User talk:MONGO: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 05:04, 5 December 2010

It's raining thanks spam!

Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks • Ling.Nut (talk) 02:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Glacier images

I'm uploading some peaks in Glacier. It's very slow, as my upload speed is dismal at the office and worse at home (although there's a fiber salesman who's stopping by the office tomorrow promising big bandwidth for cheap, finger crossed). I'll get better coords and descriptions, and will try to upload the context images as well. So far they're all on the east side from the Sun Road, taken in a three-hour window of nice sky. I can move them to more descriptive titles once we've hung names on them. It'll probably take a couple of days to get all up. Acroterion _(talk) 04:28, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good..I'll check commons and see what you have so far and recheck as time goes on...I'm usually able to ID mountain pics, especially ones off Sun Road.--MONGO 01:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a few more shortly - uploading hasn't gone smoothly today. Acroterion _(talk) 01:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one is definitely Little Chief Mountain...Nice Shot...!--MONGO 01:51, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And already moved to the article....--MONGO 01:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This one is Dusty Star Mountain...I need to stub that one.
This one is Singleshot Mountain..and I think if you took that from Sun Road you where looking north....[1]...looks like another stub I missed.

Yes, north, it's in full sun. Acroterion _(talk) 02:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Positive this is Mount Jackson (Montana)...really good shot there!
Mount Jackson in background, Citadel Mountain north flank at left.--MONGO 02:08, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More on the way from Logan Pass along the Garden Wall. Acroterion _(talk) 02:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those are fantastic. Keep up the good work both of you guys ... Antandrus (talk) 02:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But, but but...Acroterion had all the fun...I haven't been to Glacier NP in 10 years...oh well. Someday I'll go home again.--MONGO 02:46, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Goose Island in St. Mary Lake with Dusty Star Mountain, Little Chief and Mahtotopa Mountain center to far left
Great shot along Continental divide...right to left, Pollock Mountain, Bishops Cap, Mount Gould
View from Logan Pass looking north
Definitely Pollock Mountain...super

You'll see that the weather was closing in as time went on. Acroterion _(talk) 03:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added this one to Clements Mountain...all your shots are better than existing ones...the pic still in the Clements Mountain infobox was one I found on Flickr.--MONGO 03:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note...I'm stopped at NP image 7...will resume with number 8 at your uploads tomorrow or by the weekend...these are all super.--MONGO 03:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is Bishops Cap...nice.
This is Haystack Butte...and unnamed peak in back

I think 13 is Boulder Ridge. If you look at 15 it has Wynn Mountain on the right and Boulder Ridge on the left, as I read the topo. Acroterion _(talk) 04:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images 13 and 15 are both Wynn Mountain from different vantage points, or distances...Boulder Ridge is entirely tree covered according to Google Earth...if you have Google earth installed, I can email you a 3D shot of Wynn Mountain tomorrow...you took some great shots...the project benefits greatly from your trip.--MONGO 04:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I benefited greatly from the trip too, and was wishing I was back there, although it's a nice time of the year here and I'll be spending the day by the Chesapeake Bay tomorrow. Can't complain. The topo map shows Boulder Ridge as tree-covered too, so I think my perspective is askew. Wynn Mountain is a bit contorted on Google Earth. Acroterion _(talk) 04:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have some other peaks I haven't uploaded yet, as the images either suffer from severe backlighting or the general murkiness that you can see in some of the later shots from Logan Pass - the weather got worse quickly, and the images need work or are just poor, though they might look OK if downsampled. I also have more Teton images that I need to go through. Acroterion _(talk) 04:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All so far are excellent..some may qualify for featured level...that is the opinion of one other person as well. I even very much liked the surreal image taken at Swiftcurrent Lake of Grinnell and Mount Wilbur lurking in the background at right....I'll look forward to any Teton or other peaks you may have and other images you did.--MONGO 12:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<undent> The storm at Many Glacier was entertaining, with an overall coppery tint to the sky that is reflected in the sepia-like image (which is in full color). Check my contributions of 30 September - there are a bunch of Teton peaks there, and I'll have a few more. The folks at Commons FPC are very sensitive to image noise, and I think my camera does have a noisy sensor, so there might be criticism there - not much I can do but buy a new camera - I've been pricing them for a while now but have been waiting for business to pick up first. Acroterion _(talk) 23:55, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will check there...FPC at Commons or here is a bloodbath at times...I had but one image I have taken nominated for FP and it was unpleasant...I didn't nominate it and though I appreciate someone else thinking it was good enough, it wasn't a lot of fun having the work torn down....something about "artwork" with a camera seems more personal to have others critique it than my editing here...so, though I think you've produced some great work, I won't put you through that FPC gauntlet!--MONGO 01:33, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with images is that you can't fix them beyond a certain point, while you can always improve text. Having been through six years of design school and twenty-five years of architecture practice, I have a thick skin for that sort of criticism - you don't survive design juries without learning how to take far worse than FPC can dish out. Acroterion _(talk) 02:07, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wow, what great images. [/me steals the Swiftcurrent Lake Storm and runs off with it to own talkpage. ] Bishonen | talk 04:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

