User talk:MONGO/Archive30

Re Lakes in Glacier
Actually I started it Here months ago. I'll have to get on it. Been very busy with work travelling all over the place (Costa Mesa, CA, Chicago, Pittsburgh and New York) all last month. Am flying to Pitt today. Take care.--Mike Cline (talk) 11:28, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks on 14:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for making that disambiguation page. Actually, I saw that you had created the Mount Henry (Montana) article and am trying to add more links to it.

—72.91.241.104 (talk)

You may enjoy this exchange
Talk:History of wolves in Yellowstone--Mike Cline (talk) 02:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the big bird
What did I do? I have tried diligently to stay out of trouble (unavoidable for an active admin). Finally finished the Cemeteries lists. Turned out to be more trouble than I planned. Maybe I'll try it with all the lakes.--Mike Cline (talk) 14:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've got a to do list a mile long for Montana related stuff so thanks for the encouragment. On the Admin side (thanks to your subtle push into the oblivion of psyopsville), I am now a defender of the wiki and relish the challenge. If I could only identify those landmines before I step on them.--Mike Cline (talk) 00:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Being an admin can be thankless...I think the website has become so complex in administrative issues that it would be hard to be an expert on more than a couple major areas related to administrative work...some do better than others if they concentrate mainly on that and that would leave little time to create articles or upgrade them...so perhaps just stick to the areas you feel most comfortable with and that should be all the help that is needed. I did notice that the WikiProject Montana/Articles page is way out of date...but it is also too long. In addition, I have had to do some major clean up of many articles due to lost redirect pages, messed up disambiguation issues and articles that no longer link directly to each other...in one case, I found a triple redirect issue! I suppose once I have all the mountains done for GNP I may clean up some of my own article starts to try and standardize them...I have been going back to older mountain articles for GNP and adjusting those but that is really tedious!--MONGO 00:59, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

CC/WMC et al
This was an inspired comment. It frames the main issue with the entire climate change topic perfectly. I salute you. -- Scjessey (talk) 11:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I stayed out of this mess...but always intended to chime in at some point...losing Connolley would be a disasterous...his evolution in his main focus parallels mine but the only thing that saved me was I simply had too much work off wiki to stay around long enough to tell the 9/11 conspiracy theorists to all go to hell. I eventually moved back into land management related topics due to time issues...and I was no expert...Connolley is. Thanks for your comment.--MONGO 11:34, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * A really good argument. I've stayed out of that case too, and even now I don't have a clear opinion on what should be done (other than that they must clarify this involvement issue), but your comments begin to sway me toward an opinion.
 * By the way, since probably no one ever bothered to thank you, thanks for all that you did in the olden days to keep our articles free of certain people's "Truth About 9/11". An important service that was seriously thankless. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 00:29, 27 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Couple of things: I noticed your comment too, Mongo, and thank you -- it was an inspired one.  Nail on the proverbial head.  (I can't get involved in that stuff -- I'm not an expert, and I don't have the stomach for all the fighting and stress.)  Also agree with Heimstern about all your struggle on the 9/11 nonsense a couple years back (just yesterday I heard one of those people interviewed on NPR; I was thinking -- what the hell?  hasn't this person ever heard of Occam's Razor?  and with our government's miserable record at keeping secrets, anyone who thinks something as giant as that would never have had a single Wikileak or whistleblower is smoking something rather potent indeed -- sometimes you just have to laugh).  Thank you for your continued work around this place; there are people who truly appreciate you.  All the best, Antandrus  (talk) 01:12, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Much thanks to all three of your comments...oddly enough though, I intend to resume work on a couple 9/11 articles in the near term as the landmark 10 year (has it really been that long) anniversary of the event is but a year away.
 * Though I personally believe that Connolley is far from perfect as am I, I see a comparable tale to be told between myself and him...in the case of climate change, I'm deeply concerned that we may have no possible (meaning economically affordable) way to turn the tide...I doubt that major changes are immediately forthcoming climate wise, but the long term (hundreds of years) feedback from doing little or nothing will be looked at by future generations as a serious blunder on our part. Sound, reasonable benchmarks for reduction of greenhouse gas and other pollutions need to be established. I thank all of you for all your contributions as well!--MONGO 10:32, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Another kudo for your perceptive statement. ScottyBerg (talk) 16:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Your friend Bishzilla pleased also.   bishzilla     ROA R R! !    18:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC).
 * Scotty and Bishzilla...I appreciate the feedback...well, I surely hate to see so much going on at arbcom regarding these issues over climate change and the editors there...there have been some errors that need to be addressed, but I can't support banning though that decision isn't mine to make...had I been on arbcom for that case, I would have had to recuse myself as I don't think I could have made an objective decision.--MONGO 03:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Great pic
And since I was spying on your page I noticed File:Thunderhead.anvil.jpg which is gorgeous William M. Connolley (talk) 11:14, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * A lucky shot...I was west of Omaha, Nebraska looking east (the storm was over Iowa) and the storm was tracking north...I'm just glad I wasn't under it as it did some major hail damage. I also wish I had a better camera with me at the time I took the shot to better absorb the low light conditions at the ground...the pic was edited to restore the actual lighting conditions...Keep the faith WMC.--MONGO 11:28, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

