Template talk:Johnson & Johnson

	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Business This template is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. Chefmikesf (talk · contribs) has been paid by Stellaresults on behalf of Johnson & Johnson. COI declared at User:Chefmikesf

Declaring COI and small updates

Hello @Spintendo: and @Jax 0677:

I'm currently working with Johnson & Johnson to making general improvements to the template and article compliant to WP:COI. The content of the template needs reorganization, linking the current articles in the template to the articles in its category. In the past, It has been uncontroversial to make straight forward updates to the template box. I wanted to submit this request for transparency, even if I get the ok to make the edits at a later point. --Chefmikesf (talk) 01:51, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Location:Brands

1.

Request: Hyperlinks to all the brands in the template box that are in the template box, but lack the syntax.

Proposed Brands to add Wikipedia article hyperlinks:

• Bactidol
• Caladryl
• Combantrin
• Desitin
• Vogue
• OGX
• Imodium
• Lactaid
• Lomotil
• Motrin
• Mylicon
• Neosporin
• Pepcid
• Plax
• Rembrandt
• Trosyd

2.

Request: Update the color of the template box to Johnson & Johnson's color. Add this line of code to Line 4 of the wikitext. 

Current: </nowiki> {{Navbox |name = Johnson & Johnson |title = Johnson & Johnson |state = autocollapse |listclass = hlist |image =

Proposed: |name = Johnson & Johnson |title = Johnson & Johnson |state = autocollapse |basestyle = background: #D71500; color: white |listclass = hlist |image = </nowiki>

• Reply - I support Item 1 (adding links), oppose Item 2 (color and logo). --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:47, 17 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Jax 0677, I added links to the articles in the template box and removed the photo as you requested.--Chefmikesf (talk) 16:28, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Improving the J&J Template Box

In my post above, I stated the content of the Template Box is outdated and needs improvement. I went ahead to research the articles that fit in the Template Box based on categories and relevant articles to the brand. I have updated the Template Box myself in the past, but this update is more involved so I'd appreciate guidance on this update.

• First, all the articles in this Template Box sandbox are or should be added to Category:Johnson & Johnson or its sister categories.
• Second, What is the protocol for COI editors adding Categories to articles? I'd be happy to assist with the heavy lifting of identifying, then adding categories to articles.
• Third, to view the proposal, please remove the nowiki line of code, then publish preview to view the Template Box.

Jax 0677 or Indefensible, would you be interested to collaborate on this?

Let me know if anyone has any questions!--Chefmikesf (talk) 23:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Chefmikesf, not sure about the COI but looks fine to me, your updates seem to make it much more comprehensive. Why did you use nowiki to keep the output in plaintext? - Indefensible (talk) 00:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I received some feedback a while back to keep the template box in the nowiki code, so I was just following my learned protocols. If the template box doesn't need them, I'm OK with this too. Would you be open to updating this or should we get Jax 0677 input too?--Chefmikesf (talk) 03:19, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Chefmikesf, what is the difference between subsidiaries and acquisitions? For example, it looks like Abbott Medical Optics was an acquisition. Can you also please merge legacy brands into brands and former subsidiaries into subsidiaries? Did not know about the nowiki thing, think we can ignore it unless anyone says otherwise. - Indefensible (talk) 14:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Indefensible,

The subsidiaries section are the companies in Johnson & Johnson's three business divisions. I see your point that the Acquisition section is redundant. I'd be open to move the three companies in the subsidiary section and remove the acquisitions section from the Template Box.

Abbott Medical Optics is an excellent example of a brand inconsistency. The current name of that organization is Johnson & Johnson Vision, but the Wikipedia article is yet to reflect the change. I placed it in the subsidiary section because of its actual name (located in the article's Infobox); with anticipation, the update will occur in the future.

