en:User:Meaghan/Sunshine

Hello, Jokulhlaup, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially on the River Rase and other English rivers. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! DThomsen8 (talk) 19:08, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jokulhlaup! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Hajatvrc (I'm a Teahouse host) Visit the Teahouse This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 01:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't beat a nice cup of tea, milk and two please... Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:39, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks from a human for your work on the Tame, West Midlands. It badly needed a decent infobox and it really does look a lot better for it. Sjwells53 (talk) 22:24, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message on this. I liked the Geobox as it was, but can't say I'm hugely distressed if people want the shuffle the pictures a bit. I was hoping more people would contribute photos to document the Tame further downstream, but they haven't to any great extent. I quite like the idea of showing how a river grows in the galleries. I think people always like some view that corresponds to their own stretch of river, and that's understandable. Sjwells53 (talk) 17:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

River Swift, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

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 .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Trent Valley Way, Jokulhlaup!

Wikipedia editor Barney the barney barney just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

{{{3}}}

To reply, leave a comment on Barney the barney barney's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

That's a bug with the reviewing software. I think it was a reminder about grammar. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:17, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm glad you're making use of the location map. But I'm afraid it was a few years ago now and I do not know exactly how I went about doing it. Also, I'm not as active on Wikipedia as I used to be. However, Wikipedia does have a Map workshop in which users can request new maps. Maybe you could try there. Thanks! Del_♉sion23 (talk) 21:07, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for providing the Guinea map with at least two places marked. I need to study this in order to repeat this. Maps with hopefully multiple would be useful for marking railways, such as from mine to port.

I have added a third place (mine) to the Guinea map. How does one enter lat and long in degrees/minutes/seconds?

See Guinea Map Tabletop (talk) 02:04, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jokulhlaup, Thanks for all the editing you've been doing on the York Museums Trust article in AFC. It's great! As the YMT Wikipedian in Residence I have been unable to do more than make the bare bones. However, I have added a few resources to a table on our project page. They might help you out a bit. Cheers PatHadley (talk) 18:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, got there in the end! Thanks for all your help. Let me know if there are any YMT resources that might help with your editing for the future? Cheers, PatHadley (talk) 19:28, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(see also: Template:Kenai River system)

I'm curious as to how you came to to the conclusion that this river is of low importance. I had a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Rivers/Assessment#Importance_scale and it seems to say that low-importance rivers are small streams that are relatively unknown. This is the only major inland waterway on the Kenai Peninsula, it passes through two major lakes, and people come from all over the world to fish for salmon in its waters. It is the reason that the many towns along its banks exist. Seems like at least mid-importance to me. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:50, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Beeblebrox, thanks for checking on this - I based the importance initially on the length, which at less than 100 miles usually means a short Low importance river. Having had another look, the fishing does give it a greater importance, so I will amend to a mid. Jokulhlaup (talk) 19:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks! Beeblebrox (talk) 19:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Jokulhlaup, Thanks for your note on my talk page -- I answered it there. I also wanted to say that this morning I removed the "more citations needed" tag that was at the top of the article. As I noted on the article's talk page, I don't think the piece actually needs more citations, I think the main thing that is missing is that the master list should have individual citations for each of the species listed there. Do you think you could do that? Then I think the piece would really be in great shape. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 13:18, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing: it would be good to give a citation for the note in the image caption that says "King's Mill near Castle Donington was the location for catches of sturgeon and eels" Invertzoo (talk) 14:29, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jokulhlaup. You have new messages at Sarah777's talk page.
Message added 22:50, 13 June 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ww2censor (talk) 22:50, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Ormr2014. Jokulhlaup, thanks for creating River Kemp!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please include additional information and references. Could us a mini map as well.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Ormr2014 (talk) 14:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments copied to Talk:River Kemp for response...Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:39, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Thank you for your message. Your contribution has certainly been much greater than mine. Well done.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 19:08, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Markeaton Brook, Jokulhlaup!

Wikipedia editor Cornellier just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice article!