September 11 attacks
I see your point about Silverstein not flying the planes. Now, in equally good faith, let's also make the same point about Families of September 11, the documentary Flight 93, List of terrorist incidents, 2001, Post-9/11 legal issues, Survivor registry, United 93 film and World Trade Center (film). Or maybe you have some other reason for not wanting Silverstein's name displayed anywhere in connection with his property which was destroyed that day? Cheers, Bjenks (talk) 06:37, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Those see also links are related to the event...Silverstein isn't.--MONGO 06:43, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change/Proposed decision
Please note that contributors should not be voting here. I'd appreciate it if you'd remove your !vote (and reword if appropriate). What we are looking for is constructive criticism (such as alternate wordings or alternate remedies). If you aren't around I may remove your !vote myself, and you might want to then modify your comment. Thanks. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Dougweller (talk) 15:00, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Done.--MONGO 15:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Montana Pix
Are there any specific images you'd like for me to get when I'm in Glacier/Waterton Lakes NP in September? I'll be there, Yellowstone, central Idaho, Salt Lake City and points in between, so if there's something that's missing in one of your many Montana-related articles, I'll try to get it. When I get back, maybe I'll be motivated to tackle the summary article on Historic structures of Glacier National Park that I promised back int he spring.  Acroterion  (talk)  14:13, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OOOH....lemme go with you! Well, I'd have to quit my job so can't do that. Are you sticking to the roads or going backcountry? Let me look over what is missing and get back to you in a day or less.--MONGO 11:07, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It'll have to be near the roads, unless I can arrange for new hips for my wife in the next week and a half. Specifically, starting in SLC, up through Craters of the Moon, Ketchum, the Bitterroot Valley, Missoula, Columbia Falls, a couple of days in Glacier/Waterton Lakes, back down the east side of the mountains around Chouteau, and then four days of undefined activities in Ennis/Yellowstone/Grand Teton, Jackson, down to Park City, and back East. For what it's worth, my Droid will show Google Maps with the Wikipedia overlay, so I can see where the mountain peaks or other subjects with articles are in a topo or satellite context. I figured I could do wide reference shots for context so I could identify things later, then individual shots of peaks. This will depend on weather, schedule, and my wife's patience.   Acroterion  (talk)  11:51, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Obviously, I'll shoot peaks, lakes, bears (from an appropriately respectful distance), old log buildings, odd roadside structures, weather (preferably not fog or low clouds), vast scenic panoramas, mud pots, fumaroles, places that steam in the middle of the parking lot, bridges, mines, rock formations, as so on. My only problem is keeping track of what I want to shoot and knowing what I've shot once I'm back home.  Acroterion  (talk)  21:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That sounds wonderful. Bitteroot Valley is my old region from when I was a kid. I suppose anything along Going to the Sun Road in Glacier NP would be helpful though we have lots of pics of Lake McDonald and St. Mary Lake, not enough of surrounding peaks...also, many historic structures articles use oldish images courtesy of the feds which work fine, but newer ones would be nice too. I can ID most of the mountains from sight and/or using Google Earth to clarify if you get confused. In other regions like the Mission Range and ranges south of Missoula we don't have a lot of images I don't think, least none well linked via Commons it seems. If in the region near Chouteau, you'll be far east of the Rocky Mountain Front but it's hard to access that region around the Bob Marshall Wilderness anyway...it is really remote. We lack defined images of many of the easily seen peaks of the Tetons, especially the northern part of the range north of Mount Moran and also between Moran and Grand Teton itself and points south. I think Yellowstone, least from easily accessed spots if fairly well covered, but I imagine that more images would still be beneficial. I will look through Commons, see what we have and add more to this...if what we might need is on your direct itenerary, then that would be great!--MONGO 03:42, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I wanted to add that Google is slow to add geo-coordinated articles to their overlay...Commons images show up immediately almost, but the articles themselves have a long lag time...many months. I even had an inquiry recently about the W icon for a covered bridge being off by a half mile, so I adjusted it two weeks ago and it still hasn't been adjusted yet on Google Earth. Few of the numerous mountain stubs I have created for articles on mountains in Glacier NP are showing up yet on Google Earth...even ones I stubbed out back in April...so I don't know if these newer articles will be available via Google Maps yet either.--MONGO 03:51, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd pretty much assumed that Google hadn't picked up on any geo-coordinated links that have changed or been added since, say, April. This gives me a general idea of what to shoot, and while I agree that we have way enough images from the obvious viewpoints, there's probably ample scope for improvement or detail shots of individual features, as opposed to big vistas. Tripod shots of distant peaks with telephoto could be useful if the air's clear. Also, I intend to get as far back as I can into Waterton, which seems poorly represented, and to poke around on roads not taken when we were last there in 1999, like the North Fork Road, time permitting. In Yellowstone we have a bazillion images of the usual things, and surprisingly good coverage of geothermal features, so I'll have to scour Commons for what's missing. The new OF visitor center needs a shot, and the Myriad Basin behind the OF Inn is not represented, although it's really hard to get a useful composition - I've tried. Context shots of the UGB and Geyser Hill seem to be missing.
 * Along the Rocky Mountain Front, I'll see what can be done with tripod and telephoto; I know somebody who knows somebody with a cabin out west of Choteau, but we're not going there. The Bitterroot Valley and central Idaho seem entirely neglected, so I'll try for general coverage and context - those areas are new to me. For the Tetons, I should look through the archives I already have: while I don't have much north of Moran, I already have a fair number of shots along the length of the Tetons between Jackson and Moran, which might be croppable without much loss of quality - I have both film and digital from 1999 and 2007.
 * It was supposed to snow above 6500' last night all the way down to Missoula! Maybe there'll be some (not too much) photogenic snow when we're there.  Acroterion  (talk)  14:36, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If you can and are interested, it would be really awesome if you added some things to OpenStreetMap. Like Wikipedia, changes go into effect immediately. (or might take a minute)  Things like making sure mountain peaks are in the right place are useful, to adding points of interest and other things.
 * Work is being done on the Toolserver to provide better integration between OSM, Wikipedia, making Wikipedia coordinates available, and allowing OSM data to be used for maps on Wikipedia. --Aude (talk) 16:21, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Another free-content project/time sump?! With maps - a personal weakness of mine. Oh hell, I've signed up.   Acroterion  (talk)  17:17, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Acroterion, I'm looking over images and that will take a lot of time...I could spend weeks at Commons just categorizing images and creating pages that have related images so they are easier to locate...we have a lot of orphans I see in need of categorizing. In addition, geotagging is sorely needed and that may be an immediate project I might commence this evening even...Some of the images are quite good...In Glacier...we do lack images of the northwest region...that road is unpaved but well graded the border region...FYI..I saw it snow a foot in Kalispell in late August (1993) but it was mostly gone the next day...we have but one image of Kintla Lake..and two of NRHP things you uploaded]....two of the Bitterroot Range...etc...I looked over some of the sawtooth Range images and saw some decent shots...Craters of the Moon NM is either poorly represented or just poorly linked...looking over my stubs just of mountains of Glacier NP, less than 10% have images on Commons or generally free use images available via Flicker I could use. Don't feel that just images of buildings and mountains are needed either...we lack good resolution imagery of much of the native flora to the region you are going to...not trees so much, but flowering plants etc. Have I made it too much of a project yet? Hah...--MONGO 23:58, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oops...This image is tagged as being Triple Divide Peak but I think it is actually Mount Jackson...like I said...lots of work to do at Commons...--MONGO 00:03, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I was also wondering if you plan on going over the Beartooth Highway...if so we have few images from that region I think...--MONGO 00:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Flora will be scarce this time of year, but I'll see what appears. While I or my wife can identify flowering stuff, herbaceous plants, not so well, so that will be a low priority. I figured I'd seek out some of the more accessible places for which I uploaded images of buildings. I can probably do better than HABS or the NPS guy who got detailed to go take pictures of everything (although in fairness, I worked for the NPS in graduate school and was detailed to document abandoned buildings in Martin Luther King NHS, so I was once that guy). I doubt we'll go over the Beartooth this time, but might do the Chief Joseph Highway toward Cody. I do have some film shots of the Beartooth from 1999, but they need a lot of work - I shot negatives when I should have stuck to Kodachrome, and they're grainy. The weather wasn't good and there was a lot of smoke in the area.  Acroterion  (talk)  01:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Some asters and gentians may still be blooming. Also, you may see some seed heads and fruit. Pictures of the leaves and involucral bracts help identify the species; flowers and fruit are often not adequate. For documenting the location of an image, before I had my GPS, I took pictures of road and trail signs, mileposts, altimeter, odometer and pedometer readings, etc. Also, I was careful to set the time of my camera so that it was accurate and could be correlated with any notes that I took. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Regarding Craters of the Moon: If you take a look at the Commons:Category:Craters of the Moon National Monument instead of the gallery, you wil find that I uploaded everything I liked from the NPS website. It's another of "my" parks on deWP and regarded as lesenswert (~good) there: Craters of the Moon National Monument. --h-stt !?  06:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh...I forgot to check the cats...maybe we can transfer those images to the Craters of the Moon page at Commons...--MONGO 01:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye out; I have two forms of GPS, so I should be able to keep reasonable records. I expect I'll need help with identification once I upload: assuming I have useful images, they might start out as File:Glacier seed head 1.jpg until they're identified and I can move them to a more precise filename. If I take the number of images discussed here it will be a multi-month project to refine the images, verify, upload, tag and categorize.  Acroterion  (talk)  19:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If you go from Yellowstone to Glacier (or the other way), I might be interested in pictures of Grant-Kohrs Ranch NHS at Dear Lodge (they have a lot of living history stuff going on this summer). And the usual request: typical images of small towns. Any small town. Main street with a bank or a post office. A church plus the buildings around it. Not details, but the large frame. We often already have the court houses of county seats, but pretty much anything else is missing in most sparsely populated regions. Same is true for lesser known mountain ranges and smaller rivers. Almost any picture of those places would be the first we have. But please don't overdo it, have fun in the first place. It would be nice though, if you would take a few pictures of the typical places that are not special and you probably would not deem worthy of a picture. Those are the ones we usually don't have. Thanks in advance. --h-stt !?  22:39, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * We might get to Grant-Kohrs - we were there in 1999 and liked it, but there wasn't any such thing as a free online encyclopedia and my shots from that visit aren't of much encyclopedic use. I tend to shoot weird things in small towns, so that's not much of a problem - see my images from Newcastle, Wyoming. I will have to be judicious - I wish to remain married, and there are limits to my wife's patience.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:49, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll watch the Commons cats for new images. Thanks for your offer and have a good trip. --h-stt !?  06:42, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I've got about 3200 images in all, of maybe 700-900 subjects, allowing for bracketing, experiments and alternate compositions. Mountain peaks, flowers, seedheads, historic buildings, town streetscapes, thermal features and art for art's sake. It took all of yesterday evening to get them off the cards and into the system, including a scare when one 16GB card claimed it was corrupted. Happily, they make software to deal with that, and everything came through unscathed. I've started uploading images and will go as time permits - only two so far, both of the new part of Dulles Airport. The weather in Glacier was variable, with a stubborn cloud layer between 5000 and 6000 feet, but I've got images of most peaks visible from the Sun road and Many Glacier. I've also got some images from along the Rocky Mountain front through a long lens - I haven't checked how they turned out yet. I think I have images of every Teton peak in morning or midday light. I was thinking of setting up a Flickr account for unidentified subjects, particularly botanical images and mountains, and uploading them there for identification before processing and uploading to Commons.  Acroterion  (talk)  19:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds great...I'm not surprised that you had low clouds in Glacier this time of year...though it is a 50-50 thing since sometimes late summer early fall there can be dry and balmy too...even into mid October and then winter arrives in 6 hours after that! There are a number of options available to you...you could load as many pics as you feel are decent to a page at Commons in your userspace there...link me to it, and since I see topo maps almost in 3D anyway, I bet I can ID most images of the mountains...I also use google earth to help ID places too..so unless a peak is extremely obscure, we'll ID it. Once identified, I'll geotag it so it shows up at google earth and other places if you like...For biota, I would contact User:Wsiegmund at his talkpage...he is excellent at identifying plants and species in general also has many contacts at Commons and elsewhere that he may be able to direct you to. He has uploaded many thousands of images...all his own work....I'll alert him to this conversation as he may have further advice.--MONGO 13:14, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Apparently, winter arrived a few hours after we left, with 4-8 inches of snow. I've started uploading image of things that are not in doubt, while I organize my notes on locations - mostly recorded in the form of GPS traces which I should be able to cross-reference against image data. We'll see. I'll start uploading some doubtful images once I've worked them over a little bit in Photoshop. As I said, this will take a while.   Acroterion  (talk)  14:52, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I find GPSPhotoLinker helpful. It adds location data from a GPX file to JPG files. Commons:Commons:Tools/Commonist works well and extracts the GPS data from geocoded JPG files and fills in the corresponding fields of the geotag. The default uploader may do this as well. I'll try to help with plant identifications. Please send me a link to your unknown images. Congratulations on a successful trip. Walter Siegmund (talk) 20:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll investigate GPSPhotoLinker. I haven't uploaded anything botanical yet - I'm still assessing what I've got so far and am picking photos to upload somewhat at random. As Mongo suggests, I'll probably upload to a directory in my Commons userspace and move the files to more appropriate names in the filespace once they're properly attributed. I'll probably place a directory on my main [Commons user page] to point to individual files.  Acroterion  (talk)  20:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've started a subpage at my Commons space with images of plants that need identification. I can move them to a more descriptive title once they're properly attributed.  I'll do something similar with mountains once I get those a little better organied and have uploaded those whose identifications I'm certain of.   Acroterion  (talk)  19:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Cheers!
Good to see you are busy editing and helping maintain articles :) Regret I don't have much time for editing, but hope to do some more.

