User talk:Mikenorton: Difference between revisions
DerekSmith (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
DerekSmith (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 181: | Line 181: | ||
}} [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 08:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC) |
}} [[User:Graeme Bartlett|Graeme Bartlett]] ([[User talk:Graeme Bartlett|talk]]) 08:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Darwin was Nearly Right == |
|||
Hi Mike, I appreciate that evolution is not your thing, but I noticed you made a contribution to the Darwin page so I thought you might be interested in the latest development in evolutionary thought from Eugene McCarthy http://www.macroevolution.net/support-files/forms_of_life.pdf -- Darwin was so close, yet so far from the real source of genetic variation. |
Hi Mike, I appreciate that evolution is not your thing, but I noticed you made a contribution to the Darwin page so I thought you might be interested in the latest development in evolutionary thought from Eugene McCarthy http://www.macroevolution.net/support-files/forms_of_life.pdf -- Darwin was so close, yet so far from the real source of genetic variation. |
Revision as of 12:12, 15 June 2012
|
||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
I generally prefer unbroken discussions. If you leave a comment for me here, I will most likely respond to it here — my talk page — as an effort to keep the entire conversation in one place. Similarly, if I leave a comment on your talk page, please respond to it there.
At the same time, feel free to send an alert to me on this page about a comment you have left elsewhere.
Thank you!
Welcome!
Hello, Mikenorton, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}}
on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
Wow youve been doing all that editing in an important area and no one has said g'day (saw your work on Perth basin) anyway looks like youre doing well! SatuSuro 10:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
New Page Patrol survey
New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Mikenorton! 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.
Please click HERE to take part. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey |
Grand Parade
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Much thanks
Thank you so much for your help at Mary Kessell. I left last night with the intention of making additional corrections today and was pleasantly surprised to see it in the queue (thanks to your work). Much appreciated. All the best, France3470 (talk)
Hi Mike,
I've expanded the article with a DYK in mind. It's at 5.7X right now and I have a proposed hook though I haven't posted the DYK nomination yet. Are you busy these days? The article is missing the technical aspect and a tectonic setting section could round it out nicely. This one's been in my sandbox for a good month or so. The hook might be something like:
... that four of the twentieth century Parkfield earthquakes had similar intensities and showed a solid resemblance to the dawn foreshock of the great 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake?
Work's slowing down but taking a class to fill my time. Hope all is good with you, Dawnseeker2000 03:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Just finished a licensing round (UK offshore), so things easing off a bit right now. I'll take a look at the article tomorrow as it's late here and I've just returned from taking my daughter back up to Uni after the Easter break. Cheers, Mikenorton (talk) 22:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Lunchtime here & just checking in. Will probably do the DYK tomorrow after work. Haven't touched the article since last weekend, and not finished with the sources that I have. Any you know, that's true for the 1979 Imperial Valley article too. I've really liked working on that one, and there's more detail that can be added; I keep finding new sources. I did think that maybe the content is getting too detailed, but the really detailed stuff only amounts to a few paragraphs. Dawnseeker2000 18:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm working on the tectonic setting section 'as we speak (?type)' (did that sound a little guilty?). I also found (that should be rediscovered) a reference on supershear rupture propagation relating to the 1979 Imperial Valley earthquake. For nearly 20 years it was the only example of propagation at such high speeds and most seismologists didn't take it too seriously, but then from 1999 to 2002 there were three big strike-slip earthquakes with good instrumental records that confirmed that such ruptures could occur and might be particularly damaging. Part of my procrastination over the Fort Tejon article was me digging into the references on supershear. There's more sources out there now and I aim to expand it, and DYK it if there turns out to be sufficient material for a 5x expansion. Mikenorton (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you :) I posted a nomination with a simplified version of the proposed hook last night. Dawnseeker2000 14:27, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- Looks good, and there are many alternative hooks if that one doesn't get approval. I'll aim to take a thorough look at the article and see what I can add, in an attempt to justify your inclusion of my name in the nomination. Mikenorton (talk) 14:32, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Re-removal frackign stuff
I've not c ehcked talk, but I can guess what the complaint will be. As a compromise, want to put the stuff onto the Texas article instead of the frackin one?? ~ Iloveandrea (talk) 20:03, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Probably the Jackson School of Geosciences, if it goes anywhere. Mikenorton (talk) 20:07, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for April 27
Hi. When you recently edited 2012 Indian Ocean earthquake, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Deformation (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) 10:46, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 23:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
DYK nomination of 1966 Toro earthquake
Hello! Your submission of 1966 Toro earthquake at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that 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! Empathictrust (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Fault table (in sandbox)
Hi, Mike. I don't know if you saw my comments at User talk:Mikenorton/sandbox about the prototype fault table. I would like to try some variations, preferably there to better compare the results. Would you be agreeable to that? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:48, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the alert JJ, I thought that I had it watched, but apparently not. I'll reply there. Mikenorton (talk) 09:06, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
More comment requested. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 18:22, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
About ready. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
DYK for 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake
On 10 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that four of the twentieth-century Parkfield earthquakes had similar intensities to the dawn foreshock of the great 1857 Fort Tejon earthquake? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1857 Fort Tejon earthquake.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
DYK for 1966 Toro earthquake
On 11 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1966 Toro earthquake, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a large aftershock following the 1966 Toro earthquake caused more deaths in the Democratic Republic of Congo than the original earthquake? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/1966 Toro earthquake.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I found an error in the article (see photo). Copernicus was not a German, he was from Poland. --Top811 my talk —Preceding undated comment added 15:34, 12 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) 22:44, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
- Mikenorton, as RockMagnetist invited Ceranthor too, as WikiProject Earthquakes is a daughter of Wikiproject Geology, as you are a member of WikiProject Geology, as you edited plate reconstruction, as you wrote so many DYKs, as you are an active editor, do you want to throw in your two cents too? --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
- Oops, I didn't see that you were invited already ;) Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Pichilemu
Hi there Mike. Wanted your input in this: see, I added the peak ground accelleration of the 2010 Pichilemu earthquake to its table. the strongest was in Curicó (according to the coordinates). however, is it possible that the earthquake could have reached 8.6 g ? I'm not sure, I may not be using well the data in the reference... thanks. Diego Grez (talk) 05:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hi Diego, sorry for the delay in responding, that seems an unfeasibly high number. I'll check what the sources say. Mikenorton (talk) 14:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's 8.6%g or 0.086g if you prefer - PGA is always quoted as %g. Mikenorton (talk) 14:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- Ah! thanks for the response Mike! Diego Grez (talk) 15:28, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
- That's 8.6%g or 0.086g if you prefer - PGA is always quoted as %g. Mikenorton (talk) 14:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
New message
Message added 21:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I have already removed the template warning and explained to the User what happened, on his Talk page. Thank you for taking the trouble. I appreciate it. -- Gareth Griffith-Jones (talk) 21:38, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
Please help
I need help to improve the pages: 2012 Emilia earthquakes and List of earthquakes in Italy Thank you -- Robyc73 15:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.18.133.177 (talk)
- Hi - what in particular - I've already added a lot to the 2012 Emilia earthquakes article. Mikenorton (talk) 14:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
The earthquake while not having a great magnitude has produced extensive damage due to the sandy bottom. the area was not considered high seismicity and the earthquakes recorded only phenomenon of Ferrara in 1570! For this reason many people have found themselves unprepared and very shocked. Geologists today are reviewing some data not so precise on the area. Thanks for your valuable contribution -- Robyc73 15:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.8.127.164 (talk)
Please help again
I need help to improve the pages: 2012 Emilia earthquakes and List of earthquakes in Italy Please put the exact magnitude of the earthquake of June 6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.17.125.225 (talk) 17:10, 6 June 2012 (UTC) Thank you Robyc73 19:00, 06 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.17.125.225 (talk)
- I added the magnitude scale and the original INGV source for the information. Mikenorton (talk) 15:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
DYK for Silicate perovskite
On 11 June 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Silicate perovskite, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that silicate perovskites may make up to 93% of the lower mantle and that the magnesium form is considered to be Earth's most abundant mineral? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Silicate perovskite. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
Darwin was Nearly Right
Hi Mike, I appreciate that evolution is not your thing, but I noticed you made a contribution to the Darwin page so I thought you might be interested in the latest development in evolutionary thought from Eugene McCarthy http://www.macroevolution.net/support-files/forms_of_life.pdf -- Darwin was so close, yet so far from the real source of genetic variation.
Please let me know what you think, thanks, Derek