User talk:Peltoms
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Glacial recession
Peltoms, thank you for your work on glacier retreat and related articles. I've noticed that you have uploaded a number of figures and photos. If possible, could you go back and add a bit more detail to the descriptions of these items? Especially with graphs, it would be useful to reference it to published work describing how the data was collected, etc. Also you might want to clarify whether images like Image:Glaciermassbalance.JPG are refering to global effects or some region of study, or something else. Do they include/exclude the major ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica, etc? It would be nice if you could add these kinds of details to the image descriptions. Dragons flight 08:22, 14 February 2006 (UTC) Okay, I can see the advantages of adding more information so that other articles can use them that I did not consider before.Peltoms 19:31, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Once over
I just wanted to ask how you feel about the Glacier retreat article. Is it what you hoped for? What does it lack and or what does it have too much of? Is there a manner you would prefer it to have been written as contrasted to the nearly completed form we have now? In my opinion, I believe it is an excellent article. I do want to state that soem may wish to see it reduced in size when we nominate it for featured article. If that happens, maybe the Mass Balance section would be the best part to spin off into another article, which in itself, is an article that could be quite extensive. When you get a chance, let me know if you are pleased and I will then nominate it for featured article status.--MONGO 04:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I think the article in excellent. Except for in the technical areas I trust your judgement, Walter and Lulu's. In terms of size yes it is mass balance that should be spun off, the Arctic Islands image is the only image that adds little. You probably saw the news on Greenland glaciers yesterday, well we had that covered here several weeks ago. I notice the climate change and global warming articles are much longer, due to a broader topic. However, to deal with glacier retreat well takes time. I think both mass balance and glacier runoff deserve an article at some point. I am alarmed and fascinated by the declining mountain snowpack, and that would have to be explored in a glacier runoff article. It is glacier runoff that is economically important.Peltoms 12:50, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Indeed I did see the article in USAToday about the Greenland glaciers...as I mentioned before, I am in a hurry this summer to get up into the Wind River Range and at least photographically document all I can...and then return every other year or so. Do you know if anyone is doing any surveying on the glaciers in the Winds? I do know that I read they have done some ice cores on at least a few of the largest glaciers, but I wonder if this is done on a regular basis. Not that I have that expertise. I also had a question for you about these rock glaciers, as I posted a link on the Galcier retreat discussion page. For instance, is the rock glacier at the base of Longs Peak in Colorado merely the remnant of a much larger glacier that has retreated into it's own moraine or talus, for lack of better wording? What I mean by this is, as I have understood that as glaciers reduce in length and thickness (mass) the rock and soil debris becomes more commonplace as a percentage of the glacial mass...eventully the glacier reduces in size to the point that the ice itself is almost unrecognizable and the movement or plasicity (sp) is then slowed to a crawl.
As a sidenote, the article length is probably fine as I have seen several other articles that have been featured that are longer...such as Abraham Lincoln. I think it can be easily explained that the information in the article needs to stay together as much as possible.--MONGO 13:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
There is very little surveying going on in the Winds. The UWYO did some work inthe 1980's, and yes the USGS has drilled the Fremont and Kerr has looked at Gannett Glacier and Dinwoody but only in a cursory fashion in the late 1990's. I have several old climbing books on the Winds with good glacier pictures. If you have such look to gain some of the same vantage points. Mammoth Glacier and Downs Glacier would be two key glaciers. The GPS of the terminus would be excellent to have. But as I said do not be too impatient this season the heavy snowpack will make the termini tough to locate until at least late July.Peltoms 13:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Moved
I moved a copy of Glacier retreat to my userspace for a major overhaul....User:MONGO/gr I have already commenced eliminating many of the headings and trying to make the flow of the article better...have a look...it is just another work in progress...if we like the end result, we'll replace the existing article which is not going to make featured status in it's current format and direction. I have kept every single citation and all the evidence. We also need to address some of the comments in the nomination and on the discussion page as we go, mainly with how this all relates to global warming or what effects this worldwide problem may have in a lot more detail.--MONGO 10:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
That sounds very good. However, I am more concerned with having a good article that will be usable for years, than having a featured article if it means shortening it by eliminating picutres and examples. We can go into the impacts more, though that again takes more time. Are the nomination comments located somewhere separate or are they just amidst the other comments? Peltoms 13:31, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you wholeheatedly. I am not in favor of removing any information. In addition to the discussion page for glacier retreat, the nomination comments are located here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Glacier retreat. Just so you know, almost all the comments have been about the flow of the conversation...creating a better transition from one oiece of facts and figures to another. On the article's discussion page, user Mclean has properly been doing a fact check where he is looking over our facts and making sure we have cited them correctly. If it's okay with you, continue to add whatever you wish to the main glacier retreat article and I will incorporate it into my version as I see things come up...maybe in a couple of weeks I will renominate it again after all the concerns have been addressed...but please look over my temporary version and let me know what you think by posting here or on my talk page. Thanks.--MONGO 13:52, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Glacier retreat