Anyway, from this past weekend, here's construction progress of One World Trade Center. Cheers. --Aude (talk) 21:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah...nice shot...I read the other day it was now over 350 feet...only 1,426 feet left! Nice to hear from you...yes, do resume if and when you have time...you are sorely missed.--MONGO 03:45, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd like to do another featured article or two... just need to try not to get too distracted on the talk pages and just work on articles with what time I can spare. (and have reviewing help) --Aude (talk) 16:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me know..I can add what I can and I promise not to nominate it for FA as I did after you did ALL the work on Banff NP...sorry about that one.--MONGO 00:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Triple Divide Peak
H, thanks for the notice. I exchanged the image and improved the description of both images. Keep on with the good work. --h-stt !?  07:38, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, you do great work..I hope the translation tool I used for the conversation at your usertalk at the German Wikipedia wasn't too crummy...--MONGO 22:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

WT:RFAR-CC
Please refactor your comment in the last section of the talk page for the RFAR. "Denialist" is an extremelhy offensive term; it equates skeptics of the AGW theory of global warming with holocaust deniers and AIDS deniers. As someone who is the son-in-law of one of the few Jewish survivors of Bialystok and who is very close to someone who has been HIV+ for 29 years, I have a real problem with that formulation. I have come to your talk page to ask you because I am not one of your detractors; in fact, I supported your second RFA and was one of the more strident opponents of Tango's second RFA, because of his mistreatment of you with that vexing exchange with Thomas Basboll. I'm not asking you to retract your statement (although I disagree with it), but please remove the "denier" from the statement.  Horologium  (talk) 00:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you.  Horologium  (talk) 00:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a problem...best wishes.--MONGO 01:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

CC ArbCom
Please stop treating the CC ArbCom case as if it is simply a disagreement between majority viewpoint editors and minority/fringe view point editors. The reality is far more complex. You've seen enough of my edits that I don't prescribe to minority/fringe view points, so I ask that you reconsider some of your recent posts. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 02:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * From your perspective, what is the main issue then?--MONGO 02:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, as you may have noticed in my work on 9/11 conspiracy theories, Moon landing conspiracy theories, Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories, etc. I seem to have a bizarre interest in conspiracy theories, but not to promote them, but to debunk them. Anyway, when I first heard about Climategate, I found the notion of a global conspiracy of scientists to be ridiculous and went to check out our article on the topic.  Much to my surprise, our article didn't actually explain what the conspiracy theorists were claiming.  So I tried adding them to the article.  For some strange reason, this got me labeled as a skeptic.  Apparently, we have editors who don't understand that explaining minority and fringe theories is not the same thing as agreeing with them.  So, you have a group of editors who repeatedly remove any mention of these viewpoints in articles about these view points.  It would be the equivalent of me removing the section on controlled demolition in our 9/11 conspiracies article because I don't want people to find out about controlled demolition conspiracy theories.  Or me nominating the article Loose Change for deletion because I don't want people to know about this movie.  Anyway, I can go on further, but hopefully this gives you some insight into what is going on in the CC topic space. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 16:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, and to clarify, this doesn't mean that we don't have skeptics who are actively trying to push anti-AGW viewpoint in our science articles. We do and that's a problem as well. I'm just trying to explain that there's more than one dispute going on here. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 16:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

At the employ of the United States Department of Homeland Security (USDHS)
It has been alleged on Talk:September_11_attacks that you were once and perhaps still are an employee of the United States Department of Homeland Security (USDHS). Can you please confirm or deny. As I alluded to that fact in a recent comment on that same page, I would like to give you the opportunity to address that question. Thank you. Oclupak (talk) 16:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the opportunity to address your concerns...where I did work and where I work now are none of your business...but if you start to see black helicopters following you around don't be surprised....

Removal of section " Failure to prevent the attacks" from 9/11 attacks talk page
I noticed that you removed the section " Failure to prevent the attacks" from the 9/11 attacks talk page yesterday and moved it unceremoniously to Talk:September_11_attacks/Archive_53 without a single word of explanation. Please explain why? Oclupak (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No different than removing vandalism (or conspiracy theory stuipidities, same thing) from the article itself...least I archived instead of simply deleting it...if you want to reread the nonsense you wrote, it's in archive 53...the talkpage is for discussing ways to make the article better...it should be obvious we're not going to add a bunch of idiotic conspiracy theory junk to the article...

