User talk:Orcaborealis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Orcaborealis, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

• Try our tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
• Keep the Five Pillars of Wikipedia in mind, and remember to write from a neutral point of view.
• Sign your posts on talk pages using the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~, or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~.
• Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
• Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

If you have any questions, see the help pages, ask a question at the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome, and good luck!

Kirill Lokshin 16:52, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Great Photos for Trondheim 2 Your help would be appreciated 3 Pushing things some further 4 New Regions in Norway? 4.1 Regions of local identity 5 Svalbard 6 Image Tagging 7 Speaking of replacing counties with larger regions... 8 Maritime military history task force 9 Orphaned fair use image (Image:Combatboat90.jpg) 10 Milan 11 Cleanup help appreciated 12 Oceanic climates 13 Hammerfest temperatures

[edit] Great Photos for Trondheim

Enjoyed your photos for Trondheim, as well as your additions to local municipality entries. Williamborg 23:18, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! It was actually just one photo I added to the Trondheim article, the one taken from the Cathedral tower. But I've added photos to other articles. Orcaborealis, 09.14 4 september.

[edit] Your help would be appreciated

Hi Orca, I am currently requesting review for the Bjørnøya article and since you have recently edited there, I thought you might like to look into it again. Please comment at Wikipedia:Peer review/Bjørnøya/archive2, Any constructive criticism would be much appreciated. Thanks. Kosebamse 22:43, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I will look into it. It is pretty good, really. Orcaborealis 08:25, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, nice to hear that. Kosebamse 17:24, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pushing things some further

I am currently expanding Bjørnøya some further in the hope that it will soon be ready to submit it as a Featured Article candidate (see also Talk:Bjørnøya and Wikipedia:Peer review/Bjørnøya/archive2. As you mentioned that you have the booklet that seems to contain valuable information on the environmental matters, may I once again ask whether you you would perhaps like to contribute some more? I believe it's mostly the environmental matters that need more expanding. Apart from that booklet, I have heard and read a lot about Norway's recent attempts to expand its petrol industry into the Barents sea, but I can't remember the name of that project and was not overly successful finding relevant information (not even on Bellona's website). That would be very interesting as well - if you had some relevant information at hand and could spare the time could you add something there? Thanks a lot, Kosebamse 18:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello again! I have read the Ottar magazine (published by Tromsø Museum/University of Tromsø) where Bjørnøya is featured, but I don't have it, I read it in the library. I might add some (brief) information in the article. Concerning the petroleum activity, you might be thinking about the Snøhvit (Snow White) project Statoil project page, which is actually geographically where the Norwegian Sea meets the Barents Sea, and with a large LNG site near Hammerfest. There have also been some test drilling further east, but without any really substantial success so far. The sea border with Russia in the Barents Sea is disputed by the two countries, they are now starting negotiations again (which they have been doing on and off for 30 years).

Yeah, that was what I was thinking of, will try to find out more. Thanks! Kosebamse 08:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] New Regions in Norway?

Hello Orca (spekkhuggern?). About your recent addition to "Norway" that Note: The 19 fylker might be replaced with 5 - 9 larger regions by 2010. Do you know any more specifics about this development? Are these plans/debates inspired by devolution in Engalnd and Denmark and Finland? Or by the EU NUTS statistical divisions? Take care! :-] //Big Adamsky 20:04, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Hello Big A! The plan for new regions is not new, it has been around for a long time, the influence from other countries is there, but not decisive. The new government has put this (new, larger regions from 01.01.2010) in their "regjeringserklæring" (the negotiations that formed the platform of their government). Furthermore, there are a clear majority in the parliament for larger regions, so this time it seems likely it will happen (only Høyre and Fremskrittspartiet want to abandon the intermediate level altogeter). Kommunenes Sentralforbund hired a professer to look into the matter (Tor Segelstad), and he concluded with 7 regions (Østviken - Østfold, Akershus, Oslo; Innlandet - Hedmark, Oppland; Vestviken - Telemark, Vestfold, Buskerud; Sørlandet - Vest-Agder and Aust-Agder; Vestlandet - Rogaland, Hordaland, Sogn og Fjordane, parts of Møre og Romsdal; Trøndelag - Part of Møre og Romsdal, Sør-Trøndelag, Nord-Trøndelag, a small part of Nordland; Nord-Norge - Most of Nordland, Troms and Finnmark). The government need not propose exactly the same regions, off course. The regions will be decided by their responsibilty. Many people would like to see the larger regions get more real power than the Fylke has today (especially after Health care was moved to the state itself (Helseforetak), divided into five regions. There are a broad consensus that the Fylke is too small in many instances, like when it comes to regional development. Orcaborealis 20:49, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Hey Orca. Here's some more on the proposals for new larger administrative units:

• Regionalization and devolution (click for next powerpoint slide)

Note also the inconsistent treatment of Rogaland and Møre og Romsdal in various contexts:

• SSB's statistical regions
• Meteorological region "Midt-Norge"
• Meteorological region "Vestlandet"
• Regions of Norway

Cheers! //Big Adamsky 17:18, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I've seen most of them before, but the powerpoint document was new to me, very interesting, again is professor Selstad a central figure. There have been a debate in the newspapers, and it seems as the Romsdal landscape in Møre og Romsdal will prefer Trøndelag, if they cannot stay as a Fylke of their own. Wrt Rogaland, I have to admit I was a bit surprised by Selstad, as you points out others have proposed Rogaland as a part of Sørlandet. Selstad's argument was that Vestlandet needed to be strong to balance the Oslo region (Østviken). I would have thought that the southern part of Rogaland (south of the large Boknafjord) incl Stavanger could be part of Sørlandet, as I know people in Stavanger are not to happy about being "governed" from Bergen. However, would Stavanger or Kristiansand be the centre of Sørlandet? Also, if the geographically large Nord-Norge is to be one region, many in the southern part (Helgeland) would prefer to be part of Midt-Norge (the last to say so was the mayor of Rana municipality). Currently, not much is happening wrt larger regions, as everyone is waiting for the new government's proposal. Cheers! Orcaborealis 18:03, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regions of local identity

