User talk:Hike395/Archive 17

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Hike395. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

←

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Concerns with conversion

I have a few suggestions about the conversion, but I have to leave now. If you could hold off on doing any more, I'll get back to you later today. –droll [chat] 18:04, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

So, I think, these things need attention.

1. The lat_d and long_d parameters appear twice in some of the infoboxes I've looked at. I'm thinking that you are changing highest_lat_d to lat_d, etc. Could you first change the parameter names for existing lat_? and long_? to something like range_lat_?. This will make cleanup easier.
2. There three options for elevation which are elevation, elevation_m and elevation_ft, but there are only two choices for length and width, which are, for example, width (metric), and width_mi ("imperial"). Could AWB rename width to width_km and length to length_km (or what ever). New width and length parameters could then be added for free form entry. I've seem width=3 to 5 mi which could be input as {{convert|3|to|5|mi|0}}. It would also be more consistent with the elevation parameters.
3. We dropped the white space before a ref tag in Infobox mountain. I think was necessary because few editors choose to add white space when a ..._ref parameter was not available. I'd like to drop the white space in this template as well.

Only the first to items need to be addressed soon. I was able to switch many of the US mountain range Infoboxes form "Geobox locator" templates to "Location map" templates very easily. I think its best to go with what you have been doing. I will go through after you and convert what I can. It can be pretty much automated but the conversion from Geobox to Infobox is what is really important. –droll [chat] 01:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

This seems good. Let me copy your suggestions to Template talk:Infobox mountain range#Concerns with conversion, to make sure that we get wider consensus. I'll respond with more details, there.02:40, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Hike395. You have new messages at Talk:Cinder cone.
Message added 07:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi. Just thought as a courtesy you should see this. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 07:40, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! :) DBaK (talk) 10:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Singular

Isn't "grows" singular? A cluster of trees grows; trees grow. Tell me it ain't so. Regards, Ericoides (talk) 06:32, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

You're right. Reverted —hike395 (talk) 06:35, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Cypress dome

On 24 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cypress dome, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that cypress domes are the most common swamp habitat in Florida? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Cypress dome. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Strand swamp

On 29 May 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Strand swamp, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that strand swamps are home to Florida black bears and the endangered Florida panther? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Strand swamp.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) 16:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Purpose of Template:TopoMap

Hi, I was wondering what the purpose of Template:TopoMap, which you created is. It is currently not used anywhere. If it does serve a purpose, I would encourage you to add some documentation to clarify its use. If it does not serve a purpose, as you are the sole author, you may request it be deleted by tagging it with {{db-self}}. Thanks --balloonguy (talk) 18:17, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for finding this --- it seems to be a test from 2004. I requested deletion. —hike395 (talk) 02:53, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Following Up

Just learning the ropes, I'll see if I can figure this out.

Thanks for your patience. Looking for your talk page. I'll reply here. gadfly1974 (talk) 15:15, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

bug in Template:Infobox mountain range

It looks like one of your edits to {{Infobox mountain range}} introduced a bug. A fix would be appreciated. Please see the template talk page for details. Best regards, —Stepheng3 (talk) 20:23, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Rather than editing the template and then testing, I recommend testing your edits in the sandbox before deploying them to the live template. Best regards, —Stepheng3 (talk) 05:11, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Not sure which bug you are speaking of. If you are speaking of the typo, please look at the edit history of the sandbox and the main template. I already did that. The existing test cases were inadequate to catch the typo, but the documentation caught it. —hike395 (talk) 09:33, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Mountain range vs. peninsula

Question: you recently changed the infobox for the Bōsō Peninsula from infobox geo to infobox mountain range. I wasn't sure which infobox to use for a peninsula, so I went with infobox geo. But, does every peninsula use the infobox mountain range? They're not all mountainous. (Side note: I'll change Bōsō Hill Range from infobox mountain to infobox mountain range asap) Thanks tremendously for any clarification. As a librarian, I can't tell how useful an infobox vs. a lot of text is in our daily work! ---> Prburley (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

My mistake. A peninsula is not a range. I don't know what it should be, but probably some flavor of geobox. —hike395 (talk) 01:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Help Survey

Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.

Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)

Kangchenjunga needs the Garwood map.