Conflict of interest notice
I have posted my view of the conflict of interest issue on the Conflict of interest noticeboard. It is not my desire to harrass (quite the contrary); I only wish to maintain maximum article quality with a neutral point of view. Conflicts of interest tend to be counterproductive toward maintaining NPOV. Wildbear (talk) 07:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure you do...--MONGO 00:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

When you are done pushing the DHS agenda
MONGO - just lit up Notable figures in Montana history. If you can think of anyone we are missing (there are dozens, I am sure) let me know. Or just get your DHS buddies to conspire to include some really radical Montana progressives that believe the Mormons were behind 9/11. Any help is apreciated.--Mike Cline (talk) 04:06, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The conspiracy theory peddlers truly hate my guts...and I'm glad they do...if I make their "editing experience" here unpleasant then so be it. This is an encyclopedia, not some blog...I think it's time to start tracking their edits and see which ones of them I can prove are previously banned editors...their patterns are the same and the MO they use is the same...they have tried repeatedly to get me banned from 9/11 articles and they fail every single time and they always will. Your list looks pretty complete actually...but I'll check out other stuff and see if anything pops up.--MONGO 00:25, 12 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Most conspiracy theories age poorly, so time has a tendency to heal these things, as the peddlers will look more and more ridiculous with each passing year. Our government has a wretched time keeping even the most basic secrets, so the idea they planted explosives in the towers, or whatever the conspiracy theory du jour happens to be, and no one has leaked documentary evidence yet, is so utterly absurd that I still laugh every time I hear it (particularly with a change in administration!)  I've met a lot of conspiracy nuts in my life, and they have many things in common it wouldn't be polite to mention here, but I'm sure I could find a psychological study to back me up.  Anyway, keep up the good work.  William of Ockham had it right more than seven hundred years ago. Antandrus  (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * There are some that have published books on the matter...and a few that have produced some truly silly videos...they have at times registered here and/or used just their IP...they have a COI since they might lose book sales or ad fees if their videos don't get enough hits. I make nary one single dime to keep the silliness at bay, and it is mostly thankless...most of the time, someone either somewhat sympathetic to their efforts of naive of what those talkpages are like try to slap a civility warning on me, or worse, block me for a week(!) and get desysopped partly because of it. I could probably be less combative with the CTer's, but since most of them add basicallly zero to the website, I can't see how they're much more than a drain on server space.--MONGO 01:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the "Restored" section you had created on my talk page
MONGO, I moved the message you had written on my talk page to the "Administrators' noticeboard" section, created by Tarage a few days ago and then, proceeded to delete the redundant "Restored" section you had created. Just so that you will know why it has vanished, should you look or it. Oclupak (talk) 12:30, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

AN/I
Thanks. I figured it was dead and gone, but I appreciate it. I've been sick the last few days so my attention to it has been a bit lacking. --Tarage (talk) 20:58, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Next step in dealing with any further CT disruption is to gather links and post them at arbitration enforcement noticeboard. But it's important to ensure all editors understand that there are discretionary sanctions that can be imposed if they persist with their agenda....and we both need to inform them of such potentialities on their talkpages as politely as possible.--MONGO 02:23, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Removal of sourced content
You have removed sourced content from Collapse of the World Trade Center in this edit. You have justified your removal by stating that it would not be wholly true and that the source would be non-English.


 * Is your statement that the content would not be wholly true your personal assessment, or do you have any sources for the statement?


 * Do you agree that non-English sources are acceptable and should be replaced by an English source only if a better English source for the content exists?

Cs32en  Talk to me  21:58, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If you persist in promoting conspiracy theories here either via edits, talkpage distractions or via links to conspiracy theory websites, then you risk the chance of having discretionary sanctions imposed as I mentioned at your talkpage.--MONGO 22:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * The source is ZDF, one of the two large public television stations in Germany. While the text covers conspiracy theories, this is a factual statement from the TV station itself that is not attributed or ascribed to any of the theories. I you need a verbatim quote and a translation, I can provide both. Cs32en   Talk to me  22:07, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I already translated it...you're correct that the website is not in and of itself a CT website, it is still not an English language ref and it is pretty obvious you're trying to promote an agenda by linking to it....the translation I have rough is as follows from this ref you provided here:

The long night of the conspiracy theories an other view of 9/11

''In exciting documentation, critics do not tell its version of the events of the 11th of September 2001 and why Osama bin Laden nine years after that still grasped is. ''

''The production forms the prelude of the long night "102 minutes" of the American History Channels. Between the impact of the first airplane into the World Trade Center and the collapse of the second tower, exactly 102 minutes passed, of 8.46 clock until 10.28 clock local time. Until now unknown filming and sound recordings reconstruct the events in real time. Videos of resident, records of supervision cameras and with cuts of emergency call headquarters sit down like a Puzzle part for part together to a moving and thrilling documentation.''

''Hunt on Osama bin Laden he the usually sought man of the world is. Head money 27 million Euro. The best elite units of the world hunt it. Yet always the Saudi al-Kaida-boss seems to be its Häschern a step ahead. Many ask itself: Do the Americans want to catch it generally? Nevertheless it serves them as an establishment for its expeditions against the terrorism. Perhaps is am store already since years dead and will receive only of the CIA with falsified video and Audiobotschaften artificially alive? On the heels of the terror boss the film of Michael Renz and Michael Rudin proceeds on the trace of the most important theories round around the previously unsuccessful hunt after am store. What has it am with the mysterious Audiobotschaften store on itself? Is the man explained on the video actual that saudi, the America already long the 11th September ago 2001 the war? To word, hunter such as hunted come: For example a member of the secret special unit delta Force, that had struggled here itself up to few meters at the terror boss, and former way companions of Osama bin Laden that explain how he creates it evidently again and again to escape its hunters.''

The website promoting the show goes on to state: (making serious false claims as WTC suffered the destruction of a major support column...see:World Trade Center 7....

''The third tower on the 11th of September 2001 not only the Twin tower collapsed in New York. Buildings 7, that third-highest house of the World Trade Center of complex, was hardly damaged external when it collapsed seven hours after the Twin Towers in itself. The 47 floors collapsed in few seconds, symmetrical, "cleanly" - as would have been burst it by discontinuance pro purposefully. The tenants of the building 7 were among other things the secret service CIA and that authority New York to the defense of terror attacks. The official version of the collapse read: Here refuse end ruins of the Twin Towers set the building on fire, what led last of all to the collapse. For the followers of the numerous conspiracy theories to the 11th of September, the WTC7 plays an important role. Was the building burst in order to destroy proofs? Was the WTC7 "preserve the command headquarters of that culprit" of the 11.September? The Koproduktion of the BBC and the ZDF investigates many traces and lets come numerous experts and witnesses to word. Under that Barry Jennings, that was rescued as more last out of the burning WTC7, as well as that fire department boss former New York Nigro, that gave its men prematurely the command, served to remove itself of the building. ''--MONGO 22:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC)


