User talk:Julien.leuthold

This is Julien.leuthold's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Rum layered intrusion has been accepted

Rum layered intrusion, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Julien.leuthold, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Xx236 (talk) 09:51, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deep hot zone

We don't create blank pages.Xx236 (talk) 09:52, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Deep hot zone

Hello Julien.leuthold,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Deep hot zone for deletion, because it doesn't appear to contain any encyclopedic content. Take a look at our suggestions for essential content in short articles to learn what should be included.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Xx236 (talk) 10:07, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

About Deep hot zone

Hi Julien,
I've added a reference to this article.
Could you possibly have a look at this article and see if it adequately describes what is meant by this term?
Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Torres del Paine Sill Complex has been accepted

Torres del Paine Sill Complex, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 08:52, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Editing on Wikipedia

Hi Julien, as you have already discovered editing on Wikpedia, even as an experienced research scientist with a good list of publications, is not that straightforward. You are not alone in discovering this and sadly a lot of academics find it difficult to cope with the ways in which Wikipedia articles are written and edited. You will have your edits reverted with tags such as WP:COI, WP:OR or similar on a regular basis. Over at the Geology WikiProject Wikipedia:WikiProject Geology, you will find people willing to help, if you decide to persevere. If you need help, just ask any of us over at the talk page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geology. The main thing to remember here is that to most editors your knowledge doesn't really matter unless you use it to write well sourced articles. If you think that your own publication is the best reference to cite something in an article then you should open a discussion on the relevant article talk page and propose it, so that other editors can give their opinion. It's tedious, but necessary. Anyway I'll not bother you longer and wish you well, whether you decide to stay or not. Mikenorton (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Julien, thanks for your contributions. I assume that you are the same Julien Leuthold who wrote the article that I have just removed as one of the references that you added to the Oceanic crust and Lower oceanic crust articles. To expand a bit on Mikenorton's mention of WP:OR (original research), in Wikipedia it is preferred that editors do not add their own work as a source reference because it is almost always regarded as "original research" even if it is peer reviewed; editors are not allowed to add their own original research to Wikipedia articles. I think this is not unreasonable because if you can't offer an alternative source reference because e.g. you are the only person to have ever discovered something, then the information is indeed original research, and you would not be allowed to add it to Wikipedia (but other editors could add it). If Mike or I had added your article as a source without your involvement e.g. five years before you started editing Wikipedia, it would have been acceptable on Wikipedia because neither Mike nor I would have done any original research. Unfortunately, if you now suggest that Mike or I should add your article as a source reference, it becomes problematic because there could be potential complications related to e.g. conflict of interest, advocacy, sock puppetry etc. and it's better for everyone to avoid those problems. I suggest that the most sensible compromise is for you to use source references that are not written by you. GeoWriter (talk) 16:50, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Crystal mush

Are you running a class through wikipedia? from the bunch of editors who appeared and started editing this article it looks like it. You may want to look at Wikipedia:Student assignments. Could you please explain these editors and where they came from? ^{[Username Needed]} 10:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, We have just finished teaching a class on Heat and Mass Transfers in Magmatology, with 4 MSc students in Earth Sciences and 1 PhD student in Chemistry. The goal of this class was to learn scientific communication: The students have first read one scientific article and presented it orally to their peers. I have then asked them to read the Wikipedia documentation, do little edits on existing pages and finally write a new page on an important topic in geology: crystal mush. Each student has written about one sub-topic, and then revised the text of their colleague. I was clear and strict with the goal to write for the general public and they have made special effort to achieve it. Thank you for the additional references. I already have experience creating and editing Wikipedia pages, but this always helps to improve my classes and do good editorial work! Students asked several questions about what was allowed and what wasn't and it really helps to have such documents. Julien.leuthold (talk) 11:30, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to tell the people over at Wikipedia:Education noticeboard that you are doing this. They probably would like to know, and are probably in a better position to respond to anything than me. ^{[Username Needed]} 12:34, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted a message over there telling them, since you seem to not have done so. ^{[Username Needed]} 10:08, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Crystal mush has been accepted

Crystal mush, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

-- RoySmith (talk) 04:17, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]