Just to let you know I am only taking a short break from the Glacier retreat article and will return to it in a few days. I think I can get it smoothed out and renominate it for featured article, though that isn't really our only goal. Personally, I am more proud of the work I did there than any other article I been involved in. I have three more short stub articles to complete regarding National Monuments and then back to glaciers.--MONGO 14:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Renominated
I renominated Glacier retreat and you may wish to watch the commentary here : [1]. The article wouldn't exist without all your efforts and I am appreciative of your contributions, always.--MONGO 11:57, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
You may also wish to chime in on the article talk page as we are discussing the article title again. Thank you for your assistance.--MONGO 13:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Naming
I added more also to Glacial Lake Outburst Flood combining some information from the article Glacier run. I agree with you that the title of Glacier retreat since 1850 is not going to be an oftcued google entry...I can creat a better redirect page that will automatically redirect to the current title. In other words, if someone googles a certain passage, it will redirect them without them having to make even one mouse click to Glacier retreat since 1850. What, in your educated opinion would be the best couple of words that would be used...Glacier retreat, retreat of glaciers, recent glacier retreat, glacier retreat and global warming....or something else altogether?--MONGO 17:43, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Congratulations!
You are a a major contributor to Retreat of glaciers since 1850 which is now a Featured article....good work!--MONGO 06:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC) That sounds good, what does it mean in reality to be a featured article--in terms of key words-- recent glacier retreat, climate change glacier retreat, global warming glacier retreat, shrinking glaciers, declining glaciers. Peltoms 12:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
I guess the featured means, it has undergone a form of peer review and a fact check, (and I was surprised at the excellent fact checking that went on), and that it is one of only about 950 or so of the one million articles in Wikipedia that are considered reliable, well written and encyclopedic. So I can use any of those terms such as glacier retreat...I suppose we want folks to find the article through a google search, so I will work on some redirects so when they google glacier retreat maybe they will get to the Retreat of glaciers since 1850 article.
Have a look at Glacial Lake Outburst Flood as I added some images and a little text...it may need a little tidying up.
Finally...if I were to start a Project page about glaciers...should it be titled Glaciers or Glaciology. The project would encompass all articles related to Glaciology from the one we just got featured to individual glaciers to mass balance, etc. The project would be formatted something like Wikipedia:WikiProject Protected areas is, and the purpose is to ensure that we can group all glacier related articles under one banner, making them more cohesive and maybe even draw more interested parties in. Let me know if you have any interest in this and if so if it should be a Glacier or a Glaciology Project. Thanks!--MONGO 13:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
If the focus in on the glaciers than it is that, if the focus is on the scientific methods than glaciology. So if your list is surging glaciers, GLOF's, Glacier Retreat, Glacier Mass balance than it would be glaciers as that is the focus. I note that snowpack in Wind River Range is notably below normal on the east side of the range and slightly above normal on the western flank. http://www.wcc.nrcs.usda.gov/snotel/. Peltoms 12:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for that...I have been watching this NOAA link off the National Weather Service snow depth interactive maps and I have to say that this time of the year, I am used to seeing snow at lower areas than it is now. A mid august trip into the Fitzpatrick wilderness of shoshone national forest will put me at dinwoody and gannett glaciers at a good time to at least photograph them. heres the NOAA page... and I'll get to work on that project before this week is over. Thank you again.[2]--MONGO 12:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Main Page
Sort of like Wikipedias front cover...Retreat of glaciers since 1850 will be on the Main page on 4/18/06 [3]...so don't change that channel.--MONGO 11:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Glacier National Park (US)
Hi, Peltoms...glad to see you're still around...I am commencing my work on the article Glacier National Park (US), to try and get it to featured status. It has almsot no mention of the glaciers there amoung other things. I remember in the Glacier retreat article that as of the year 1850, an estimated 150 glaciers existed in the park, now, according to this easily discerable edit on this page (about mid way down the page), there are only 27 as of 2005...indeed, I will probably live to see the end of all glaciers in that park unless things change significantly...the mass balance is such that, as you well know, the change si going to have to be drastic. If you care to watch and help when I get to the geology and glaciers section, please do. Maybe after that I can ask both you and Wsiegmund to work to get North Cascades National Park to featured status, although the vandalism and the odd arguments do get tiresome.--MONGO 04:32, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Glaciers
I started a new project that might interest you. I think all the information is on the page linked above, so if you wish to help out, don't hesitate. It's just beginning so there will be improvements as we go.--MONGO 15:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