 * "The 47 floors collapsed in few seconds, symmetrically" and "The official version of the collapse read: Falling [pieces of] debris from the twin towers have set fire to the building, which ultimately led to the collapse." are statements from the ZDF, they are not quotes from other people. Some parts of the "translation" above are correct, but others are rather obscure or misleading. Cs32en   Talk to me  22:55, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Erh? That is a blurb/teaser text to make people watch a show about conspiracy theory... and as such it definitively isn't a reliable source. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 23:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The ZDF, a reliable source, classifies the broadcast as a documentary, not as a "show". Which are the "serious false claims" in the source, in your view? Cs32en   Talk to me  23:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Promotional material is never reliable for anything other than its existence. And this is promotional material - not journalism. It has very little to do with whether the ZDF is generally a reliable source or not. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 23:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC) [and i have no idea whether it is factually correct or not - i'm not interested in the 9/11 incident, outside of general curiosity --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 23:37, 18 September 2010 (UTC)]
 * I've added Collapse of the World Trade Center to my watchlist. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:29, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Would you consider factual statements from the documentary itself as promotional? Cs32en   Talk to me  23:43, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Depends on the context within which it was said, and the general focus of the documentary. Documentaries are not created equal, if the focus in a documentary is about a fringe topic, then very little of it is usable as anything other than a presentation of views within the context of that fringe. On the other hand if the documentary is well-balanced, journalistic, presenting the mainstream viewpoint succinctly, and addressing when views are fringe, then comments/statements/views could be usable. ZDF here makes it clear that this is about a conspiracy theory, and as such it may be a source to such conspiracy theories - but again context matters. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 23:50, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's WP:UNDUE anyway. Why would we mention WP:FRINGE theories in this article? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 00:13, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Haven't looked at the page. I only attached myself to this because i read and understand German, as well as watch ZDF often. If it is fringe, and we aren't describing what fringe views there are on a topic (i have no idea, since as i say, i've got no interest in the topic), then it is most certainly undue. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2010 (UTC) [ie. i do not have the background knowledge to determine whether that particular tidbid is fringe or not - all i can say is that the documentary is describing a conspiracy theory, and what caveats are attached to such presentations :) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 00:21, 19 September 2010 (UTC)]
 * The content that was deleted did not include any WP:FRINGE theories. Cs32en   Talk to me  00:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The documentary is here. It's in German, however. You can see that it includes interviews with various people who offer different viewpoints. While the documentary sometimes refers to "conspiracy theories", the interviewees that offer views that differ from the official explanation are generally not being described as "conspiracy theorists". For example, at 15:14, the documentary refers to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth as "a group of architects and engineers" that have joined "to critically review the official investiagations into September 11. Richard Gage is a member of the American Institute of Architects and has practiced in California for 20 years." It also refers to the group's members as "experts". Some of the factual statements rather support viewpoints from interviewees that agree with the conclusions of the official investigations, while other statements support views from interviewees who disagree with those conclusions. But this is all in German, and it may be quite difficult to sort these things out given the confrontational climate in that topic area. Cs32en   Talk to me  00:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Can only be seen by IP's within Germany. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 01:03, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:NONENG says that non-English sources may be used if "no English source of equal quality can be found that contains the relevant material." Other specific requirements must be satisfied as well. In most cases, it is difficult to justify using a non-English source for a topic that is well-covered in English. That is certainly true for World Trade Center collapse and related articles. Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:46, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. But then again, as a completely outsider to this, i have no idea, as to what sources are available :) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 01:04, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Kim..forgive the rudimentary translation but I use this website to do free translations...my lousy mastery of German dictates I use a third party source that may not be entirely accurate in the translation. But I concur with yours, Wsiegmund and A Quest For Knowledge in that we should use English refs in the English wiki unless we have no alternative...and that this ref is nothing more than an ad for a show about the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11...and as such, is an inadequate ref anyway. Kim, the reports regarding the collapse of the World Trade center are pretty boring to read. One of the problems with the article Collapse of the World Trade Center is that for it to be even a good article, much less a featured one, we need some editors with structural engineering and related disciplines to improve the engineering aspects of that article...much of the engineering reports about how the buildings collapsed is technical jargon not easily translated into more easily readable prose. There have been more than a dozen independent engineering studies conducted on various aspects of the collapse, some dealing with metallurgy, others that have examined fire and others that have investigated design issues. When the U.S. Government first started working on finding out how the buildings collapsed, (aside from the obvious which was high speed impact by wide body jets, extensive fires, and peripheral damage to surrounding structures and infrastructure), they appointed the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to lead the investigation...that agency specializes in disaster response more than engineering in itself...so after preliminary reports came out from FEMA, the questions regarding how the buildings collapsed were not adequately addressed, so the feds had the National Institude of Standards and Technology (NIST) take over since they have that expertise, though had never had to deal with such a massive study..hence, the final reports took years to produce. These reports (and again, they aren't "fun" to read) can be found by following the links from this page I've linked here...these same reports are cited in various articles on this website as well.--MONGO 01:24, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I have to admit that i didn't even look at your translation :) As for the rest, probably correct - but i have enough with one area that is overrun with conspiracy theory. If you ever want german or danish translated, then feel free to call upon me.. i won't promise an accurate translation, but a decent one i can do. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 22:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good...will keep that in mind.--MONGO 02:47, 21 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Cs32en...that Richard Gage guy is a bit off his rocker it seems...--MONGO 02:02, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Re next moves
I should be finished with all the Montana Lake lists in the next few weeks. I work on them most in airplanes high over the country side. Once they are done, the Flathead and Glacier County lists can be refactored into a Glacier NP list that will give you alot of stubs to work on. I think the Glacier NP trail article would be great. See: Trails of Yellowstone National Park. The Nat Geo Trails Illustrated Maps are really great sources here, plus I am sure there is a lot of historical bits and pieces about the exploration and creation of trails in the park.--Mike Cline (talk) 15:16, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a plan...--MONGO 21:48, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

NPOV tag
Hi, I've just come across an NPOV tag you added in March, and it's not clear what your concern is. If you still have concerns, please elaborate on the talk page such that somebody might one day fix them. cheers, Rd232 talk 18:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I removed it...reread the article and though it seems more like an opinion piece than a NPOV article, I don't have time at present to detail it's various problems.--MONGO 12:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

User talk:VsevolodKrolikov
Hi MONGO. Please refrain from bullying other editors by making unsubstantiated allegations regarding their edits. Please actually read the edits you are making and/or reverting. Also, when placing notices as you did here, it might be good to disclose that you were yourself blocked under this provision in 2008. All in all, as we discussed at my talk page last month, it really might be best if you backed off from this area as I think the manner and past history of your involvement may be generating more heat than light, and may actually be obstructing legitimate improvement of the article, as I believe is in danger of happening in this case. Let me be clear that this is in no way a threat or even a warning, just a friendly reminder of how we work here. It's up to you what you do with it. --John (talk) 17:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The person that should have been blocked for POV pushing 9/11 conspiracy theories was you...but well, we didn't have the arbcom case in place when you were trying to wreck the articles...one of the reasons several 9/11 related articles become featured levels ones is because of my contributions...all I ever saw you do to them was support conspiracy theorist at the expense of those that have always supported the facts. My conversation with Vsevold wasn't in any way "bullying" as you describe it...lets face facts here...you know I don't like you at all, I never approved of your support of Cters...but even taking our previous disagreements into consideration, I supported your later bid at becoming an admin...don't you ever again accuse me of not being able to AGF...it is you that needs to stop "warning" me about my involvement in 9/11 articles. Please do not respond here...in fact, I would really prefer you not comment on my pages here again...just a "friendly reminder". I hope I am crystal clear.--MONGO 18:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As another "friendly reminer"...the admin that blocked me was also a conspiracy theory supporter...and was later DEADMINNED...larger due to his incapacity to admit that his ridiculous block of me was wrong..it was definitely the catalyst that led to his desysopping, whether you choose to see it that way or not.--MONGO 18:17, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Further...for thos who wish to see the last conversation between User:John and myself...here it is...more of the same nonsense...User:John is in a position as an admin to help us weed out the conspiracy theorist from underminning our 9/11 articles but chooses instead to harass me about my fact based efforts to keep CT lunacy at bay...good work admin John...way to go! Borderline abuse of tools and position...wonderful.--MONGO 18:33, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Happy MONGO's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk  • 01:10, 26 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Well-deserved. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Antandrus  (talk) 01:16, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Very true. Happy MONGO day! Guettarda (talk) 02:13, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Wow...very much appreciated Rlevse....and thanks for the support Antandrus and Guettarda. Kind of speechless...pretty odd for MONGO.--MONGO 03:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * This should have happened like, several years ago, in my opinion. Happy MONGO's Day, Wikipedia! Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Cheers MONGO, you salty dog ;-) --Take care, David  Shankbone  03:59, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks bunches...I better be a good MONGO now.--MONGO 04:11, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * [Zilla wishes to contribute congratulatory gift, but is unsure what might be acceptable. ] On Mongo's day, can have ride in comfy pocket, little Mongo! ...or can have nap in Bishzilla's comfy water bed, very exclusive offer!    bishzilla     ROA R R! !    04:22, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
 * Zilla...any offer from you is always a good offer for me...even ones that require a hazmat suit be worn at all times! I graciously accept!--MONGO 04:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hazmat..? [Bishzilla's vocabulary is challenged. Looks up Hazmat suit in online encyclopedia. Is pleased.] Ha! Cosy garment! Make fine gifts! [Orders tiny suit for little MONGO from online supplier. ]    bishzilla     ROA R R! !    10:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
 * What a deal...MONGO much pleased and offers small tidbid of protein morsel to mighty zilla.--MONGO 16:16, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * [Bishzilla much intrigued by handsome marine mammal. ] "Long and slender"? "Bluish-grey"? Hmmmm. Not hungry today! Cute mammal join Zilla harem ?   bishzilla     ROA R R! !    16:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
 * MONGO dear, the accolades are most well-deserved, but did you have to show Bishzilla how to use my VISA card on the web? Bishonen | talk 16:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC).
 * Those charges weren't because of Zilla...she reported that card missing and when the culprit turns up...he/she will have to deal with the might Zilla.--MONGO 22:13, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

