Je bevindt je hier: Home

User talk:Resident Mario

I hate to say it

Well, I hate to say it, but I told you so. ceranthor 06:15, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

What? What??? Cer, you're scaring me! ResMar 13:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I told you it would pass easily. :p ceranthor 14:33, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Still needs archiving. ResMar 16:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry. :-(. Awickert (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

See this is what happens when it doesn't archive fast enough, an expert comes along and ugh...ResMar 22:07, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

*Sniffles* at least I apologized. Now I'll clean the mess up. Maybe even before I go to Houston, Awickert (talk) 00:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I get sour when people bug me over sources...it's the one thing that erks me most (besides inactivity over FACs). Sorry...see the FAC page again. ResMar 00:16, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

It really sucks that the major sources aren't available to the general public, and you have to make due with whatever else. And what your left with doesn't necessarily correlate with mainstream scientific thought. But consider yourself with access to papers now; I'm happy to be an email-order service for whatever you need for Wikipedia articles. And it's usually easy enough to find which papers you need via internet searches, so you can copy/paste lists of titles or whatever and it won't take me long to get things back to you. It's for a very worthy cause. Awickert (talk) 08:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm not feelin particularly well today so unfortunatly it must wait another day. ResMar 21:34, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Hope you feel better soon - just getting over a nasty illness myself. My onlineness will touch-and-go until the 11th, which I know stinks for you (sorry), but I'll try to get some reading info together in the meantime. Awickert (talk) 08:12, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) FYI, Don L. Anderson (the author of at least a few major sources that you used in the Hawaii hotspot article) is famous/infamous for believing that hotspots don't exist. While he has some interesting arguments, he is certainly in opposition to most geologists. I'm cutting his arguments down to a few ones that he reiterates and seem to have a little oomph behind them, often from other researchers as well. Awickert (talk) 06:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

your dyk hook has a problem

Hi, the source for your dyk hook here returns an error message. Could you take a look at it? Thanks, —mattisse (Talk) 01:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)

The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:22, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Taney Seamounts

On January 4, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Taney Seamounts, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for President Jackson Seamounts

On January 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article President Jackson Seamounts, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Vance Seamounts

On January 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Vance Seamounts, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.

Wikiproject: Did you know? 06:00, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Hawaii hotspot

I'm down to 5 hours of sleep for the night, so I'm signing off. I think that you can fix the factual issues in the paragraph that starts "Many geophysicists" (last real paragraph in "Wilson's stationary hotspot theory" section) without hardcore sources: if you can do this, great, do it. If not, I'll overhaul later. Fortunately this is the only major tangle of basic factual issues that I've so far while skimming. Awickert (talk) 07:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

See my talk; someone has volunteered to review the article whenever I finish going over the factual portions. It would be much appreciated to hear back from you because I want to remove the section that I edited and spread its info across the portion of the article on the hotspot itself. I also have the (above) factual issues that I'm happy to take care of if you don't want to, and also have some other thoughts that can wait until after these two items are straightened out. But I now have time and the sooner I hear back from you, the sooner we can figure out a plan of attack and the sooner I can get to work on the article. Awickert (talk) 03:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Question: can you fix that paragraph that I noted above? If I can count on some help from you, I'll keep the FAC open. If not, I'm going to have to strongly oppose its promotion and request its close. The reason is that it will take me a while to make all of the necessary changes, and since I don't currently have much intrinsic interest in this topic, I'll burn out a lot more if I try to do it all quickly than if the FAC closes and I have time to do it slowly. However, if you can help check textbook-style facts (e.g., above), it will lessen my workload and convince me of your interest in improving the article during this round of FAC, which will keep me motivated to do it quickly. Awickert (talk) 06:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Did it myself. Awickert (talk) 09:48, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Red "Page notice" links

He ResMar. I saw your message at Template talk:Editnotice. I have moved that message to Wikipedia talk:Editnotice#Why is this standard? and responded there. And no worries, we can fix that for you.

--David Göthberg (talk) 06:53, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Resident Mario. You have new messages at M4gnum0n's talk page.
Message added 18:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--M4gnum0n (talk) 18:46, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

And again. --M4gnum0n (talk) 21:24, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Userpage

Hey, guess what!? I finally got around to finishing up the implementation of your redesign of my userpage. Thanks much again! KV5 (Talk • Phils) 20:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Cross your fingers...

...but its looking good for you know which article to pass you know what nomination whose details shall not be spoken so as not to jinx the result. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 20:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Oh no, you voodoo'd it! ResMar 17:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, guys. Don't worry, it'll be a week next time. I'm willing to bet on it! ceranthor 02:57, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Pff, with my luck never inhell will be it be shorter then a month. Too bad it came around to finals week; I'm too busy studying to gaf. 108.6.15.59 (talk) 00:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Well by the time this thing passes it will be the best damn article on WP. It will have been checked, referenced, cross-checked, copyedited, rearranged, trimmed, expanded, and then triple-checked... and will be more enthralling than Homer's Odyssey. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 21:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

That makes me Poseidon! Thanks guys! Really, I'll do my best to put everything together that needs to be there, and put it in order. It's much harder to write a scientific FA than a geographic or political one IMO because you can't just say "X said Y and Z said L", but have to deal with something where there is an absolute fact somewhere out there and a whole bunch of people trying to figure it out with varied success. Awickert (talk) 21:40, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Seamount chain

Hey, I think I could probably finish up the last few issues for you, but I don't want you to get caught up by withdrawing it. If you want to strike that withdrawal, I'll try to help out while you have finals. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:19, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of volcanoes in the Hawaiian – Emperor seamount chain/archive1

Hi ResMar. Several editors have been keeping this FLC alive, but it would really help if you, as the nominator, could take a look. I'll keep the FLC open as long as editors are doing work and the list of issues doesn't become too long, but it has to come to an end sometime. In short, please address the concerns raised as soon as you have time for WP. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Yer on...

here. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:25, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

February GA Sweeps update

Progress as of January 2010

Thanks to everyone's efforts to the GA Sweeps process, we are currently over 95% done with around 130 articles left to be swept! Currently there are over 50 members participating in Sweeps, that averages out to about 3 articles per person! If each member reviews an article once a week this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. At that point, awards will be handed out to reviewers. Per my message last month, although we did not review 100 articles last month, I still made a donation of $90 (we had 90 reviews completed/initiated) to Wikipedia Forever on behalf of all GA Sweeps reviewers. I would like to thank everyone's efforts for last month, and ask for additional effort this month so we can be finished. I know you have to be sick of seeing these updates (as well as Sweeps itself) by now, so please do consider reviewing a few articles if you haven't reviewed in a while. If you have any questions about reviews or Sweeps let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 02:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)