Talk:Jim Berkland

message: Berkland's claims to have predicted earthquakes are controversial among scientists because they are so vague. 
:It must be difficult to give an example, said example being vague?
Weatherlawyer (talk) 09:17, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you.  A recent Gilroy Dispatch article gives the figures as 3.5 to 6.0 , so I will revise accordingly.  By the way, did you intend to revert the other recent changes I made?  I rearranged the material about professional associations, and cleaned up External Links, but those edits have been undone.  --Chonak (talk) 05:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, I meant to change only the introduction and the Career section.  I'm not sure how the other parts were changed.  Perhaps it should be you rather than me who restores them. Densely (talk) 07:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks; I've brought back the cleaned-up versions of "Media appearances" and "External links" from a prior version. --Chonak (talk) 08:48, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

text: You are discussing magnitudes with no real definition of them. It is unlikely that he would have specified the exact scale on a talk show.
Weatherlawyer (talk) 09:17, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Career 

message: The "Honors" section reads more like a resume than anything of encyclopedic value. Membership of various professional societies and associations does not constitute "honors". Kkbay (talk) 01:39, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. I have modified the section header and reduced the content into a paragraph. --Chonak (talk) 05:26, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I removed the "Who's Who" listing as they are all vanity publications which list anyone who pays their fee, not professional associations or honors. 76.218.69.148 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 06:16, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Honors? 

message: A paragraph about similar theories by Italian earthquake researcher Raffaele Bendandi says:
there was an Italian with a similar method: Raffaele Bendandi, that in 1919 believed that the earth's crust, as well as the tides, is subject to the effects of gravitational attraction of the Moon. His hypothesis for the prediction of earthquakes (never recognized by the scientific community, because he did not want to ever give formal exposure) is based on the idea that the Moon, other planets of the Solar System and the Sun are not the cause movements of the earth's crust , which according to his theory actually deforms and pulses with timing and rhythm-dependent position of celestial bodies within the solar system.
This paragraph is unsourced, and is really about Bendandi, not Berkland, so I have moved it here to the Talk page for review. -- Chonak (talk) 02:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the place for a full description of Bendandi's theory, but it should be briefly noted so that readers can follow the link to Bendandi's Wiki article.  I suggest something like: "Berkland's theory has some similarities to that proposed in 1919 by the Italian Raffaele Bendandi."  Plazak (talk) 13:02, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the Bendandi link as being irrelevant. It does not appear that there is any connection between the two, other than they share (among a hundred or more others) a certain approach to earthquake prediction. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Bendandi

message: In looking over Berkland's work it seems to me his only points of notability are his prediction of the Loma Prieta earthquake, and being the lynch-pin of a whole lot of pseudo-scientific crap. All of the laudatory stuff in the article makes it seem like a puff piece to support certain fringe views. Anyone interested in re-evaluating this article? ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 00:59, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Puff piece in support of fringe views? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Jim Berkland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130702193035/http://www.sentientpublications.com/catalog/earthquakes.php to http://www.sentientpublications.com/catalog/earthquakes.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:25, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Jim Berkland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140202194027/http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-573875 to http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-573875
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:09, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have rolled-back a series of questionable edits that lack any kind of cited sources. Many of these edits are also questionable on the basis of WP:NPOV. If you want to note Berkland's passing you MUST cite a reliable source, such as a newspaper. Ask if you need help. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 04:39, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable edits rolled back 

message: :The problem is not that his methods failed so mucha s his insights were limited to concentrating on his location and on earthquakes.
:Little may now be known of how much his theories were subverted by no knowing the relationship between tropical storms and earthquake, volcanic eruptions and earthquake and volcanic eruptions and storms in general.
:
A contemporary of his in Coimbatore, India used a different method with a similar error based explanation. I his case the predictions were subverted by tropical storms appearing in his (larger) target region.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.66.170 (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled and unsigned comment 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jim Berkland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160307081259/http://www.syzygyjob.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=29 to http://www.syzygyjob.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=29
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:59, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jim Berkland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060324162739/http://www.syzygyjob.com/smf/ to http://www.syzygyjob.com/smf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:07, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jim Berkland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160601063621/http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/ to https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/
*Added  tag to http://scientificexploration.s3.amazonaws.com/files/jse-21-2.pdf
*Added  tag to http://scientificexploration.s3.amazonaws.com/files/jse-21-2.pdf
*Added  tag to http://scientificexploration.s3.amazonaws.com/files/jse-21-2.pdf
*Added  tag to http://scientificexploration.s3.amazonaws.com/files/jse-21-2.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: I have reverted your edits because of massive violation of WP:CITEVAR, which says you should conform to the "style" of citation established in an article. Points to note:
1) Please put the full citations in the Sources section, and use short cites (Harv templates) to for the inline citation.
2) If you want to use {cite} templates (instead of {citation}) for the full citations you should add the  to produce "CS2 style" formatting.
3) Please do not convert short cites to named-refs. There is absolutely no need for that.
While you might be tempted to just undo my reversion, that would be contrary to CITEVAR and could lead to a bit of a tussle. If you think it would be easier to make corrections from where you left matters, that's fine, I have no objection if you revert and then make make the needed corrections. If while you are at that you also take care of the other two inline full citations ("Fehd" and "Walsh", not your doing) that would be much appreciated. Thank you. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 23:10, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for reminding me of the guideline WP:CITEVAR. I'd like to direct you to the policy WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM: "Fix problems if you can, flag or remove them if you can't. Preserve appropriate content. As long as any facts or ideas would belong in an encyclopedia, they should be retained in Wikipedia." I made good faith efforts to improve this article. I find the wholesale removal of verifiable, encyclopedic content solely because it is not formatted correctly to be destructive, counterproductive,  and petty. If you spent less time making destructive removals that retard the growth of Wikipedia, that would be much appreciated. Thank you. --Animalparty! (talk) 17:11, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  As I ALREADY SAID: you are free to revert my reversion. And I would have no objection, provided that you conform to the existing style of citation. By the way, this is not a matter of citations being "", but of the method of citation, which (per CITEVAR) is not "petty". I would appreciate it if you would NOT MAKE PROBLEMS, not make changes that corrupt Wikipedia, and not expect others to clean-up after you. ♦ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation "style" and WP:CITVAR