It's raining thanks spam!

 * Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
 * There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
 * If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks &bull; Ling.Nut (talk) 02:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Glacier images
I'm uploading some peaks in Glacier. It's very slow, as my upload speed is dismal at the office and worse at home (although there's a fiber salesman who's stopping by the office tomorrow promising big bandwidth for cheap, finger crossed). I'll get better coords and descriptions, and will try to upload the context images as well. So far they're all on the east side from the Sun Road, taken in a three-hour window of nice sky. I can move them to more descriptive titles once we've hung names on them. It'll probably take a couple of days to get all up.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:28, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Good..I'll check commons and see what you have so far and recheck as time goes on...I'm usually able to ID mountain pics, especially ones off Sun Road.--MONGO 01:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll have a few more shortly - uploading hasn't gone smoothly today.  Acroterion  (talk)  01:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * This one is definitely Little Chief Mountain...Nice Shot...!--MONGO 01:51, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And already moved to the article....--MONGO 01:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * This one is Dusty Star Mountain...I need to stub that one.
 * This one is Singleshot Mountain..and I think if you took that from Sun Road you where looking north.......looks like another stub I missed.
 * Yes, north, it's in full sun.  Acroterion  (talk)  02:37, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Positive this is Mount Jackson (Montana)...really good shot there!
 * Mount Jackson in background, Citadel Mountain north flank at left.--MONGO 02:08, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * More on the way from Logan Pass along the Garden Wall.  Acroterion  (talk)  02:34, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Those are fantastic. Keep up the good work both of you guys ... Antandrus  (talk) 02:36, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * But, but but...Acroterion had all the fun...I haven't been to Glacier NP in 10 years...oh well. Someday I'll go home again.--MONGO 02:46, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Wild Goose Island in St. Mary Lake with Dusty Star Mountain, Little Chief and Mahtotopa Mountain center to far left
 * Great shot along Continental divide...right to left, Pollock Mountain, Bishops Cap, Mount Gould
 * View from Logan Pass looking north
 * Definitely Pollock Mountain...super


 * You'll see that the weather was closing in as time went on.  Acroterion  (talk)  03:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Added this one to Clements Mountain...all your shots are better than existing ones...the pic still in the Clements Mountain infobox was one I found on Flickr.--MONGO 03:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note...I'm stopped at NP image 7...will resume with number 8 at your uploads tomorrow or by the weekend...these are all super.--MONGO 03:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)


 * This is Bishops Cap...nice.
 * This is Haystack Butte...and unnamed peak in back
 * I think 13 is Boulder Ridge. If you look at 15 it has Wynn Mountain on the right and Boulder Ridge on the left, as I read the topo.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:10, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Images 13 and 15 are both Wynn Mountain from different vantage points, or distances...Boulder Ridge is entirely tree covered according to Google Earth...if you have Google earth installed, I can email you a 3D shot of Wynn Mountain tomorrow...you took some great shots...the project benefits greatly from your trip.--MONGO 04:22, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I benefited greatly from the trip too, and was wishing I was back there, although it's a nice time of the year here and I'll be spending the day by the Chesapeake Bay tomorrow. Can't complain. The topo map shows Boulder Ridge as tree-covered too, so I think my perspective is askew. Wynn Mountain is a bit contorted on Google Earth.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:29, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I have some other peaks I haven't uploaded yet, as the images either suffer from severe backlighting or the general murkiness that you can see in some of the later shots from Logan Pass - the weather got worse quickly, and the images need work or are just poor, though they might look OK if downsampled. I also have more Teton images that I need to go through.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * All so far are excellent..some may qualify for featured level...that is the opinion of one other person as well. I even very much liked the surreal image taken at Swiftcurrent Lake of Grinnell and Mount Wilbur lurking in the background at right....I'll look forward to any Teton or other peaks you may have and other images you did.--MONGO 12:07, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

The storm at Many Glacier was entertaining, with an overall coppery tint to the sky that is reflected in the sepia-like image (which is in full color). Check my contributions of 30 September - there are a bunch of Teton peaks there, and I'll have a few more. The folks at Commons FPC are very sensitive to image noise, and I think my camera does have a noisy sensor, so there might be criticism there - not much I can do but buy a new camera - I've been pricing them for a while now but have been waiting for business to pick up first.  Acroterion  (talk)  23:55, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I will check there...FPC at Commons or here is a bloodbath at times...I had but one image I have taken nominated for FP and it was unpleasant...I didn't nominate it and though I appreciate someone else thinking it was good enough, it wasn't a lot of fun having the work torn down....something about "artwork" with a camera seems more personal to have others critique it than my editing here...so, though I think you've produced some great work, I won't put you through that FPC gauntlet!--MONGO 01:33, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The problem with images is that you can't fix them beyond a certain point, while you can always improve text. Having been through six years of design school and twenty-five years of architecture practice, I have a thick skin for that sort of criticism - you don't survive design juries without learning how to take far worse than FPC can dish out.  Acroterion  (talk)  02:07, 14 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh wow, what great images. [/me steals the Swiftcurrent Lake Storm and runs off with it to own talkpage. ] Bishonen | talk 04:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC).
 * They are nice ones...they exceed in quality the existing images we had available to us and he has produced others we needed as we had none.--MONGO 05:01, 14 November 2010 (UTC)



Other images.....
 * Mount Cannon...added
 * Open Canyon and Mount Hunt at left...a great image for two articles that need at least a stub Open Canyon and Mount Hunt (Wyoming)
 * Mount Moran...nice image now added to Mount Moran...Falling Ice Glacier (no image before) and Skillet Glacier (previous image lousy)
 * Granite Canyon no previous image of it
 * Death Canyon...Compliments existing image of Death Canyon but taken from Jackson Hole
 * Mount Grinnell..in Glacier NP...no previous image
 * Static Peak...no previous image
 * South Teton‎...no previous image
 * Middle Teton...much better pic
 * Buck Mountain...no previous image
 * Mount Wister...no previous image