You might want to check out the articles and discussion relating to the traditional smaller regions of Norway (Category:Districts of Norway). They have been given the name "districts", since "regions" is the word used for landsdelene. //Big Adamsky 20:36, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Svalbard

Hey Orca. Your mediation/opinion would be greatly appreciated in the minor revert war unfolding at Svalbard. The question is basically whether to include an article link and a category that helps explain matters of international law, (which I advocate). Thanks! //Big Adamsky 16:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image Tagging

Greetings. From the description and use of Image:Trollheimen1 july2005.jpg, it appears you intended this media to be freely available. I took the liberty of applying a {{GFDL-presumed}} tag. Could you confirm this at by replacing my edit with {{GFDL-self}}? Regards, Dethomas 02:55, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speaking of replacing counties with larger regions...

Hello again, I hope you are well! I noticed that you have removed not just robot image warnings, but also a few more messages so I restored them to your talk page, assuming that this was an accident (otherwise, just remove these messages once more). Anyway, since you were interested in the public debate about merging the Norwegian counties into larger regions, you might be interested in this, as well? Regards // Big Adamsky • BA's talk page 21:14, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maritime military history task force

I just wanted to let you know that a Maritime warfare task force has been established. Inge 12:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Very late answer, but anyway... thanks for the information, will se if I get some spare time to look into it. Orcaborealis 09:30, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned fair use image (Image:Combatboat90.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Combatboat90.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr.) 02:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Milan

Milan has NOT a subtropical climate, please show your sources for this. Any person who lived in Milan or in any city in the same area would say the same thing as I do. Milan is far from being subtropical. Dantadd 21:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

OK. According to the Koppen climate clasification (which is the most used of all such classifications), the coldest month in a subtropical climate must be above -3 Celsius (in the US, above 0 Celsius). Milan's coldest month is January, with a mean of 1.1 Celsius. See here. Furthermore, a warm and long summer is needed, which Milan does have, the warmest month average is above 22 Celsius and the summer is long enough to qualify. But, what really sets Milan out apart from the other Mediterranean areas, is the large summer precipitation, as you can see here. The area around the Mediterranean is warm enough to qualify as subtropical, but usually has a very dry summer, thus a Mediterranean climate. Milan, and the Po area, is different, as you can see for yourself. It is even mentioned in the Milan article. So you should now revert your edit to the Koppen climate classification. Orcaborealis 21:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You should have answered in my talk page, I can't know when you reply if you do in your own talk page. Milan's climate is continental, as you can see here. The most important characteristic of a subtropical climate is the influence of tropical air masses, fact that does not occur in Milan. Please, in spite of playing with data, please bring a source that states clearly that Milan is subtropical. Of course you won't find any, because it's a complete absurd. Dantadd 23:43, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup help appreciated

As I had erroneously tagged counties and districts of Norway with the WikiProject Cities banner, I appreciate your and other editors chipping in to correct this mistake. __07:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I have already started, but it seems Finnmark county has already got a rating by Derek C., even if it is not a city....I also wondered why Lillehammer was given mid-importance - is it due to the 1994 winter olympics? Orcaborealis 07:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

He made some few glitches in cleaning up after me. In one instance he removed {{NorwayProject}} and kept {{WPCities}} :-) As for Lillehammer, with reference to our talk at Talk:Bodø, I'd agree that the 1994 Winter Olympics would be one such event that would raise a settlement (or city, in this case) from low to mid importance. This would also mean that Åsta and Tretten might be raised also due to the train crashes there, although Tretten would have to wait until someone writes about the Tretten accident. Technically there might also be objections with regards to Åsta on account of the current lack of international news citations (although noone would doubt they exist). __meco 08:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

But the 1994 Winter Olympics isn't recent news any longer....Orcaborealis 09:05, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

There's no requirement that the event must be recent at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities/Assessment#Priority_scale. __meco 09:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay but on the Bodø discussion page you said recent, quote: "Obviously Bodø must contend with being a low-importance city, unless there is any recent international news coverage of events or disasters. __meco 21:12, 15 July 2007 ". This is not to be pedantic, but the criteria must be consistent. Regards, Orcaborealis 10:53, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oceanic climates

The Koppen Wikipedia article states that a mediterranean climate has three times as much rain in wettest winter month as in driest summer month. But you said that it required ten times as much rain in wettest winter month as driest summer month. __willowridge 18:01, 29th August 2007 (BST)

You are correct, I mixed up with a different climate. This is the csb definition: "driest summer month less than 30 mm average precipitation and less than one-third wettest winter month precipitation". I have corrected the article, but Vancouver does not fulfill those criteria and is cfb. Orcaborealis 19:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

But why should we, in an article describing oceanic climates, mention cities with a mediterranean climate - there is an article for that climate category! Orcaborealis 19:19, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

We are including some mediterranean climates, those thermal regime fits that of an oceanic climate type. After all, most mediterranean climates have a subtropical thermal regime, and so obviously would not be included here. Seattle and San francisco are mediterranean, but are a cooler type then say, Los Angeles, Madrid, or Rome, and so the former may be confused with other oceanic climates, like London or Paris. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Willowridge (talk • contribs) 22:03, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hammerfest temperatures

Hi Orca. Could you provide a citation for the range of monthly average temperatures you added to Hammerfest. That would be great, thanks. Keep up the good work.Manxruler 20:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)