G'day Hike395,
Some time in June you made several edits on the Kangchenjunga page and you did take out a splendid map by Garwood. It's unknown to me why that was done, but I've put it back in. Next time you take such bold steps I'd appreciate it if you were to discus this on the talk page first. TIA.
Qwrk (talk) 19:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Say hi to Carlos

Carlos Buhler has joined wikipedia - thought you might like to say "hi". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cpbuhler Ratagonia (talk) 04:24, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Mt. Baldy v. Mt. San Jacinto data

I've reverted the edits on Mt. San Jacinto. The source of data said Mt. Baldy. One can see the other mountain from each summit, but they are pretty far apart so I don't think the climates will be the same. Moreover, the Baldy data actually comes from the small community in the valley/notch far below the summit. And while there's a stone cabin near the summit of San Jacinto, I don't think much weather data has been collected there. PS: If you ever get the chance, go see "Mrs. Jesse M. Unruh" at Baldy Buckhorn Lodge. She's a semi-retired torch singer who gives a wonderful performance! --S. Rich (talk) 00:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Also, it turns out that IP user had made numerous edits with similar misinformation. Took a US page weather table, changed the title to an incorrect location, and then inserted it into the wrong articles. --S. Rich (talk) 02:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! I just fixed the formatting, but didn't check the provenance of the information. —hike395 (talk) 14:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, well! I'm happy to learn myself about such tricks and to pass the info on to others. Thanks so very much for the Barnstar!!--S. Rich (talk) 14:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Lists of mountains

Just to let you know, as a follow up to this, I have opened a discussion here. Thanks, "Pepper" @ 21:21, 16 August 2012 (UTC))

Species of the Sierra Nevada

Hi Hike395, you tried to build up a Category:Species of the Sierra Nevada (U.S.) on Commons, why don't you try a gallery instead as the Commons:Alpine flora. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Because it was not meant to be a gallery, but a meta-category. Look2See1 had previously put many species categories into Commons:Category:Nature of the Sierra Nevada (United States). Not all of the images in those species category were taken in the Sierra Nevada. So, I started to make Commons:Category:Species of the Sierra Nevada (United States), as a meta-category to hold those species categories. I think that Look2See1 did not understand what I was trying to do, so he/she undid what I did and filled the category with images. Foroa objected to making it a meta-category. See Commons:User talk:Look2See1#What I'm trying to do with Species of the Sierra Nevada category for the discussion.

So, the category is now a mess and I could not get consensus for a better alternative. I've been ignoring the problem, because I have more useful things to do around WP and Commons. If you want to fix the problem, or delete the category, feel free. I see that there was a suggestion by anon users at Commons:User talk:Look2See1#Species_and_countries to fix the problem in a more standard way. I would support that, too. —hike395 (talk) 15:43, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Later --- found a huge discussion at Commons:Talk:WikiProject_Tree_of_Life#'geographic categories' vs 'pure endemic categories'. Ugh. No wonder Foroa was pessimistic that this could be fixed. —hike395 (talk) 15:51, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Thx for the info, I think the gallery:Alpine flora is nice enough, I'll read the discussions later, hopefully. Pure endemic categories is an useful information too, some day it'll be solved nicely. Cheers --Chris.urs-o (talk) 18:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Geobox

Please see Template talk:Geobox#Mountain code and Template talk:Geobox#Mountain ranges. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Treasure Mountain

Thanks for participating on the article for creation User:Draconrex/Treasure Mountain (Colorado) to be renamed Treasure Mountain (Gunnison County, Colorado) should someone feel inclined to move it there. Beings as you transferred the image from flickr, would it be possible to change the image description to the view up what creek/valley of Treasure Mountain in the distance with the peak names on the right and left. (or something similar)? The image title on the file page in meta data says Crystal Peak, Treasure Mountain and Bear Mountain. From the map used for the core of the article, it appears to be taken from Crystal River near Bear Basin area. (facing southwest). Draconrex (talk) 00:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Would you like me to move it for you? Either of us can do it, check out help:MOVE for more information. Under the standard naming scheme, the article should be called Treasure Mountain (Colorado), because there is already a video game called Treasure Mountain!, but there are no other articles about peaks named Treasure Mountain in Colorado. See WP:D for more information.

I am happy to add that information to the picture caption. You can do it, too: Your Wikipedia login should also work at Commons.

—hike395 (talk) 01:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Treasure Mountain (Gunnison County, Colorado) was suggested by Mike Cline as there are yet two other Treasure Mountains in Colorado. He also suggests that categories be added before moving it. (which I haven't researched that part of it yet; maybe you have some advice on category help) Or perhaps we should have a concurrance at WP:Mountain? for the article title? Also, if the article is moved, more people would be able to work on it, but if we don't move it yet, I will continue with more content, which I can do in either place. I think it has advanced enough for prime time. (although I am new to this contributing thing) and thanks again. Draconrex (talk) 02:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

It is definitely ready. I went ahead and moved it, and User:The Interior added categories. We are all working on this together, no problem. Feel free to keep working on it.