Teton peaks

 * Some new Teton images for you, noted here to spare you having to cull through my category refinements - I'm reorganizing the Commons categories so that "Grand Teton" refers only to the peak and nothing else.
 * Cathedral Group wide
 * Cathedral Group tight
 * Disappointment Peak (please check my assessment, I think I'm right)
 * Yes, Disappointment Peak is the rocky prominance below Grand, partially obscuring Garnet Canyon with Middle Teton at left...--MONGO 01:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Garnet Canyon
 * Avalanche Canyon (I'm pretty sure of Mt. Wister, less so of the others)
 * I adjusted this one...you're looking at the south fork of Avalanche Canyon...the big peak at left is Buck Mountain and Mount Wister is at right...a fine image!--MONGO 02:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Teewinot wide, showing the abrupt transition from mountain to Jackson Hole
 * Teewinot mid crop
 * Teewinot tight crop
 * I've added all the above images to the articles...very nice...the Teewinot Mountain article should possibly do well with a Commons page just for it like the one for Grand Teton...and then all linked together under a super category of Teton Range Peaks/Mountains.--MONGO 02:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Also:
 * Snake River Canyon
 * bear trap and scenery  Acroterion  (talk)  21:33, 22 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks great...you've been busy at Commons...I'll probably look things over in greater detail this Friday...--MONGO 03:20, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

More Teton peaks

 * Traverse and Bivouac Peaks, with Rolling Thunder Mountain behind
 * Mt. Woodring
 * Eagles Rest Peak
 * Rockchuck Peak
 * Cathedral Group/Symmetry Spire/St John/Rockchuck
 * Mt. St. John
 * Symmetry Spire/Ice Point
 * Thor Peak
 * yet another Teewinot
 * Salt River range, maybe with Haystack Peak
 * I believe that is Haystack Peak...or some high slopes of it as it may be slightly east of these and just out of view.--MONGO 23:31, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
 * All above images used in appropriate articles...many had no images...thank you!--MONGO 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Salt River Range
 * Rendezvous Mountain

I've found that Google Earth's synthesized terrain view is extremely helpful in matching a given image to a viewpoint and identifying the subject, provided I'm not running Photoshop at the same time. Both are real resource hogs.  Acroterion  (talk)  21:04, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh wowwie...good. I use Google earth all the time to ID spots...but the Teton Range is easy for me...I worked there for a number of years in the 90's. Heading to Commons to check these out....--MONGO 00:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sawtooth Range
 * Sawtooth Valley
 * Added image to article Galena Summit--MONGO 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Salt River Pass
 * South Park south of Jackson
 * Rendezvous Peak (as opposed to Rendezvous Mountain
 * Used this image to build a new stub...nice--MONGO 00:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Rendezvous Mountain
 * I'm at a halt until I get Photoshop set up again on another computer - my old computer bluescreened last night and isn't worth the trouble to fix, but I have to wrangle a Photoshop license onto another machine.  Acroterion  (talk)  04:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for working those images into articles. I don't expect to upload much more for a few days until I can do a clean OS install on my new-old computer - Adobe won't install because of conflicts with older Adobe products - go figure. The images are safe on an external drive.  Acroterion  (talk)  03:00, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * After four days of fighting with Adobe's persnickety installation interface (it's incompatible with other Adobe software!), I've gotten it working again and will have some more images. National Park Mountain's on the list, for instance.  Acroterion  (talk)  02:55, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I will check those out this weekend...--MONGO 11:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, National Park Mountain's already uploaded . I'm starting to forget what I've done.  Acroterion  (talk)  13:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

 * I'll try to think of something equally subtle and elegant for Acroterion... Bishonen | talk 05:38, 14 November 2010 (UTC).
 * That pic in the Beartooth Mountains is now 17 years old...I took it in 1993 (and it looks it, but glad you like it!)...wow...much appreciated...but you should continue to look at thread above to see all the great images Acroterion has provided us (I am about to notate others)...many of mountain peaks (plus historical buildings and even flora) that we had either lousy pics of or none at all...thanks again...I owe YOU big time!--MONGO 05:48, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar II
Thanks for the barnstar and for putting all those images to work - there are more of the northern and southern ends of the Tetons coming, and I still have parts of Glacier that I haven't looked at thoroughly. I figure I'll have it all accounted for by the end of the year. I may revisit those Teton peaks and adjust the color balance. While the Tetons tend to photograph rather bluer from five miles away on the valley floor (which is the way we're used to seeing them) than they really are close up, some of those go a little too far into red compensation. I think I'll have to accept a little more blue than I initially wanted.  Acroterion  (talk)  15:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you for uploading them. The Mount Moran image has the best view of the Black Dike (left side of peak) I have seen...a similar igneous intrusion can be seen on the northwest side of Middle teton, but it can't be seen from the valley.--MONGO 19:23, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, you can see the Middle Teton intrusion on my image - it's just narrower than the one on Moran.  Acroterion  (talk)  19:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure enough..tis true...there is a bigger one that is best seen from the Lower Saddle, the high windswept pass between Middle and the Grand...that was the one I was thinking of...I have only seen it twice..once when I ascended Middle and another time during a loop hike along the backside of the range....--MONGO 19:37, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Have you climbed Grand or Moran?  Acroterion  (talk)  19:42, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No, neither...Middle was my highest in the range...Grand is not actually easy...least not for me. My most difficult climb was actually Going-to-the-Sun Mountain in Glacier though...but I was always a hiker, not a climber, so getting to the top of summits had less of a draw for me than just getting back into the wilderness.--MONGO 19:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! I'm not sure that I've done much "defending" of the Wiki I've done lately, but it's nice to be appreciated. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 04:40, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Your question at RfA
Thanks for noting your concerns regarding the Phil Jones article. Unfortunately, to put the discussion in context requires a back story—a long simmering debate about the propriety of types of sources (blogs, opinion columns, news reports, science articles, and peer-reviewed science articles). I considered summarizing the positions of those with whom I am debating, but I think that's unfair, as I may get some details wrong, so, if I may, I'll briefly summarize my position on some of the issues:
 * 1) In science articles, peer-reviewed science articles are the gold standard.
 * 2) In science articles, other sources are acceptable although almost never blogs, as the usage of blogs is quite restricted, and it is not easy to image how they could be used in a pure science article).
 * 3) One reason for using a source other than a peer-reviewed science article is that peer-reviewed science article sometimes lapse into jargon, and other sources, such as science articles or new reports may be written in a way that is better for our audience, with the critical caveat that if a new report or science article is in dispute with a peer-reviewed science article, the peer-reviewed science article almost always wins. (Rare exceptions, such as when a non-peer-reviewed article notes an error in a peer-reviewed source, and virtually all agree that the peer-reviewed source is mistaken.)
 * 4) The strong preference for peer-reviewed science articles is less compelling for articles which are not squarely science articles, such as bios of scientists, and articles about the political, commercial, and other aspects related to science questions. (If such an article makes a scientific statement, then the preference for peer-reviewed science articles remains, but in other areas, we apply the ordinary rules.)

Sorry for that long background.

The Phil Jones (climatologist) article is about a scientist, not a science article. Many aspects of the dispute relate to some editors acting as if it were a science article, insisting that statements in news stories ought to be dismissed.

The quote in question comes from the BBC. Not all Reliable Sources are equal, but I trust that the BBC is considered one of the highest quality sources. It is my opinion that in a science article, if we had a statement from the BBC and a statement form a peer-reviewed science article, we would generally default to the peer-reviewed science article (although we might decide to include both and note the discrepancy.) However, the article in question is not a science article. I was quite unhappy that some were attempting to dismiss a quote from the BBC. In addition, part of the "argument" for dismissing the quote is that some editors have personal expertise in the field, and didn't agree with the substance of the statement. Sorry, that isn't how WP works. We don't permit expert to use their personal judgment to override a quote from a scientist. We do welcome expertise - but that expertise could be used to point to relevant documents on the subject, to clarify what a scientist means when they use technical terms so that editors weighing in can make a good judgment about how to use a quote, but we don't permit experts to tell us that the scientist didn't really mean what he plainly stated. If the scientist made a mistake (and that can happen), the BBC is perfectly able to follow up with a correction, or the scientist can follow up with a correction (here is a case where a blog statement might be acceptable).