In terms of merging legacy brands and former subsidiaries into brands and subsidiaries, could you help me understand your idea? We seem to have the same intent, make it easier for the reader. If it's helpful to know my thought process, the sections and subsections within the Template Box are modeled from examples found in Template:WikiProject Companies and Category:Template-Class company articles. Thus I found it appropriate to add Former Subsidiaries and Legacy Brands to the Johnson & Johnson Template Box. What are your thoughts merging the two sections into one section called Former Subsidiaries and Legacy Brands?--Chefmikesf (talk) 18:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Indefensible, Do you have any input on the comments above? Always appreciated--Chefmikesf (talk) 19:20, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Chefmikesf, sorry, somehow forgot about this. My previous question was are the "Legacy Brands" still part of J&J, or are they brands which J&J has discontinued or sold? If they are still J&J brands, then I think the section can be merged with the "Brands" section, as I do not understand the distinction. If they are no longer J&J's brands, then maybe something like "Former Brands" would make more sense, similar to "Former Subsidiaries." For example, I randomly picked Cetirizine from the "Legacy Brands" section and it still seems to be a J&J brand, so I do not understand why it would not just be listed under "Brands." - Indefensible (talk) 03:22, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Indefensible, That's a good call out and clarification. Yes, the "Legacy Brands" section are brands discontinued by Johnson & Johnson or sold to another company. I agree we re-name the section to Former Brands. Also, Cetirizine belongs in Brands, so I moved it to the appropriate section. With that said, I would feel OK publishing the template with those changes. What are your thoughts?--Chefmikesf (talk) 23:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How confident are you in the accuracy of the template draft? Cetirizine is just one I picked randomly, are the rest of them correct? If they are, then I think it should be ready to implement. - Indefensible (talk) 04:58, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indefensible, I'm confident with the template draft(see updates revision history). I reviewed the now titled "former brands" section to removes duplicates and extraneous articles. The articles that I removed still have J&J categories on the articles, so that's my mistake. The current Subsidiaries, Brands, people(both current and former), and other sections are accurate. Let me know if you have any questions or comments before you proceed. Thanks--Chefmikesf (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again User:Chefmikesf, are there any references to verify/support that all of the current listings in the draft are affiliated with J&J? For example, I picked 2 more--Axert and Edurant--and did not see any reference to J&J in either of those 2 articles which would indicate that they are their brands. We may have to go through and update each of the articles to be added into the template. - Indefensible (talk) 00:55, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Indefensible, Thanks for your observation. I am aware not every Wikipedia article mentions the Johnson & Johnson brand. What I have provided here are reliable sources that names Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries. Is this sufficient?--Chefmikesf (talk) 03:20, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let me go through these one by one and see about updating the articles as needed; may take some time. - Indefensible (talk) 04:42, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indefensible, I'm starting to see the review process may get a bit complex, Would it be helpful if I created a checklist to track our progress? I added the appropriate changes to the Template Box draft from your notes on the Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Ortho-McNeil-Janssen, and Alza talk pages. Also, see the reply on Janssen Pharmaceutica's talk page.--Chefmikesf (talk) 03:08, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably break up the work and do section by section, starting with the existing ones. Let's hold off on all of the drugs for now and make sure the People and Subsidaries sections are accurate first. I can update the template as we go so that we're making some progress in manageable chunks. - Indefensible (talk) 04:03, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indefensible, Per your suggestion, I reviewed the companies section then removed a few more companies from the list. The one discrepancy I see is "Abbott Medical Optics". The article and references state:

In February 27, 2017, Abbott Medical Optics has changed its name to Johnson & Johnson Vision following its $4.3 billion acquisition by Johnson & Johnson.

What are your thoughts to update the name or propose the update on the articles talk page? I feel it should be included in the Template box.--Chefmikesf (talk) 23:19, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson & Johnson Template Box references