To reply, leave a comment on Cornellier's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

		The Original Barnstar
		For creating lots of nice lighthouse articles. Well done! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Many Thanks for the Barnstar, it makes for a very nice Christmas Eve present...Jokulhlaup (talk) 13:03, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jokulhlaup, thanks for taking the time to assess Salmon River (New York), which is an article I've sunk a bit of time into lately. You rated it as "C-class" indicating that the article "may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup." I'm curious what large problems you are seeing with the article, so that I can attempt to improve it. Thanks! Antepenultimate (talk) 12:47, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thanks for the message. My initial thought was that it was much better than a Start class article, which was how I had rated it last year. Let me have a closer look, and I will let you know on the talk page...Jokulhlaup (talk) 12:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jokulhlaup, thanks for re-assessment and the kind words on my talk page, and thanks especially for the feedback. I had been wondering where to go to get some critical eyes on the article, so your assessment just now was very serendipitous. I will take a look at adding some of what you note to be lacking to the article. Thanks again! Antepenultimate (talk) 18:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me have another look, I'm pleased you found the comments useful...Jokulhlaup (talk) 20:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jokulhlaup,

We’d like to invite you to participate in a study that aims to explore how WikiProject members coordinate activities of distributed group members to complete project goals. We are specifically seeking to talk to people who have been active in at least one WikiProject in their time in Wikipedia. Compensation will be provided to each participant in the form of a $10 Amazon gift card.

The purpose of this study is to better understanding the coordination practices of Wikipedians active within WikiProjects, and to explore the potential for tool-mediated coordination to improve those practices. Interviews will be semi-structured, and should last between 45-60 minutes. If you decide to participate, we will schedule an appointment for the online chat session. During the appointment you will be asked some basic questions about your experience interacting in WikiProjects, how that process has worked for you in the past and what ideas you might have to improve the future.

You must be over 18 years old, speak English, and you must currently be or have been at one time an active member of a WikiProject. The interview can be conducted over an audio chatting channel such as Skype or Google Hangouts, or via an instant messaging client. If you have questions about the research or are interested in participating, please contact Michael Gilbert at (206) 354-3741 or by email at mdg@uw.edu.

We cannot guarantee the confidentiality of information sent by email.

Link to Research Page: m:Research:Means_and_methods_of_coordination_in_WikiProjects

Marge6914 (talk) 21:02, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

		The Geography Barnstar
		for your help in improving the hydrology and water quality on the article about the River Tone — Rod talk 17:19, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice and many thanks. Glad I could help, let's hope that this will get it through the Good Article review...Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:36, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Putting all those rivers again in "Category:Rivers of Spain" makes no sense, it's not consistent with "Category:Rivers of the United Kingdom," "Category:Rivers of the United States," etcetera. --Xabier Armendaritz^(talk) 11:06, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion continued at Category talk:Rivers of Spain...Jokulhlaup (talk) 13:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, If you have time would you please take a look at this article: [1] and this discussion [2] and provide your input. There is a content dispute occurring and I feel fresh eyes would help because of your experience. [3].

Thank you Swamiblue (talk) 22:57, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Been busy elsewhere for a while, having now had a quick look I don't think my knowledge can really help in this case. Apologies...Jokulhlaup (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Noss Head Lighthouse, Jokulhlaup!

Wikipedia editor Blythwood just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Looks great!

To reply, leave a comment on Blythwood's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Chester Creek (Alaska), 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. 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 .
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:41, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also wanted to say that it was a nice job you did of salvaging and editing the article. Bravo. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:52, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note, much appreciated. I thought it deserved a helping hand, when I saw it as a draft article within the Wikipedia:WikiProject Rivers table...Jokulhlaup (talk) 18:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

		The Lighthouse Barnstar
		For writing tons of articles on lighthouses! jonkerz ♠talk 21:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gah, I just noticed the "For convenience, all lighthouses in the Canary Islands should be included in this category" note. I'm not sure I agree, but I may have some restoring to do. Anyways, thanks for all the work you have done related to lighthouses! Cheers, jonkerz ♠talk 21:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, a lighthouse barnstar, that’s brightened up my day. Many thanks for this, sorry you don’t like my categorization quite as much.☺ Cheers to you too...Jokulhlaup (talk) 09:10, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First, if the community believes this type of categorization is an improvement, or if you can convince me that it is, I'll restore the categories myself in a heartbeat. But, I do not believe that is the case, and it actually made finding the Lanzarote/La Palma/El Hierro lighthouses harder.