In short, it was my view that certain editors were attempting to suppress a quote in the BBC, simply because that quote didn't fit with their narrative.

Could I have done a better job making my case? Almost certainly so. I've reread much of the exchange, and I confess, a couple times, I had to pause and think about what point I was trying to make. I can only assume those I was debating may well have not fully understood my point, so that may have lead to a higher ratio of heat to light that is desirable.

Sorry for the length of this comment. I do not like when articles include bad sources to accomplish a POV, nor do I like when good sources are removed to meet a particular POV. This is a perfect example where WP fails our audience. A reader seeing a discussion about the issue may well come to this article, and will be puzzled to see no discussion of it. I think we can do better.-- SPhilbrick  T  01:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

SophiaBLiu's Research Request
My name is Sophia and I am a PhD student at University of Colorado in Boulder researching the use of social media for historically significant crises like the 9/11 attacks. I am interested in what kind of values and practices are emerging from these disasters especially with the use of ubiquitous technologies like blogs and social media sites like Wikipedia. I am contacting you because I noticed you are one of the top contributors of the September 11 attacks Wikipedia article. I was wondering if you would be open to answering some questions for my dissertation research on this topic. One example of a question I have is: You provided a considerable amount of edits to the September 11 attacks Wikipedia article. What kind of edits did you make? What story was being told before you edited the article and how does that differ from what is in Wikipedia now? Feel free to email me at Sophia.Liu@colorado.edu if you have any questions. Thanks for your time, Sophia --Sophiabliu (talk) 05:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I can answer your questions here...but mostly all I have been doing is trying to keep the conspiracy theories out of the articles related to the 9/11 terrorist attacks....most of my edits have been to do that or revert vandalism to the articles. The articles related to 9/11 have less conspiracy theory misinformation than they used to have...but there are articles that discuss these notions elsewhere.--MONGO 23:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for my delayed reply. I did not know you responded so quickly and forgot to check back (I'm too used to email notifications :) Thanks for your reply and for sharing your thoughts. Here are a few more specific questions if you do not mind answering them.


 * What motivated you to edit the September 11 attacks Wikipedia article? What expertise are you using to edit this article?


 * What are the different voices and narratives you have seen emerge from the climate change story particularly through social media like Wikipedia, Facebook, YouTube and Flickr?


 * What role or value do you think these types of social media play in communicating historical crises like 9/11?


 * Based on your and others' contributions to the 9/11 story online through social media like Wikipedia, do you believe you are curating the 9/11 story? I define curation broadly to mean aggregating, categorizing, archiving, preserving, organizing, filtering, verifying, juxtaposing, representing, exhibiting, and storytelling. Do you think the design of these online technologies is helping to facilitate this kind of curation especially in socially-distributed ways?

Thanks for taking the time to answer these if you can. --Sophiabliu (talk) 19:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on December 5, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/December 5, 2010. If you think that it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director,. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbh®tch Talk © Happy Holidays 03:47, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

 

The elk is one of the largest species of deer in the world and one of the largest mammals in North America and eastern Asia. Elk are almost identical to Red Deer found in Europe, of which they were long believed to be a subspecies; however, mitochondrial DNA evidence strongly suggests they are a distinct species. Elk range in forest and forest-edge habitat, feeding on grasses, plants, leaves, and bark. Although native to North America and eastern Asia, they have adapted well to countries where they have been introduced. Their great adaptability may threaten endemic species and ecosystems into which they have been introduced. Male elk have large antlers which are shed each year. Males engage in ritualized mating behaviors during the rut, including posturing, antler wrestling (sparring), and bugling, a loud series of vocalizations which establishes dominance over other males and attracts females. Elk are susceptible to a number of infectious diseases, some of which can be transmitted to livestock. Efforts to eliminate infectious diseases from elk populations, largely through vaccination, have had mixed success. Some cultures revere the elk as a spiritual force. In parts of Asia, antlers and their velvet are used in traditional medicines. Elk are hunted as a game species; the meat is leaner and higher in protein than beef or chicken. (more...)

That will be great..but I will have to do a ref check and update in force on 12/4...and will complete it before it gets on the mainpage.--MONGO 06:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm so, so sorry for telling you this, but Elk was replaced with Rock Steady (album) for appear as the TFA tomorrow :(. If Elk is again re-added, I'll notify you, or maybe you can put the article at WP:TFAR Tbh®tch Talk © Happy Holidays 05:31, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem...I requested it to be delayed...after reviewing the references and how dated and or dead they were, I asked Raul here for a delay in it being mainpaged...but thanks for the notices...I'm not online as much as I used to be and I would have missed it had you not informed me.--MONGO 05:40, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, thanks for let me know, I'll return when it is re-scheduled. Regards Tbh®tch Talk © Happy Holidays 05:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Didn't take too much. new date: December 14. Tbh®tch Talk © Happy Holidays 06:26, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That will be much better...gives me time to do some updates and get a few FA reviewers to do some copyediting...thanks again.--MONGO 06:43, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Very nice to see elk on the Main Page! :) Cheers. --Aude (talk) 21:57, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, thank you! Hope all is great with you!--MONGO 02:51, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

North Algodones Dunes Wilderness
Hi, you can find both images at Commons:Category:Algodones Dunes (the two file names starting with cb...) and I put one of them in the article Algodones Dunes (as well as de:Algodones-Dünen). Unfortunately my French is not good enough to add a sentence on the Wilderness area and the picture to their article as well. Thanks again for your help. --h-stt !?  23:16, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Nice work...I am always glad to help.--MONGO 01:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy notice
Editors are carrying on about the TFA blurb/lead [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates#Main_page_summaries_-_Elk_for_example. here]. Just notifying you, as I'm sure you've been around this particular merry-go-round a few times. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  18:24, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well...its off the mainpage now...I have been offline more than I have wanted to be today due to work issues, so I all but missed it's mainpage appearance...I don't know who wrote the blurb/catch phrases for the mainpage paragraph...I'll see what the discussion was about..thanks for the update!--MONGO 02:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Darwinchristmas
Hi little Big MONGO, how do? Bishzilla very unfortunate head of stupid bish clan! Regret ever creating stupid little Bishapod. Pod stupidly create socks of his own, good twin Darwinfish, evil twin Darwinbish. Bitey little Darwinbish disrupting wiki plenty! Now regretfully running for adminship, Bishzilla tear hair scales out! :-( Credulous little arbcom user Elen of Roads nominate, disaster! Please go oppose evil little bishfish, save wiki! Greetings of season (=darwinchristmas), MONGO!   bishzilla     ROA R R! !    21:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC).
 * Will do. Nice pic showing evolution of sled pulling critters over the eons.--MONGO 15:55, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

You appear to have !voted twice, without realising
Per little oversight (good pun, eh, because I happen to be an "oversight"er? Oh, never mind...) I have had to strike your previous vote which was entered after the subsequent one. I am of course willing to let this go, even disregarding the use of a different name appended to your signiture, although I would warn you that Darwinbish might not - when she gets the tools. I consider that your !vote under the circumstances (the later first one, not the earlier subsequent one) to be rather ironic... LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:35, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Various dinosaurs been doing mischief....see massive spam voting overload...Happy Holidays!--MONGO 02:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Archive of WTC collapse article
Hi Mongo, I just noticed a weird outburst at the top of Archive 13 of the Collapse of the World Trade Center article, which you archived in October. The all-caps editorializing vaguely looks like I signed it in December 2009, though it was added in September 2010. Can I get you to fix it? Best, --Thomas B (talk) 20:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Greetings -- I did it for you, Mongo -- since I saw this on my watchlist and wasn't sure if you were around .... Happy new year both, Antandrus  (talk) 20:08, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and all the best in the New Year to you both.--Thomas B (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * --MONGO 21:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC)