Jump to content

User talk:Jaguar/Archive 28

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Jaguar

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 11:10, 10 March 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31

GA?

Would you have time to review Bleib bei uns, denn es will Abend werden, BWV 6 for GA? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! - Same question now for Erfreut euch, ihr Herzen, BWV 66. It's an Easter cantata that appeared already on DYK, but will be linked on Sunday, and should be in best shape. If you don't have time for a review, just a look for prose issues would be nice, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:49, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the review, - please check my changes, if possible soon. DYK that the cantata was written for Monday but is linked on Sunday? (while a hymn for Sunday will not appear at all, and an anthem got so much pressure that I gave it up?) - But yesterday was good on DYK! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:41, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

A;l done! Sorry for the delay. I've been really busy off-wiki lately. If you nominate it at DYK now then somebody is likely to review it if you ask them? Does it have to be on the main page in time for Easter? JAGUAR  16:53, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Thank you, all fine, - it was on DYK lang ago, but is linked tomorrow. Happy Easter! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:04, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

AWB

I found three mistakes introduced using AWB's "typo fixing" function in your last run:

You noticed another one yourself:

I will remove your AWB access when I see you introduce one more mistake by "typo fixing". Misleading readers by changing Guines to Guinness is a lot worse than 500 missing commas after "Subsequently". If you don't catch mistakes like changing "Evilton" into "Evolution" you are not careful enough to use AWB. —Kusma (t·c) 10:01, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

So nevermind the fact that I spent around six hours of my own time fixing another user's errors on over 11,000 articles, but I make three trivial typos and it's enough to warrant a "final warning"? Maybe I should have turned off the typo fixing feature on AWB when I was fixing Bob's mangled sentences, but I'm certain that scanning an article for typos on the side is a beneficial thing. If I remember correctly I fixed around a hundred typos along the way and did indeed self-revert anything I thought was out of the ordinary, but I still fixed Bob's errors. Yes it is unfortunate that it changed "new York" to "New York", but I'm only human Kusma—I was concentrating more on removing or rephrasing Bob's nonsensical statements across almost every English settlement. Many, many errors still remain because AWB can't correct the incorrect population figures and civil parishes that he added. I'm sure AWB heavyweights make a trivial mistake every now and again, but I'm just a tad frustrated that I do something good with AWB and then I have to get reprimanded for it. I'm not sure if you were aware of the ANI discussion though to be fair. And I must point out that it's ironic that it's me fixing large-scale errors for a change and not somebody like Fram LOL! I didn't want to come across as being angry (not sure if it sounded like it, but I'm honestly not), and wanted to reaffirm that I actually like you because I know you're one of the good ones. JAGUAR  11:27, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I had been wondering what that "cleanup" was about until I realised it was more or less a mass revert of one user. Thank you for helping with this. Back to typos: You changed "new York" to "New York", not "it". Typo fixing needs lots of concentration, so please do not do it if you are not willing to pay a lot more attention. When there is any doubt about an edit, just skip it instead of confirming it. I have another questionable typo fix for you: shouldn't this be "unaffected"? As for "final warning", I have warned you about your AWB edits in January and in February already. I do find this a bit frustrating: I know you want to help, but you really have to reduce your editing speed (with AWB or without) and make it so slow that you do not introduce misleading errors like this. If this is too much to ask, then I'd rather have you contribute without AWB. Given that I said more or less the exact thing several times a year ago (you need to be more careful with AWB), I also don't think you should complain about being given yet another final warning instead of having access removed right away. —Kusma (t·c) 19:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

4th GA Cup - Wrap Up

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016 GA Cup - Wrap Up

Hello, GA Cup competitors!

Saturday, April 1 concluded the 2016-2017 GA Cup. 64 reviews were completed by our finalists. Although the backlog increased by 42 over the reviewing period instead of declining, the increase suggests that the contest is encouraging editors to nominate articles for review.

Congratulations to Shearonink, who is the winner of the Cup, finishing with 672 points! Once again, just as in last round, this is more than the point totals for all the other competitors combined! It was a close race for second place between Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, who achieved 164 points, and Sturmvogel_66, who earned 150. Though Sturmvogel_66 reviewed one more article than Krishna Chaitanya Velaga, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga managed to earn 14 points more due to reviewing older articles. Our two wildcard competitors, Kees08 and Chris troutman, came in fourth and fifth, respectively.

There were some bumps in the competition this time: The sign-up deadline and the first round were both extended due to fewer competitors signing up then was planned for. And there were delays in tallying points and getting out the newsletter. The judges apologize for this latter difficulty. Lastly, mid-way through the competition we bid farewell to Zwerg Nase, who stepped down from their position as judge due to other commitments. Information about the Final can be found here.

Thank you to all of our competitors, and congrats to our winners!

Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, and MrWooHoo.

To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

Your GA nomination of Bradley, Hampshire

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bradley, Hampshire you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bungle -- Bungle (talk) 14:40, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bradley, Hampshire

The article Bradley, Hampshire you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Bradley, Hampshire for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bungle -- Bungle (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Sonic CD

Hi Jaguar, I just wanted to ask, could you help me with getting the page for Sonic the Hedgehog CD to GA status? I've started a conversation on the talk page there on what needs work. ~ TheJoebro64 (talk) 23:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheJoebro64: I'd be happy to! I had been thinking of bringing this to GA for months, but never got around to it. At a glance the article appears solid enough. I'll check the talk page first, but if it's OK I'll start work on the reception section. JAGUAR  12:20, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

So...

@3family6, Figureskatingfan, and MrWooHoo: (and this is on Jaguar's talk page so they've already been 'pinged')
Well. It's been interesting for me on Wikipedia today. If you're wondering why, maybe take a look at a recent edit to Talk:Param Vir Chakra/GA1 (an article I gave its GA Review to) & the article's editing-history - which, while I was writing this up, is just now showing possible signs of a simmering edit-war...
It was so interesting reading all the different articles I reviewed (transport! pop culture! historical biographies! warfare! engineering! music! small articles! big articles! HUGE articles!), I tried to do as good and thorough a job reviewing them as I could muster, I spent countless hours reading the articles and checking the sources and checking images and trying to be a facilitator not a gatekeeper but... I do want to say that I think the GA Cup is a great idea and I appreciate the amount of work the Judges (along with BlueMoonset and some others) have put in to the GA Cup and the entire GA process.
I thought I should say something to you all since I have decided I am pulling back from doing any more GA Reviews for the foreseeable future. If the editorial consensus is that Param Vir Chakra's GA status needs to be discussed I do hope someone puts it up for a GA Reassessment so the article can be improved. I had fun doing all those GA Reviews & was thinking of starting in on some again but when something specific I do around WP ceases to be fun then that work has to go. At least for a little while. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 07:06, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Shearonink I'm sorry to hear that you've been discouraged from reviewing GA reviews, but I would like to stress that if anyone deserved to win the GA Cup, it was definitely you. You put in a lot of effort, time and determination into each GA review and that must be applauded. I've reviewed over 600 GANs and have been involved in disputes too, but I found that it's not a big deal. I've also passed a couple of GANs which have been subsequently delisted due to editing disputes—I try my best to stay out of them. Looking at Param Vir Chakra, it's not too clear on what the content dispute is about. Is it a lack of comprehensiveness? It does seem that a few of the refs are not formatted properly. JAGUAR  12:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
The disagreement is that the one editor is saying the article just isn't good enough (and if you look at the edit summaries, that is all said in such a helpful collegial tone...). I like the fact that WP:GA is a democratic procedure. Doesn't matter if you're a newbie or an editor with 100s of thousands of edits - want your article to be a GA? Then put it up GA nomination and wait your turn. And it doesn't matter if the article is pages and pages long...if it doesn't fulfill the parameters then it won't pass and you can take another run when you've fixed the issues. Fulfill all the parameters and get a review? Then the article is a GA. Sure, I can see having some doubts that a WP:GA fulfills all the parameters and putting the article up for a reassessment so it can be improved or delisted but...oh well, am taking your advice Jaguar and staying away from now on. Just made the mistake of looking in on the article's talk page.
Re: the refs - there has been so much deletion/reversion I am not sure what the references are looking like at this point and I am taking the article off my watchlist so I won't know, but according to WP:WGN (which, yeah, is an essay and not a rule/guideline but *still*), one of 'The mistakes to avoid' is "Requiring consistently formatted, complete bibliographic citations. (If you are able to figure out what the source is, that's a good enough citation for GA.)"
Re: GA Reassessment: Some editors take it very hard and seem to think that a Reassessment is some kind of an "automatic delisting!" mark of shame - editors do not always like having their article put up for a reassessment (never mind that the article needs to be improved, they really do not take the process well). There's a reason I stopped taking articles off of 'Articles needing possible reassessment'...
Jaguar, thanks for the response - greatly appreciated. Shearonink (talk) 16:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bradley, Hampshire

The article Bradley, Hampshire you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bradley, Hampshire for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bungle -- Bungle (talk) 22:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nights: Journey of Dreams

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Nights: Journey of Dreams you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ProtoDrake -- ProtoDrake (talk) 21:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Nights: Journey of Dreams

The article Nights: Journey of Dreams you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Nights: Journey of Dreams for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of ProtoDrake -- ProtoDrake (talk) 15:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Ben Affleck peer review

Hi, I noticed you left helpful feedback in the peer review of Bradley Cooper's article and wondered if you might look over Ben Affleck's article too? Thanks, Popeye191 (talk) 07:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Help on disruptive editor

Hello! Just want to ask a favor about a disruptive editor who keeps on deleting properly sourced material from the page Love in the Moonlight. The user keeps on reverting edits with unsubstantiated and unproven claims of sockpuppetry.

I hope you can restore the page to this again: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Love_in_the_Moonlight&action=edit&oldid=778284865

Thank you very much. Ni Ni Ni Ni Ni (talk) 13:22, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Film poster

FWIW, this File:Jaguar poster.jpg is now in the public domain, if you want to add it anywhere ;) We hope (talk) 13:19, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

That's so cool! Thanks. I'll have to think of a time and place to use it. JAGUAR  16:55, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Nartanasala

This is one of those pet projects i am undertaking before the completion of the last of the three tasks. Given the time taken by them, i feel that these would be more in number and more often too. If interested, can you review the GAN of Nartanasala? Please let me know. Regards, ** Pavan Jandhyala ** 16:35, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I've taken the GAN and should review it within a day or two. I too have been thinking about retiring. Sadly I haven't had the time, motivation or drive to produce content over these past couple of months. I'll still be more than happy to assist you with your final three tasks though! JAGUAR  16:57, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Haha! Lets rest together then. :-p Will surely be happy if you would help. Of course you never denied it, even in eerie times. :) ** Pavan Jandhyala ** 17:33, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
I'll see how things go in early June, and if nothing happens for me then I'll probably take an indefinite hiatus from Wikipedia. Always happy to help! I'll finish that review shortly. JAGUAR  10:48, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
What happened? I was about to ask you for help for an article - not by me - that received a GA review which was not good enough: The Fountainhead, - remembering the Lilacs. They are in bloom. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:41, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi Gerda, I was going to post a message explaining my decision and how this might seem abrupt but I'm afraid that I've been feeling an increasing lack of motivation to edit over the past few months. Unfortunately I have little time to edit nowadays and haven't brought myself to produce content like I was last year. My decision is entirely personal but I'll wait until June to see if I'll have some more free time. I posted the semi-retired template to let people know that my time is severely limited. I hope that perhaps a long wikibreak will refresh me—so I'm thinking of this as an "indefinite hiatus"! JAGUAR  20:52, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for explaining, and a bit relieved, because typically it seems to be my fault when good editors leave. Just do what's best for you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:58, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Importance

Hey Jaguar, what do you think the importance should be for this article 2009 Saipan Shooting, for WP:UST, it is definitely mid or low but I am not sure which.

