The Geologist

March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Tsunami, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 15:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

I am a professional geologist and a volcanologist. I hold the graduate degree of Bachelor of Sciences with Upper Second Class Honours and the Post Graduate degree of Dotore de Philosphae - othherwise known as PhD. I am a Fellow of the Geological Society and a member of the International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth's Interior.

I am involved in research into volcanic edifice failure and its potential to generate tsunami. Main areas of interest include the Canary Islands which is where I live and work, the volcanoes of the Andes, Santorini, Italy, Japan and others too.

Should you wish to seek my assistance I can be contacted in the first instance at volcanesdeterra@hotmail.com

Please put "Geology" in the subject heading otherwise it will be auto-deleted

Thank you

Re

I've saw your message today. Please tell me which revert are you referring to? Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:43, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I have made some changes to the "Tsunami" and mega-tsunami pages. One I made was the pronunciation in English which was subsequently removed. I was told many years ago by a visiting professor from Tokio University that tsunami was pronounced "Sue-nar-me" in English. Yet when I put this in it was removed. I accept that different peoples will pronounce words differently but as English is my main language I prefer English as spoken by the professional English speaking world not "american English." However, what I am trying to do as no doubt you are too, is ensure that the quasi-scientists are made to be quiet and real science is presented in a manner that can be understood. Regards The Geologist (talk) 14:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry that I took your good-faith edit as vandalism. But according to the Merriam-Webster, it's not "Sue-nar-me". Listen to the pronunciation. Please show me a source of the "Sue-nar-me" pronunciation. BTW, I'm not an American, but a Japanese. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 15:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Oda Mari, I thought you were Japanese. I have no quarrel with your pronunciation and will bow to your superior knowledge of how to pronounce the word. I am fed up with high school kids and false scientists who put their ideas on the geology and associated pages as fact and then argue that true scientists are wrong! I believe as a scientist that it is my duty to ensure that the science I am involved with is presented in a way which can be proved and is understood. Sometimes we have to use simple language to get this message to non-scientists who understand a little and want to know more. We also need to show the idiots that we do know what we are talking about. Gerard The Geologist (talk) 17:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I am here to help with my knowledge and language, including something like this. And to fight vandalism. Ask me when you need a Japanese help. Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 10:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Teide

On 9 April 2008, you wrote in the Teide article that it is considered to be the 13th most dangerous volcano. Can you give me any information about a reference for this, please? Thanks, from a fellow Canary Islands volcano enthusiast. GeoWriter (talk) 16:23, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes - Try the IAVCEI web pages. It lists all the volcanoes in order of perceived danger.The Geologist (talk) 10:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a look at the website. GeoWriter (talk) 20:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I did not find the list on the IAVCEI website. A specific web URL address would be helpful. Can you help, please? GeoWriter (talk) 17:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

calderas

Please read the linked article. The population estimate is not 75,000. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 16:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Copied from User Talk Geologyguy:

WRONG - more recent workers have upgraded the figures to about 75,000 - I forget the reference but it was published in I think 2000 in Nature. I am a professional volcanologist working under the auspices of the UN and WE use that figure. User:The Geologist

Then please feel free to add a citation that shows this. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 16:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, when communicating, please do not post to the User page, but to the User Talk (Discussion) page, and please sign such communications using four tildes - ~~~~. Thanks Geologyguy (talk) 16:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, when communicating, please do not post to the User page, but to the User Talk (Discussion) page, and please sign such communications using four tildes - ~~~~. Thanks Geologyguy (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

your edits

Hello again. Please do not remove "citation needed" tags without providing an actual citation [1]. Also, please do not change British/American usage contrary to Wikipedia standards (see WP:ENGVAR). Also, when a link exists to a Wikipedia article, it should not be changed to a name that redirects to the existing article name [2]. Your contributions are appreciated, but Wikipedia does have normal procedures. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 17:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Please note the message to you that User:Kablammo posted on my talk page. I would also encourage you to read WP:CIVIL. As I already said, your contributions are appreciated, but you need to adhere to Wikipedia conventions. Now I shall go back to playing with crude oil for a while, but I will certainly also continue to edit your (and everyone else's) input where needed. Cheers Geologyguy (talk) 19:30, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject earthquakes

Hello, The Geologist. I have decided that I want to start a wikiproject dedicated to earthquakes, instead of having it all under natural disasters project and geology. Would you like to join? Please sign up at this page so the project can be passed. Thanks, Meldshal42_{Hit me}^{What I've Done} 01:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Inactive

Hello. After a recent reoganization of WikiProject Volcanoes, we have established an "inactive" list. As your account has not edited for over 4 months, I am sorry to imform you that you're being moved to the list. If you wish to refute this and are indeed active, I am sorry for the mistake and you can revert my action. Thank you and happy holidays, ResMar 14:02, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Teide - 13th most dangerous volcano in the world

I notice that you are actively editing again so I thought I would seek your input on a question I asked during your last period of activity back in August 2010, when we were in discussion about the "danger rating" of Teide. I asked a question at the talk page of the Teide article [3]. Please would you take another look at it because I am interested in your opinion on the topic. I have not been able to find the IAVCEI and United Nations Disaster Mitigation Committee Reports that you refer to. Can you provide a web link or other bibliographic reference, please? GeoWriter (talk) 12:18, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Responding to old talk discussions

Hello, Geologist. I see that you have been spending a lot of time over the last week responding to multi-year-old discussions on Talk pages of volcano articles. You are certainly free to do so, however, I thought I would let you know that almost all of those discussions are considered "dead", so your contributions are not likely to be read by the people who previously contibuted to them.