Not saying you support this, but putting all articles in Category:Lighthouses in Spain would also be convient for readers who want to browse all articles on lighthouses in Spain. Or Category:Lighthouses in Europe and Category:Lighthouses, if we are to take the example further.

Category:Lighthouses in the Canary Islands is the only category that transcludes {{Allincluded}}, so it's not "the normal" way of categorizing articles. Experimentation and all that is good, but the reason we have WP:OCAT is because it has been tried in the past. I see how it is convenient to have a self-maintaining list (ie category) of all Canarian lighthouses, but it clutters the categories and I'm afraid that browsing WP articles in this way will not be possible until the MediaWiki software has been improved to support it (and that would take at least a couple of years even if the WMF wanted to do something about it). jonkerz ♠talk 10:08, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, now I remember why "Jokulhaups" sounded familiar :) jonkerz ♠talk 10:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for explanations. I probably prefer to over categorize, maybe as a result of struggling to find lighthouses tucked away in too many sub-cats (my next step would have been to do an all-in forCategory:Lighthouses in Spain, but I will hold-off on that). I will leave the Canaries as you left it, maybe too many Punta... titles didn't really help. And thanks for the Magic cards link, I can pretend to use that if it all gets too much here on the wiki...Jokulhlaup (talk) 10:59, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you never have to play that card, at least not when I don't have a Counter Spell on my hand :) A thing you could do is to move the maps to {{Lighthouses of Tenerife}}, {{Lighthouses of Fuerteventura}} and {{Lighthouses of Gran Canaria}}, so that only a single page has to be changed in case a map needs to be updated, just a suggestion. jonkerz ♠talk 11:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the useful tip, that could save me a lot of time...Jokulhlaup (talk) 09:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

at List of Holocaust memorials and museums in the United States because I was born in Siglufjordur? Carptrash (talk) 18:45, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to say that I did, but it was only that you asked for some help and I knew where to look. Siglufjörður looks like a nice place though. All the best...Jokulhlaup (talk) 08:52, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm starting a new discussion at WP:CFD about the naming of river categories. Since you have participated in at least one of the recent discussions in the matter you may want to express your opinion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 July 11#Rivers. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 02:40, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know...Jokulhlaup (talk) 09:00, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For this huge edit! Thank you so much. You are wonderful! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:41, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really pleased that you liked it, credit should go to you as well for creating the initial list. Cheers...Jokulhlaup (talk) 11:31, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are we being a strict stickler in that he designed but didn't actually build two lighthouses listed ? Dave Rave (talk) 10:43, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for raising this, I was quickly checking which articles needed a WP:Lighthouse template and thought he didn't warranted inclusion in the builders cat. I've reverted the removal of the cat, I was looking to see how many lighthouses he had designed and only saw one. A closer check showed he had designed three...Jokulhlaup (talk) 09:39, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

eggsellent ... do you not think that one is enough ? but also, design versus build ? I'm happy to alter the categories accordingly Dave Rave (talk) 10:32, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the slow response; I have been busy elsewhere with a number of other issues etc. I think that WP:CATDEF applies, so being a lighthouse builder or engineer should be a defining characteristic of that person. A new category for Lighthouse engineers would help...Jokulhlaup (talk) 12:43, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That was a remarkably easy edit to make - that attractive photo looks very like the stream I remember playing in 60 years ago... Narky Blert (talk) 16:08, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a nice image, and one of the reasons I created the article - thanks again for resolving the dab on that one...Jokulhlaup (talk) 16:18, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thankyou for your participation in the challenge series or/and contests. In November The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There will be over $4000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. If this would appeal to you and you think you'd be interested in contributing new articles on women during this month for your region or wherever please sign up in the participants section. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate and raise money to buy books about women for others to use, this is also fine. Thankyou, and if taking part, good luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:58, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed you corrected some lighthouse infobox regarding the shape. Removing the word frustum appear that the lighthouse has no height, because the “square” is a two dimensional shape. Perhaps it could be used “square prism” and some time “tapered square prism” according to the form of the lighthouse. All the best.Chesipiero (talk) 14:08, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Tower" implies verticality. Your eccentric language lasted a lot longer than it should have. Mangoe (talk) 19:18, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chesipiero. Apologies for the slow response (been busy elsewhere), edits by Mangoe prompted me to investigate how widespread some of these terms were used on lighthouse articles. I think that some were wrong, and at best, most were overcomplicating the description of a simple tower. Regards...Jokulhlaup (talk) 16:21, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jokulhlaup. Just to let you know I have closed an RFC you created, at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Rivers#Request_for_comments_on_the_Geobox/Infobox_river_templates. Apologies for the delay in closing this request for comment; there is a large backlog of complex RFCs requiring admin closure. Regards, fish&karate 12:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing the close on this and the nicely balanced summary, much appreciated...Jokulhlaup (talk) 18:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is my first time on Wikipedia, apologies if I go about this incorrectly.

