy 04:14, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

@Ceranthor: I do not see the point in adding nbsps to the article text. From what I see it does nothing. And if it's really an issue then why is it not used in other FA articles? Volcanoguy 01:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

It's really just a matter of readability. It's very inconvenient for the reader to change lines when reading proper names, conversions, and similar words that are grouped together. It's certainly not necessary for FAs, but I find that in geography and volcano articles it proves helpful. ceranthor 01:24, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

If you'd rather not use them, feel free to revert my edits. ceranthor 01:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for the explanation. I'm not going to revert your edits I was just not sure what they were for. Volcanoguy 06:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Mount Meager may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• flows, lava domes and breccia of Devastator Peak.<ref name="DFI"/> It has a maximum thickness of {{nowrap|{{nowrap|{{Convert|300|m|ft|abbr=on}}}}} and overlies a {{nowrap|{{Convert|400|m|ft|abbr=on}

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:09, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Itcha Range

Hello! Your submission of Itcha Range at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Iry-Hor (talk) 20:09, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Nomination of T.T. Quick for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article T.T. Quick is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T.T. Quick until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Mz7 (talk) 20:45, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Itcha Range

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:04, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Yo

Hi Volcanoguy. I think Meager's ready for a go at FAC! ceranthor 17:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Probably not just yet. The article has no history about hydrothermal energy. Volcanoguy 22:05, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Had no idea there was much of a history! Sorry about that.

Okay, let me know if you need any help, and I'll keep an eye on the article for now. ceranthor 04:36, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

And the intro probably needs to be rewritten to include all major topics in the article. Volcanoguy 04:52, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Request source

Hi Volcanoguy!

I noticed your edit to Animal House (U.D.O. album). The credited personnel except Dirkschneider didn't actually perform on the album? I've always suspected that about the track "Lay down the law", but never about the rest of the album. Could I ask what is your source for this, please?

Yours, --Odd M. Nilsen (talk) 07:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@OddMNilsen: It clearly says that on the album's booklet: "Music and words by Accept and Deaffy". And if you look through the booklet it gives "(Dirkschneider, Hoffmann, Baltes, Kaufmann, Fischer, Deaffy)" for every song. Volcanoguy 07:29, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

But that's the songwriting, not the performance. I'll revert. Thank you.--Odd M. Nilsen (talk) 08:17, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@OddMNilsen: I would have to disagree with you. The "Music" part refers to the music that is on the album. Volcanoguy 08:44, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Nevermind you are right sorry about that. Volcanoguy 08:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Could you please take a look at the back cover of U.D.O.'s next album "Mean Machine"? It's online here: http://www.vinyl-blog.com/2012/02/28/u-d-o-mean-machine/img_2259/. There's the same statement "music and words by", and just 3 of the band members are listed for 10 of 11 songs. Does that mean that the other 2 band members, the bass player and the drummer, do not perform on 10 of the songs? Consider again if you don't agree that the "music" part refers to the composition and not the performance of the music. All the best, --Odd M. Nilsen (talk) 09:02, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Oops, sorry - didn't see your last comment first. Have a great day! --Odd M. Nilsen (talk) 09:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@OddMNilsen: To tell you the truth I am not really sure. I thought the Animal House album was all Accept songs under the name U.D.O. because that is how I understood it but after doing some research I found this interview with Wolf Hoffmann saying "To the best of my knowledge neither I nor anyone from Accept was ever featured on the Animal House record". Volcanoguy 09:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I guess we'll have to trust Hoffmann on this, then. The reason I speculated whether "Lay down the law" could really be Accept, is that the vinyl I bought in 1987 had a sticker about the "super-track by Accept and U.D.O." - plus it seemed to have different production qualities from the rest of the album, reminding me of Russian Roulette (1986) - so I suspected it was a leftover from that album. But this is still mere speculation on my part.--Odd M. Nilsen (talk) 10:09, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@OddMNilsen: Right. I have the Animal House album and it also says the same thing about Lay Down the Law. Actually you can see that statement on the album cover image in the Animal House (U.D.O. album) article. A reason why I thought all the Animal House songs were Accept is because I found all of them sounded like Accept but I guess that can be explained from the song writing since they were all written by Accept. Volcanoguy 11:11, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Dragon Cliffs, Nunavut.jpg Incorrect attribution

I've submitted a request on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files to fix the attribution on this picture of Dragon Cliffs that you uploaded. I'm the photographer of the image, and the Flickr source from which you got it isn't the original source. Someone else put it on Flickr, not me. If the attribution can be fixed, it can stay with a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-commercial license (i.e. the Non-Commercial part needs to be added). Only archives of my original page exist, such as [5], but you can read the original, pre-Creative-Commons terms at the bottom, dating from way back in 1996. If you could help fix this, it would be appreciated.140.184.130.215 (talk) 21:59, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

That didn't take long. The request got rejected because apparently that's the wrong place to do it. I was trying to find a place where I could report the attribution error and get it fixed without necessarily having the file deleted. As the person who uploaded it, do you have any suggestions?140.184.130.215 (talk) 22:47, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

@140.184.130.215: hello, I'm not sure what you (or I) can do. Perhaps you could get a hold of a Wikipedia administrator and tell them about the issue. Be aware that articles for volcanic formations in Northern Canada lack images so it would be great if you could help with that issue. Volcanoguy 09:01, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Johnny Creek, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rabbit Lake (Ontario). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 28 September 2014 (UTC)