User talk:J. Johnson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines

The community

Writing articles

A handy collection of useful links.

Canonical IPCC citations.[edit]

The canonical forms for citing the IPCC documents are at:

Ask if you have questions or need assistance.

Thank you[edit]

Thanks for being neutral in your closure. Happy holidays and here's to new beginnings in 2015. -Thibbs (talk) 23:00, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

You are welcome. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:38, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Review a new article?[edit]

There are some questions about continental arcs here if you care to have a look. — Brianhe (talk) 02:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I'll try to swing by there sometime soon. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:26, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Relax duplicate linking rule (again!)[edit]

Hi J,

You might be interested to see that I'm reopening the issue of duplicate links at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking#Relax_duplicate_linking_rule. --Slashme (talk) 21:37, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take look.~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 22:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)


JJ I still haven't mustered any interest in learning citation nuances, but realize you're an expert. Did you see this edit summary? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 06:11, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

No, didn't see that. It's a definite screw-up, although it appears to be a good-faith effort to address a deeper problem. Hell, I may have to take a deeper look at this. This may take a little time. Face-confused.svg ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

A new draft you might be interested in[edit]

Draft:Glacial erratic boulders in King County, Washington is a naacent draft. Thought you might be interested. - Brianhe (talk) 18:14, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Interesting. Of course, the first thing I notice is that the picture alleged to be of the Thornton Creek erratic sure looks like the Wedgewood erratic. Next thing, that the references are not what I would deem up to snuff (sniff, sniff), but aside from all that -- nice. I especially like that source on the Indian names; I need to check that out for my own projects.
Something you might look for: there is a list somewhere of erratics in Seattle/King County. Might have been a magazine article. And with suitable persuasions I might be able to talk my photogrpaher into taking some pictures. ~ 19:37, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
I had put the same placeholder image up for a bunch of sites when I was working on it alone. Because of (potential) confusion, have replaced with a blank space instead. It would be great to have pro quality sources to work with. Looks like someone at UW ESS started a catalog of their own [1] but it never gained momentum.
Oh, I might have recruited at least one Seattleite and one Duvall resident to contribute pictures. But more are welcome, of course. — Brianhe (talk) 21:43, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Article is much improved, lots of images from me and two Seattle collaborators. I included some pretty solid geology references in the lede too, though would like to go further. Individual rocks don't seem to get a lot of academic attention. — Brianhe (talk) 19:26, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, much improved. Looking good. But one suggestion: the location inset in the lead image seriously distracts from the rest of image. (And potentially a problem trying to locate any erratics in the overlaid area.) I think the image would be fine without the inset. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Could you post a request for smaller inset on the article talk page? The image is actually another editor's creation. - Brianhe (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Done. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:50, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

Been awhile[edit]

.....since I thanked you again for maintaining the IPCC citation templates. Thanks! NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 13:57, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

You're making me feel a little guilty, as maintenance of the IPCC citations is largely on hold. You probably noticed the "empty or missing |tile=" messages that suddenly popped up everywhere: use of |chapter= in {{citation}} without a |title= is now treated as an error. I have been trying to revert this, or at least allow an exception (see discussion at Help talk:Citation Style 1), but Trappist is adamantly refusing. He insists that I should use {{Harvc}}. which I find fundamentally flawed. So at the moment we are stalemated. Would you be interested in helping with this? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2015 (UTC)