This particular Treasure Mountain is a thirteener, so it already had red links throughout the encyclopedia. Calling it Treasure Mountain (Colorado) is definitely the right thing to do, to make those red links turn blue. —hike395 (talk) 05:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

WWF ecoregion links

Hi hike395. Thanks for going through the ecoregion pages and fixing the worldwildlife.org links. It turns out the pages are still around, but they've moved. Here is the current formatting:

http://worldwildlife.org/ecoregions/im0502

Is there a way to templatize the links, so that if they change again, we only have to change the template instead of fixing hundreds of pages? Miguel.v (talk) 20:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that URL. Looks like I wasted some hours! I will do as you suggest and make a template.

P.S. Check out Commons:Category:Photographs by Miguel Vieira -- I gathered all of your photos uploaded to Commons, because I really like them. Thanks for taking such cool photos! —hike395 (talk) 03:28, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks hike395. I appreciate all the work. And my own Commons category! I'm honored. Miguel.v (talk) 16:33, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done --- I changed all of the links to individual ecoregions to use {{WWF ecoregion}} or {{NatGeo ecoregion}}, as appropriate. Whew! —hike395 (talk) 20:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Ecology of California

		The Article Rescue Barnstar
		Great work in improving the Ecology of California article, which has likely saved it from deletion! Northamerica1000^(talk) 03:17, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 03:49, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

	Happy Holidays!
	From the frozen wasteland of Nebraska, USA! MONGO 12:15, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

vandalism?

I certainly appreciate your efforts to keep our geography articles in top shape. However, describing this as "vandalism" strikes me as being a bit harsh. It looks to me like this rookie editor simply forgot to leave an edit summary. Is there any way to make TW a bit less bitey? Warm regards, —Stepheng3 (talk) 19:26, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree that the edit is in the grey zone. Perhaps I should have selected the AGF option for the edit history. in mitigation, I think that anon editors pay attention to the comments left on their talk pages more than edit histories (which they probably don't know how to access). I left the lightest level comment (level 1), which assumes good faith and is now friendly and non-robotic. So, I don't think that the newcomer should feel bitten. We'll see... —hike395 (talk) 05:33, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

That makes some sense. Thanks for the prompt reply. —Stepheng3 (talk) 16:59, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Pinus Longaeva edit

Hi, I made the edit without citation, for the reason in the edit message: The 'oldest trees' page has been updated. There is a confirmed (with citation) tree older than 'Metuselah'. Therefore the Pinus Longaeva article was (and now is again) in contradiction with the page 'oldest trees'. I made the edit to resolve this internal contradiction in Wikipedia. --10:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.150.110.169 (talk)

Ok, I did not know about the List of oldest trees article. I updated Pinus longaeva, List of superlative trees, and List of long-living organisms. Thanks for pointing this out. —hike395 (talk) 10:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

PD-USGov-USGS

Do you know that this is a valid licence? No further permission needed. --Eingangskontrolle (talk) 10:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is a valid license, but the material did not come from the USGS, but came from "Volcano World" from Nodak.edu. See the (now archived) source link: http://web.archive.org/web/20080114043639/http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/north_america/california/long_valley.html .. I don't see any evidence that the map is from the USGS. —hike395 (talk) 12:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Later -- Volcano World was run by "North Dakota and Oregon Space Grant Consortia administered by the Department of Geosciences at Oregon State University". See http://web.archive.org/web/20080130124854/http://volcano.und.edu/ These are not part of the U.S. Government, but are State Universities. Materials produced by State Universities are not in the Public Domain. I think the map needs to be deleted. We can take it to Commons AfD, if you wish. —hike395 (talk) 13:07, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Enlarge thumbs

Hi Hike395; I was surprised to find that it is not currently possible to set gallery image sizes in preferences.[1][2] I think it would be helpful. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

What actions should we take to recommend it? —hike395 (talk) 03:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker): If I understand this correctly: Fixing that I think would take some work from the developers. What I'd recommend is a few steps: first, demonstrate a consensus for the value and desirability of the feature at one of the village pumps (maybe WP:VPT?) Step 2: Once you've got that, see if you can get the devs on board by filing a feature request/bug report at bugzilla. (see WP:BUGS.). Step 3, profit. The MediaWiki devs are their own community and they have their own feeling about what is and what isn't urgent, or even a good idea, and many of their customers are not the English Wikipedia, so ... you may get pushback. But that's probably your best path for MediaWiki improvements.

Alternatively, for those with coding skill, one could always start contributing at the MediaWIki code level. --j⚛e decker^talk 05:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Sounds time-consuming. Walter, do you want to take the lead on it? —hike395 (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Himalayas

Congratulations and thanks for the improvement you made to Himalayas. The section you tackled was almost unreadable before. Now it makes sense. Apuldram (talk) 15:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for noticing! Working on Karakoram now. —hike395 (talk) 16:54, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Adirondack Plateau?