They are nice ones...they exceed in quality the existing images we had available to us and he has produced others we needed as we had none.--MONGO 05:01, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other images.....

Mount Cannon...added
Open Canyon and Mount Hunt at left...a great image for two articles that need at least a stub Open Canyon and Mount Hunt (Wyoming)
Mount Moran...nice image now added to Mount Moran...Falling Ice Glacier (no image before) and Skillet Glacier (previous image lousy)
Granite Canyon no previous image of it
Death Canyon...Compliments existing image of Death Canyon but taken from Jackson Hole
Mount Grinnell..in Glacier NP...no previous image
Static Peak...no previous image
South Teton‎...no previous image
Middle Teton...much better pic
Buck Mountain...no previous image
Mount Wister...no previous image

Teton peaks

Some new Teton images for you, noted here to spare you having to cull through my category refinements - I'm reorganizing the Commons categories so that "Grand Teton" refers only to the peak and nothing else.

Yes, Disappointment Peak is the rocky prominance below Grand, partially obscuring Garnet Canyon with Middle Teton at left...--MONGO 01:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I adjusted this one...you're looking at the south fork of Avalanche Canyon...the big peak at left is Buck Mountain and Mount Wister is at right...a fine image!--MONGO 02:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added all the above images to the articles...very nice...the Teewinot Mountain article should possibly do well with a Commons page just for it like the one for Grand Teton...and then all linked together under a super category of Teton Range Peaks/Mountains.--MONGO 02:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also:

Looks great...you've been busy at Commons...I'll probably look things over in greater detail this Friday...--MONGO 03:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More Teton peaks

I believe that is Haystack Peak...or some high slopes of it as it may be slightly east of these and just out of view.--MONGO 23:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All above images used in appropriate articles...many had no images...thank you!--MONGO 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've found that Google Earth's synthesized terrain view is extremely helpful in matching a given image to a viewpoint and identifying the subject, provided I'm not running Photoshop at the same time. Both are real resource hogs. Acroterion _(talk) 21:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh wowwie...good. I use Google earth all the time to ID spots...but the Teton Range is easy for me...I worked there for a number of years in the 90's. Heading to Commons to check these out....--MONGO 00:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added image to article Galena Summit--MONGO 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Used this image to build a new stub...nice--MONGO 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rendezvous Mountain

I'm at a halt until I get Photoshop set up again on another computer - my old computer bluescreened last night and isn't worth the trouble to fix, but I have to wrangle a Photoshop license onto another machine. Acroterion _(talk) 04:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for working those images into articles. I don't expect to upload much more for a few days until I can do a clean OS install on my new-old computer - Adobe won't install because of conflicts with older Adobe products - go figure. The images are safe on an external drive. Acroterion _(talk) 03:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After four days of fighting with Adobe's persnickety installation interface (it's incompatible with other Adobe software!), I've gotten it working again and will have some more images. National Park Mountain's on the list, for instance. Acroterion _(talk) 02:55, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will check those out this weekend...--MONGO 11:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, National Park Mountain's already uploaded [2]. I'm starting to forget what I've done. Acroterion _(talk) 13:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Podstar
		For your great and indefatigable image work, MONGO, and as a consolation prize for my theft of two of them, I award you the tasteful Podstar, or Little Stupid Star, created by User:RexxS.

I'll try to think of something equally subtle and elegant for Acroterion... Bishonen | talk 05:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC).[reply]

That pic in the Beartooth Mountains is now 17 years old...I took it in 1993 (and it looks it, but glad you like it!)...wow...much appreciated...but you should continue to look at thread above to see all the great images Acroterion has provided us (I am about to notate others)...many of mountain peaks (plus historical buildings and even flora) that we had either lousy pics of or none at all...thanks again...I owe YOU big time!--MONGO 05:48, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar II

Thanks for the barnstar and for putting all those images to work - there are more of the northern and southern ends of the Tetons coming, and I still have parts of Glacier that I haven't looked at thoroughly. I figure I'll have it all accounted for by the end of the year. I may revisit those Teton peaks and adjust the color balance. While the Tetons tend to photograph rather bluer from five miles away on the valley floor (which is the way we're used to seeing them) than they really are close up, some of those go a little too far into red compensation. I think I'll have to accept a little more blue than I initially wanted. Acroterion _(talk) 15:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading them. The Mount Moran image has the best view of the Black Dike (left side of peak) I have seen...a similar igneous intrusion can be seen on the northwest side of Middle teton, but it can't be seen from the valley.--MONGO 19:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you can see the Middle Teton intrusion on my image - it's just narrower than the one on Moran. Acroterion _(talk) 19:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure enough..tis true...there is a bigger one that is best seen from the Lower Saddle, the high windswept pass between Middle and the Grand...that was the one I was thinking of...I have only seen it twice..once when I ascended Middle and another time during a loop hike along the backside of the range....--MONGO 19:37, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you climbed Grand or Moran? Acroterion _(talk) 19:42, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, neither...Middle was my highest in the range...Grand is not actually easy...least not for me. My most difficult climb was actually Going-to-the-Sun Mountain in Glacier though...but I was always a hiker, not a climber, so getting to the top of summits had less of a draw for me than just getting back into the wilderness.--MONGO 19:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the barnstar! I'm not sure that I've done much "defending" of the Wiki I've done lately, but it's nice to be appreciated. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your question at RfA

Thanks for noting your concerns regarding the Phil Jones article. Unfortunately , to put the discussion in context requires a back story—a long simmering debate about the propriety of types of sources (blogs, opinion columns, news reports, science articles, and peer-reviewed science articles). I considered summarizing the positions of those with whom I am debating, but I think that's unfair, as I may get some details wrong, so, if I may, I'll briefly summarize my position on some of the issues:

In science articles, peer-reviewed science articles are the gold standard.
In science articles, other sources are acceptable although almost never blogs, as the usage of blogs is quite restricted, and it is not easy to image how they could be used in a pure science article).
One reason for using a source other than a peer-reviewed science article is that peer-reviewed science article sometimes lapse into jargon, and other sources, such as science articles or new reports may be written in a way that is better for our audience, with the critical caveat that if a new report or science article is in dispute with a peer-reviewed science article, the peer-reviewed science article almost always wins. (Rare exceptions, such as when a non-peer-reviewed article notes an error in a peer-reviewed source, and virtually all agree that the peer-reviewed source is mistaken.)
The strong preference for peer-reviewed science articles is less compelling for articles which are not squarely science articles, such as bios of scientists, and articles about the political, commercial, and other aspects related to science questions. (If such an article makes a scientific statement, then the preference for peer-reviewed science articles remains, but in other areas, we apply the ordinary rules.)

Sorry for that long background.

The Phil Jones (climatologist) article is about a scientist, not a science article. Many aspects of the dispute relate to some editors acting as if it were a science article, insisting that statements in news stories ought to be dismissed.

The quote in question comes from the BBC. Not all Reliable Sources are equal, but I trust that the BBC is considered one of the highest quality sources. It is my opinion that in a science article, if we had a statement from the BBC and a statement form a peer-reviewed science article, we would generally default to the peer-reviewed science article (although we might decide to include both and note the discrepancy.) However, the article in question is not a science article. I was quite unhappy that some were attempting to dismiss a quote from the BBC. In addition, part of the "argument" for dismissing the quote is that some editors have personal expertise in the field, and didn't agree with the substance of the statement. Sorry, that isn't how WP works. We don't permit expert to use their personal judgment to override a quote from a scientist. We do welcome expertise - but that expertise could be used to point to relevant documents on the subject, to clarify what a scientist means when they use technical terms so that editors weighing in can make a good judgment about how to use a quote, but we don't permit experts to tell us that the scientist didn't really mean what he plainly stated. If the scientist made a mistake (and that can happen), the BBC is perfectly able to follow up with a correction, or the scientist can follow up with a correction (here is a case where a blog statement might be acceptable).

In short, it was my view that certain editors were attempting to suppress a quote in the BBC, simply because that quote didn't fit with their narrative.

Could I have done a better job making my case? Almost certainly so. I've reread much of the exchange, and I confess, a couple times, I had to pause and think about what point I was trying to make. I can only assume those I was debating may well have not fully understood my point, so that may have lead to a higher ratio of heat to light that is desirable.

Sorry for the length of this comment. I do not like when articles include bad sources to accomplish a POV, nor do I like when good sources are removed to meet a particular POV. This is a perfect example where WP fails our audience. A reader seeing a discussion about the issue may well come to this article, and will be puzzled to see no discussion of it. I think we can do better.--SPhilbrick T 01:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SophiaBLiu's Research Request

My name is Sophia and I am a PhD student at University of Colorado in Boulder researching the use of social media for historically significant crises like the 9/11 attacks. I am interested in what kind of values and practices are emerging from these disasters especially with the use of ubiquitous technologies like blogs and social media sites like Wikipedia. I am contacting you because I noticed you are one of the top contributors of the September 11 attacks Wikipedia article. I was wondering if you would be open to answering some questions for my dissertation research on this topic. One example of a question I have is: You provided a considerable amount of edits to the September 11 attacks Wikipedia article. What kind of edits did you make? What story was being told before you edited the article and how does that differ from what is in Wikipedia now? Feel free to email me at Sophia.Liu@colorado.edu if you have any questions. Thanks for your time, Sophia --Sophiabliu (talk) 05:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can answer your questions here...but mostly all I have been doing is trying to keep the conspiracy theories out of the articles related to the 9/11 terrorist attacks....most of my edits have been to do that or revert vandalism to the articles. The articles related to 9/11 have less conspiracy theory misinformation than they used to have...but there are articles that discuss these notions elsewhere.--MONGO 23:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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 December 5, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 5, 2010. If you think that it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). 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! Tbh®tch^Talk ^© Happy Holidays 03:47, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

120px|An Elk at Gibbon Meadow, Yellowstone National Park

The elk is one of the largest species of deer in the world and one of the largest mammals in North America and eastern Asia. Elk are almost identical to Red Deer found in Europe, of which they were long believed to be a subspecies; however, mitochondrial DNA evidence strongly suggests they are a distinct species. Elk range in forest and forest-edge habitat, feeding on grasses, plants, leaves, and bark. Although native to North America and eastern Asia, they have adapted well to countries where they have been introduced. Their great adaptability may threaten endemic species and ecosystems into which they have been introduced. Male elk have large antlers which are shed each year. Males engage in ritualized mating behaviors during the rut, including posturing, antler wrestling (sparring), and bugling, a loud series of vocalizations which establishes dominance over other males and attracts females. Elk are susceptible to a number of infectious diseases, some of which can be transmitted to livestock. Efforts to eliminate infectious diseases from elk populations, largely through vaccination, have had mixed success. Some cultures revere the elk as a spiritual force. In parts of Asia, antlers and their velvet are used in traditional medicines. Elk are hunted as a game species; the meat is leaner and higher in protein than beef or chicken. (more...)

That will be great..but I will have to do a ref check and update in force on 12/4...and will complete it before it gets on the mainpage.--MONGO 06:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm so, so sorry for telling you this, but Elk was replaced with Rock Steady (album) for appear as the TFA tomorrow :(. If Elk is again re-added, I'll notify you, or maybe you can put the article at WP:TFAR Tbh®tch^Talk ^© Happy Holidays 05:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem...I requested it to be delayed...after reviewing the references and how dated and or dead they were, I asked Raul here for a delay in it being mainpaged...but thanks for the notices...I'm not online as much as I used to be and I would have missed it had you not informed me.--MONGO 05:40, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, thanks for let me know, I'll return when it is re-scheduled. Regards Tbh®tch^Talk ^© Happy Holidays 05:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That will be much better...gives me time to do some updates and get a few FA reviewers to do some copyediting...thanks again.--MONGO 06:43, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

North Algodones Dunes Wilderness

Hi, you can find both images at Commons:Category:Algodones Dunes (the two file names starting with cb...) and I put one of them in the article Algodones Dunes (as well as de:Algodones-Dünen). Unfortunately my French is not good enough to add a sentence on the Wilderness area and the picture to their article as well. Thanks again for your help. --h-stt !? 23:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work...I am always glad to help.--MONGO 01:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 200: / Line 200: @@
  <div class="plainlinks" style="background-color: #FFFFFF; border-width: 1px; border-style: solid; border-color: #88a; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -moz-box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); -webkit-box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75); border-radius: 1em; -moz-border-radius: 1em; -webkit-border-radius: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; padding: 1em 1em .5em 1em;">
-<div style="float:left;margin:0.5em 0.9em 0.4em 0">[[File:Elk.jpg|120px|An Elk at Gibbon Meadow, Yellowstone National Park]]</div>
+<div style="float:left;margin:0.5em 0.9em 0.4em 0">[[:File:Elk.jpg|120px|An Elk at Gibbon Meadow, Yellowstone National Park]]<!--Non free file removed by DASHBot--></div>
 The '''[[elk]]''' is one of the largest [[species]] of [[deer]] in the world and one of the largest [[mammal]]s in [[North America]] and eastern [[Asia]]. Elk are almost identical to [[Red Deer]] found in Europe, of which they were long believed to be a subspecies; however, [[mitochondrial DNA]] evidence strongly suggests they are a distinct species. Elk range in forest and forest-edge habitat, feeding on grasses, plants, leaves, and bark. Although native to North America and eastern Asia, they have adapted well to countries where they have been introduced. Their great adaptability may threaten [[endemism|endemic]] species and ecosystems into which they have been introduced. Male elk have large [[antler]]s which are shed each year. Males engage in ritualized mating behaviors during the [[rut (mammalian reproduction)|rut]], including posturing, antler wrestling (sparring), and ''bugling'', a loud series of vocalizations which establishes dominance over other males and attracts females. Elk are susceptible to a number of [[infectious disease]]s, some of which can be transmitted to livestock. Efforts to eliminate infectious diseases from elk populations, largely through vaccination, have had mixed success. Some cultures revere the elk as a spiritual force. In parts of Asia, antlers and their [[velvet (antler covering)|velvet]] are used in [[traditional medicine]]s. Elk are hunted as a game species; the meat is leaner and higher in [[protein]] than [[beef]] or [[chicken]]. ('''[[Elk|more...]]''')