I have noticed that the article relating to River Dulas (Ceredigion) is accompanied by a photo of a different Dulas, namely one a little further north, on the other side of the Teifi, which is a tributary of the Brefi. To reiterate, the subject of the article (the river passing Llangybi) is not the river in the image on the page ; the latter, as the text next to the image says, is a tributary of the Brefi (which is on the other side of the Teifi to Llangybi, near Llanddewi Brefi). If anyone can help me to change this image for one that is definitely of the relevant Dulas that would be great.

Many thanks, JSWILD (talk) 23:58, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JSWILD as you have seen, I've replied over at the Rivers Project Talk Page...Jokulhlaup (talk) 14:43, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to send Thanks to acknowledge my mistake at List of tributaries of the River Ribble, but that option seems to have disappeared. When I looked at the source yesterday I could have sworn that the Limestone Ribble was in Wales (maybe something to do with Pen-y-ghent). I was obviously half-asleep, sorry for my error. TiB chat 18:24, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, you did have me worried for a moment, so I had to double check in case I had mixed it up with the The other Yorkshire Ribble. Thanks for letting me know...Jokulhlaup (talk) 19:30, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Portals WikiProject has been rebooted.

You are invited to join, and participate in the effort to revitalize and improve the Portal system and all the portals in it.

There are sections on the WikiProject page dedicated to tasks (including WikiGnome tasks too), and areas on the talk page for discussing the improvement and automation of the various features of portals.

Many complaints have been lodged in the RfC to delete all portals, pointing out their various problems. They say that many portals are not maintained, or have fallen out of date, are useless, etc. Many of the !votes indicate that the editors who posted them simply don't believe in the potential of portals anymore.

It's time to change all that. Let's give them reasons to believe in portals, by revitalizing them.

The best response to a deletion nomination is to fix the page that was nominated. The further underway the effort is to improve portals by the time the RfC has run its course, the more of the reasons against portals will no longer apply. RfCs typically run 30 days. There are 19 days left in this one. Let's see how many portals we can update and improve before the RfC is closed, and beyond.

A healthy WikiProject dedicated to supporting and maintaining portals may be the strongest argument of all not to delete.

We may even surprise ourselves and exceed all expectations. Who knows what we will be able to accomplish in what may become the biggest Wikicollaboration in years.

Let's do this.

See ya at the WikiProject!

Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:21, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The RfC discussion to eliminate portals was closed May 12, with the statement "There exists a strong consensus against deleting or even deprecating portals at this time." This was made possible because you and others came to the rescue. Thank you for speaking up.

By the way, the current issue of the Signpost features an article with interviews about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

I'd also like to let you know that the Portals WikiProject is working hard to make sure your support of portals was not in vain. Toward that end, we have been working diligently to innovate portals, while building, updating, upgrading, and maintaining them. The project has grown to 80 members so far, and has become a beehive of activity.

Our two main goals at this time are to automate portals (in terms of refreshing, rotating, and selecting content), and to develop a one-page model in order to make obsolete and eliminate most of the 150,000 subpages from the portal namespace by migrating their functions to the portal base pages, using technologies such as selective transclusion. Please feel free to join in on any of the many threads of development at the WikiProject's talk page, or just stop by to see how we are doing. If you have any questions about portals or portal development, that is the best place to ask them.