I see you have returned the Adirondacks as an example of a plateau mountain. Our article calls the Adirondacks an eroded dome and doesn't call them a plateau. I don't recall seeing a ref to them as plateau mountains, but personally don't know much about them. The Ozarks are sometimes referred to as a plateau and would maybe be a better example, although that doesn't fit very well except maybe the Bostons and what I call the White River escarpment. Just thinkin', Cheers, Vsmith (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

My mistake. I didn't realize that you had edited the Adirondacks out: I thought I had left them out of my previous edits. I think the article was confusing the Catskills with the Adirondacks. —hike395 (talk) 03:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

No problem, and the Catskills work. Vsmith (talk) 13:26, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Mount Rainier

Thanks for the cleanup after my edit of Mount Rainier. –droll [chat]

Sure, happy to help! —hike395 (talk) 11:39, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

i work at MSH. The info on Mt. Rainer is from USGS. it comes from several emails with several USGS and UW geophysics profs on Cascade volcanos. The info is accurate. MSh may 18 1980 wasa VEI 5 - 5.1. Mt Hood appears from gelogic evidence to be a VEI 2 maybe 3. Mt Rainer appears to produce VEI 3 to maybe 4. However, larger eruptions are a possibility, but no evidence for eruptions larger than VEI 4 have been found in the geologic record at Mt. Rainer to my knowledge. Sorry for the poor spelling and grammar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.73.79 (talk) 06:58, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Hualalai

Hello Hike395, The reason I made a change to the information about the volcano was that it was outdated. on one section, it says that the eruptions of the volcano happened in 1800 and 1801, and now is 2013, so 2013-1801=212, and the page says "less than 200 years" for the last eruption, so i believe 212 is more than 200 years ago, so I was updating, if there was a detail that I missed, please tell me.

best of wishes, wikipedia contributor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.136.145.221 (talk) 03:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

You're right --- I had missed that. I restored your edit. Thanks for telling me! —hike395 (talk) 06:13, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Cabo_da_Roca

In this article you made a change Adding infobox mountain range, per discussion, using AWB. The problem is that after that the marker for the place no longer shows. It's possible other articles suffer from the same problem but from the 10 or 20 I saw none has the problem. Can you fix it, please?

Aisteco (talk) 17:13, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Mount Everest

Howdy. Mountains are not my usual area of Wiki, just a passing interest so I can't do much more than offer copy-editing experience. I think moving that bulky "firsts" section was a wise move and very much support trimming these "popular culture" and semi-trivial sections that are crowding Wiki more and more often these days. Had considered moving it to a new page myself, but wasn't sure of the best approach; yours was probably the best method. Per my comments on the article's talk page, I think the article has become one of those popular pages that has been allowed to build-up so many scrappy (and often irrelevant) edits over time that it has simply lost all form of acceptable cohesion, hence the loss of its GA status and failure to meet FA standards. As the most famous mountain in the world, for many reasons, it is a pity that it cannot reach the highest encyclopedic standard, as there must be a ton of scientific and verifiable info. available in publications and online to get it there. Not sure I feel up to the task myself, am more into writing historical facts that gathering scientific data. Given the tweaks we've made over the past few days, hopefully the article has improved a little. Cheers, Ma®©usBritish^{chat} 04:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism on Galen Rowell

I see that you have several times reverted vandalism that was done to Galen Rowell's wiki page. I wish to thank you as his daughter. I find it quite disturbing that there are those out there enjoying vandalising his memory and his page. Today I found his middle name edited to Ass and his profession as pornography. My brother actually found them. We'll have to review further to find out if there are more devious changes that have been made. Nicole Rowell Ryan GARfamily on wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GARfamily (talk • contribs) 00:09, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Sorry to butt in, but Hike395 pointed me at this, and I have applied six months of what we call "PC1" protection to the article, which places changes from non-established editors on hold until they can be reviewed by another editor. It's my hope that that will help prevent future vandalism of that sort, it was pretty terrible. I'll try and keep an eye out for further problems, but do let me know if I miss anything. Best regards, --j⚛e decker^talk 02:32, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Joe. Well done. —hike395 (talk) 02:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! --j⚛e decker^talk 14:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Instead of guessing

... replied at my talk page. Michael! (talk) 21:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

... more. Michael! (talk) 21:51, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

... again. Michael! (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

... some more. Michael! (talk) 20:44, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Could you help me with this? Thank you in advance! Michael! (talk) 14:09, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Saturn

Thanks for nominating the image. What is your opinion on whether the article Saturn's hexagon should also be made to cover both polar storms of Saturn, that I asked on that talk page? I'd like to ask everyone who contributed to that page. Sidelight12 ^Talk 09:13, 2 May 2013 (UTC)