Axert https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2009/021001s008s009lbl.pdf Balversa https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2019/212018s000lbl.pdf Concerta https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/021121s038lbl.pdf Darzalex https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/761036s013lbl.pdf Ditropan https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2008/017577s034,018211s017,020897s018lbl.pdf Doxil https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2007/050718s029lbl.pdf Duragesic https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2005/19813s039lbl.pdf Edurant https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2011/202022s000lbl.pdf Elmiron https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2008/020193s009lbl.pdf Erleada https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2019/210951s001lbl.pdf Haldol https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2008/015923s082,018701s057lbl.pdf Imbruvica https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/210563s000lbl.pdf Intelence https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/022187s009lbl.pdf Invega https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2010/021999s018lbl.pdf Invokamet https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/204353s023lbl.pdf Invokana https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/204042s026lbl.pdf Levaquin https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/020634s069lbl.pdf Natrecor https://www.drugs.com/natrecor.html Nizoral https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2013/018533s040lbl.pdf Micronor https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/appletter/2014/016954Orig1s106ltr.pdf Ortho Tri-Cyclen https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2013/019653Orig1s046,%20019697Orig1s042lbl.pdf Ortho-Cyclen https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2013/019653Orig1s046,%20019697Orig1s042lbl.pdf Ortho-Novum https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/017735s118,017919s100,018985s064lbl.pdf Prezcobix https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/205395s009lbl.pdf Prezista https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/021976s021lbl.pdf Procrit https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/103234s5363s5366lbl.pdf Razadyne https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/021169Orig1s032,021224Orig1s030,021615Orig1s023lbl.pdf Remicade https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2013/103772s5359lbl.pdf Risperdal https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2010/020588s046lbl.pdf Simponi https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2011/125289s0064lbl.pdf Sirturo https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/204384s000lbl.pdf Sporanox https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/020083s062lbl.pdf Spravato https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-new-nasal-spray-medication-treatment-resistant-depression-available-only-certified Stelara https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2016/761044lbl.pdf Sylvant https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2014/125496s000lbl.pdf Symtuza https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/210455s000lbl.pdf Terazol https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2004/19579slr026,19641slr022,19964slr021_terazol_lbl.pdf Topamax https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/020844s041lbl.pdf Tremfya https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/761061s000lbl.pdf Ultracet https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/761061s000lbl.pdf Ultram https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/021692s015lbl.pdf Vermox https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2016/208398s000lbl.pdf Xarelto https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2014/022406s015lbl.pdf Yondelis https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2015/207953s000lbl.pdf Zytiga https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2011/202379lbl.pdf Opsumit https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2016/761044lbl.pdf Tracleer https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/209279s000lbl.pdf Zavesca https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2008/021348s005lbl.pdf Uptravi https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2015/207947s000lbl.pdf Veletri https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2012/022260s005lbl.pdf Vintivis https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2013/021779s014lbl.pdf Vermax https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/017481s047lbl.pdf

Johnson & Johnson Template Box Proposal

This template's initial visibility currently defaults to autocollapse, meaning that if there is another collapsible item on the page (a navbox, sidebar, or table with the collapsible attribute), it is hidden apart from its title bar; if not, it is fully visible. To change this template's initial visibility, the |state= parameter may be used: {{Johnson & Johnson|state=collapsed}} will show the template collapsed, i.e. hidden apart from its title bar. {{Johnson & Johnson|state=expanded}} will show the template expanded, i.e. fully visible. References

Companies/Subsidiaries

Hi User:Chefmikesf, making a new section to focus just on the first part. Janssen Biotech looks current, but neither of the next 2 (Ortho Pharmaceutical and Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development) look active and should probably be included in the "former" section. The draft needs to be updated for accuracy before it can be implemented. - Indefensible (talk) 03:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Indefensible, The companies section is updated now. Do you have any input on my Johnson & Johnson Vision comments and questions above?--Chefmikesf (talk) 00:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Grand'mere Eugene, Per our conversation on the JNJ Wikipedia article, the Consumer Healthcare sections no longer belong on the template box. I have the code fixed in my sandbox if you have time. If you're busy, I'm happy to make the updates if you give me the OK. Always a pleasure--Chefmikesf (talk) 18:50, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the Consumer Healthcare section, but the formatting withouth the break codes in the headings pushed all the content to a smaller left column. Were there other changes besides the Consumer Healthcare deletion? — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 20:01, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, hat was a bit of a confusing adventure for me in the land of templates. I finally managed the deletion of the Consumer Healthcare sections while maintaining the formatting of the previous headings, but I noticed that your talk page version left out Abiomed from the Acquisitions section. Let me know if that was intentional? — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Grand'mere Eugene I agree, the template code can be finicky, Indefensible and I took a few months to build the initial structure of the Template. Abiomed a great addition to the template box. I can do another study of other articles we can add to the template box now that we cleaned it up. Thanks for your help. --Chefmikesf (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]