If you wish, feel free to contribute directly to the material in WP articles --- expert help is always welcome. —hike395 (talk) 15:37, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Hike395, who always contributes very constructively to mountain- and forest-related articles. Besides your comments being made to editors who may have long ago stopped reading those discussion pages, your lack of indentation makes it very difficult to determine whether you are directly addressing anyone in particular with your comments. Please see WP:TALK if you do not understand indentation, and thanks for signing your comments. —EncMstr (talk) 17:43, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I noticed this too (responding to really old talk page comments). I'm about to archive the talk page of 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens, so if you have any current issues, feel free to bring them up again on the cleaned up talk page, thanks. Valfontis (talk) 18:07, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

OK Guys - yes I do know about indentation, so if I haven't - Sorry! Yes I will update the WP pages. Many underwent a period of prolonged vandalism apparently from people who refused to accept scientific information and preferred to add their own ignorant interpretation, so I just packed in. After all you cannot reason with those who will not reason.The Geologist (talk) 15:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teneguía, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vents (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) 08:55, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Yes - someone had put an item claiming that Teneguia was a volcano - it is not it is a vent on the Cumbre Vieja.The Geologist (talk) 19:01, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a general rule, talk pages such as Talk:Group sex are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. SummerPhD (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Pedra da Gávea

I was wondering if you could do me a quick favor. I've been working on Pedra da Gávea on and off for about a year now, and I've been focusing on the pseudo-archaeology aspect of the article mostly. However, I've started to expand on the geology part and to be honest, I don't know as much about geology as I do anthropology. I was wondering if you could do a super-quick unofficial look-over/peer review to make sure I'm not writing anything egregious (I already got into some hot water awhile back for making a dumb mistake regrading Neoproterozoic and Meso-Neoproterozoic rocks). Thanks!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 05:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Certainly would be willing to do so. Bear in mind my time gets used up with research and other work.The Geologist (talk) 18:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

August 2015

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Volcanic explosivity index may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ] (2002), [[Raoul Island]] (2006), [[Stromboli Island]] - (continuous since Roman times to present))
• * [http://www.volcano.si.edu/world/largeeruptions.cfm List of Large Holocene Eruptions (VEI > 4) from the Smithsonian Global Volcanism Program]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:06, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teneguía, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Monogenetic. 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) 11:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Normal/reverse fault terminology

Hi, answering a query on Talk:Tsunami#Normal_faults, I repeated the origin of the terms as far as I know. I see that you also think the terms came from British coalfields (from Talk:Fault (geology)#Reverse_fault_same_as_thrust_fault.3F) and I was curious if you have a source for that, because I've failed to find one and it would be great to add it to the fault article. Mikenorton (talk) 12:09, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mikenorton, Like any good geologist I love to be challenged. I shall endeavour to discover a reliable quotable source for the information, I was told the story when I was doing GCE A Level geology in 1966-68 at Wigan and District College of Mining and Technology. The lecturer was Iain Williamson who had worked for several years as a mining geologist with the NCB, I also heard it from several miners who could sometimes tell you just by looking at the fault face roughly how far the throw was. It was also repeated by university lecturers whilst I was doing my BSc. Like you I am also fed up with the idiotic pseudo-scientists criticising everything and anything we say or do. I have my own opinions about fracking and keep them to myself, but someone has to pay my gas bill - me! I would value your feed back on the rewrite of Cumbre Vieja which I have almost completed - just in time I suppose for some idiot to come along and vandalise it with false information. Cheers.The Geologist (talk) 13:17, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

In my case, it was Brian Chadwick at Exeter University (1974) who passed on the story, referring specifically to the Midland Valley coalfield, which makes sense to me as there are quite a lot of reverse faults in that basin, but still less than the normal faults. I'll take a look at Cumbre Vieja when I get a chance. Thanks and happy hunting! Mikenorton (talk) 17:10, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mikenorton, That would make sense as regards the Midland Valley coalfield. I shall endeavour to contact Iain - I did keep in contact for many years and I think I know how to contact him. I shall also search my old textbooks in respect of the term as I have some rather old books which I purchased a long time ago. If I can find a reputable reference I shall let you know. I appreciate that your time is precious and that you will check the CV page when you can. Thanks for your time.The Geologist (talk) 17:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Teneguía, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Monogenetic. 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) 10:49, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, The Geologist. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, The Geologist. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, The Geologist. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)