If you would like to keep abreast of developments on portals, keep in mind that the project's members receive updates on their talk pages. The updates are also posted here, for your convenience.

Again, we can't thank you enough for your support of portals, and we hope to make you proud of your decision. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   10:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: if you reply to this message, please {{ping}} me. Thank you. -TT

Hi! I've recently been getting interested in watersheds, drainage basins and tributaries, and as I was perusing through the archives of WP:RIVER I noticed there was a lot of back and forth about lists vs categories. At the very end of one of the discussions in 2016, I noticed you had what seemed like a nice little suggestion, which was the table. It didn't seem like anyone responded in the thread (or in the wild, given the state of existing Lists of Rivers of X).

Did you ever try mock one up for an actual river? I'm curious about what challenges you ran into. If you didn't ever try to mock one up, maybe you would be interested in helping me mock one up for a larger river like the Mississippi? I'm not very familiar with the Stream Order system, so I'm not sure if you can start with the terminal river and work your way back, or if you have to find the very first tributaries and work your way down. I'm also not sure how to deal with distributaries in this system, like the Atchafalaya River. Look forward to your response! -Furicorn (talk) 12:18, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Furicorn, I will have a look back to remind myself of what I suggested and reply asap...Jokulhlaup (talk) 08:07, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Furicorn, I've reacquainted myself with the table etc. and the Mississippi, I think what you have suggested would be difficult to achieve given the number of tributaries involved. This article shows there are 7,000 tribs which would be an unmanageable number to include in a single table not to mention the time it would take to pull together. That article led me to the USGS Streamer system which allows you to find all the upstream or downstream tribs for any US river, so the information is available. I used its detailed report to create the table for the Sweetwater a trib of the North Platte, which took some time even for this small system (The Sweetwater is currently the only one with an article, assuming the List_of_tributaries_of_the_Missouri_River#Platte_River_Basin is correct). A lot depends on the scale of the list and what is included, the problem is that unless you include everything then the stream ordering doesn't work out. Anyway, have a look to see what you think --Jokulhlaup (talk) 14:09, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jokulhlaup, this is really helpful! I definitely agree that a single list would be unmanageable. Working on Category:Missouri river stubs, I suspected that the stream ordering system would not work very well for the Mississippi watershed, given how huge a landmass eventually drains into it.

Looking at a smaller level, perhaps a series of tables could be created at some level of the HUC watershed system. My only problem is I'm not sure how to access the new version of HUC, it seems to require GIS and I don't yet have any familiarity with how to run a GIS program. The old version is available, but it seems like some changes were made at the Subbasin level (level 4 of the 6 levels) of the [Hydrological_code#United_States|US Hydrological code]. You wouldn't happen to know anything about GIS, or the changes made? Otherwise, maybe the lists could just be made at level 3 (Basin/Accounting Unit), or I might ask around at WP:RIVER. -Furicorn (talk) 14:35, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at streamer, and tried to run a report approximating the basin/accounting unit 101201. My results were extensive, but it seems like with a lot of work, maybe this level could be the basis for a set of tables. An unsolved item in addition to the ones you mentioned, is it's a little difficult for me to tie back the streamer results to the HUC numbers. It's a pity one can't limit the analysis to one section of a river, since sometimes the Basins only look at a portion of a river. Ultimately though, I aree with you that it would be very difficult to do this for any of the larger rivers. -Furicorn (talk) 14:56, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I was looking at the List_of_tributaries_of_the_Missouri_River#Platte_River_Basin, was wondering if I misunderstood you about Sweetwater. It looked like there were several other tribs with articles like Laramie River, but did you maybe mean they were stubs or something? -Furicorn (talk) 16:28, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Really would like your insights at User talk:Qui1che#Gauge interest in pursuing dispute resolution re the Geobox river / Infobox River Tfd and merge process. --papageno (talk) 00:44, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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

Thanks for creating List of crossings of the River Trent.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Lovely article and nicely put together; might be worth emphasizing (even more) in the lede the names of the books and authors on which your table is sourced from (e.g. to clarify it is not OR). Well done.

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Britishfinance}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Britishfinance (talk) 02:58, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Britishfinance, thanks for kind review of the article and your edits there, much appreciated...Jokulhlaup (talk) 17:08, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating List of crossings of the River Derwent, Derbyshire.

I have just reviewed the page, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Lovely article!

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Britishfinance}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Britishfinance (talk) 16:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Lighthouses, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Lighthouses and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Portal:Lighthouses during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 08:10, 30 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Copston Magna source is wrong. Claybrooke Mill is on the River Soar. The current owner Mr. John Eyles has confirmed to me that it is written in his deeds. From it's confluence with the Soar Brook it goes upstream to Claybrooke Mill across the Ullesthorpe to Claybrooke Parva road, across the A5, across Green Lane to a hedge two square fields south east of Cloudsley Bush, which is at the crossroads of the Fosse Way and Coalpit Lane (the Lutterworth to Nuneaton road). I've been there. James R Hall (talk) 23:22, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me about this, I did see your post at Talk:River_Soar#Source_of_the_Soar, but didn't have time to respond. I agree with your description of the source, as it matches the sources given on the talk page...Jokulhlaup (talk) 10:11, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How do we get this corrected? I'm not a Wikipedia greek,I think I've done well to have navigated myself this far. James R Hall (talk) 22:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you put what you think needs changing at Talk:River_Soar#Source_of_the_Soar rather than here, so that it others can see it etc. Changes to articles should be discussed on their talk pages, so editiors can follow any discussion. Thanks...Jokulhlaup (talk) 16:45, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help in the Philadelphia Liberty Loans Parade adjustment in the inbox. Much appreciated. Go to above page, go to infobox, change Non-fatal injuries to Confirmed cases. Tried going to Template:outbreak but no help. Thank you for your time.2601:581:8402:1EE0:304C:CD3D:3958:6A95 (talk) 15:15, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done and dusted, Wikipedia can be difficult at times...Jokulhlaup (talk) 09:24, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I refer to your removal of the image of the Fastnet Lighthouse from the article about William Douglas (engineer).

I think that you will find that he did design the Fastnet Lighthouse. But no harm done. Shipsview (talk) 09:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure Shipsview ? I thought it was his uncle William Douglass (engineer, born 1831) as per this biography which says 'The major achievement of his career was the design and initial construction of the new Fastnet lighthouse'. William Douglass (engineer, born 1831) is the wiki-link used in the Fastnet article...Jokulhlaup (talk) 10:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops! I stand corrected! I had forgotten about William Douglass the elder. Shipsview (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem - glad we sorted it out. I recently finished an article on Mew Island Lighthouse and it took me some time to work out which Will Douglass was the right one for that light, and hence led me to make the change.-Jokulhlaup (talk) 15:18, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mew Island Lighthouse, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the large hyperradiant lens used in the Mew Island Lighthouse is now on display in the Titanic Quarter of Belfast as The Great Light (pictured)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mew Island Lighthouse. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mew Island Lighthouse), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sorting out the details on that lighthouse. I admit those dates were rather confusing, and the only interpretation that made sense was that there were two different lighthouses! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:20, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it was rather confusing and needed a close reading of the references...Jokulhlaup (talk) 08:57, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When there are two different lighthouses, it is definitely clearer to use separate items, like I have done with Fastnet Lighthouse (Q3067133) and Fastnet Lighthouse (Q105730738). Obviously with Point of Ayr I got that completely wrong! By the way, do you agree that the image is of the first Fastnet lighthouse? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:07, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree if there are two separate lighthouses then there should be two items. In terms of the image, this is the first Fastnet tower, the second tower extends down to sea level so is quite different. There is quite a discussion about this rare image it on its Flickr page the base of this tower was used as a fuel store and remains on the rock. The image could be tidied up quite a bit, so I will ask (when I get a moment) at the Commons:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop to see if they can help...Jokulhlaup (talk) 09:52, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jokulhlaup! This message is to inform you that due to editing inactivity, your access to AutoWikiBrowser may be temporarily removed. If you do not resume editing within the next week, your username will be removed from the CheckPage. This is purely for routine maintenance and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You may regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! — MusikBot II ^talk 17:18, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]