Thanks, Alex the Nerd (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I think it should be low importance as long as it didn't have a large impact. JAGUAR  09:39, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Kalidas (film)

The article is undergoing a FAR here. Please provide comments before it is closed. Thank you.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 09:02, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

RV Vandalism

Hello! Please help in reverting this edit https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Love_in_the_Moonlight&diff=780988055&oldid=780972209.

The IP address is claiming that another IP address is a sock-puppet with no proof or confirmation of sockpuppetry. Thanks! MakeASongBoring (talk) 12:25, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

GA Nominations

Hi Jag, I hope you are well. I've come to you given that you've reviewed some of the articles I've worked on before. If you have time, would you consider having a look to review some of the Sport and recreation nominations for GA status? I have four articles of my own awaiting review but the backlog seems to be preventing any real progress. The articles I have pending are Lewis Holtby, Alban Lafont, Álvaro Domínguez Soto and Nahikari García but there are over 100 other articles in the category. Thanks, Liam E. Bekker (talk) 11:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, sorry for the late reply. I've reserved the reviews and should finish them by Sunday if that's OK. JAGUAR  11:35, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Jag, thanks a million for the reviews. The time and effort is greatly appreciated. Cheers, Liam E. Bekker (talk) 18:57, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Isabelle Eberhardt

Hi Jaguar. I've nominated Isabelle Eberhardt for FAC. See here. As per the last peer review you seemed to think it was FAC ready, so just thought I'd ask for you comments on the nomination. Of course, no worries if you're too busy, and as always I would be most happy to review/work on something in return for your comments. Freikorp (talk) 11:54, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

I left a support. Sorry if it seems short but I really couldn't find anything wrong with the article! JAGUAR  11:50, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks so much. :) Freikorp (talk) 22:36, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

If you've got any time...

Hey, if you've got any time would you be able to take a look at the sources on Fallout 4: Far Harbor? It's all I need to complete [FAC]. Cheers, Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:02, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Ready for FA?

Hi again Jaguar. I'm wondering if you think Francesco Totti might be read for FA status now? Thanks. Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 12:45, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Vaselineeeeeeee, I think it looks good to go. It's certainly comprehensive enough, and remains well written after the GA review. I'm afraid I won't have time to do a review as I'm planing on taking a long hiatus from Wikipedia until the winter, but I did a cursory scan through the sources and I couldn't find any issues with the formatting etc. I really do think it stands a great chance at FAC. Good luck! JAGUAR  18:14, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Counter Logic Gaming

Counter Logic Gaming, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Cognissonance (talk) 07:23, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Wipeout Omega Collection

Hi Jaguar, this game is now available and there are many reviews out in the public domain. My suggestion would be to reinstate the content you redirected to allow it to be properly expanded and reviews added particularly. A section on the game needs to be added on the Wipeout (series) page also. All the best, Mountaincirque 09:22, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Nights: Journey of Dreams

On 12 June 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Nights: Journey of Dreams, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the video game Nights: Journey of Dreams inspired an unofficial two-CD tribute album? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nights: Journey of Dreams. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Nights: Journey of Dreams), 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.

Mifter (talk) 00:03, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Great Stuff

Have you got some other articles in the sleeves? 01:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.46.77.153 (talk)

Precious two years!

Precious
Two years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:08, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Retirement

What's all this about retirement? You've not been emailing much either. You alright? Or just burned out on here with the hot summer and all? It's understandable, particularly with mentally ill trolls online.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:29, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

He said that the hiatus would continue until the winter (obviously at his place). Waiting. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 14:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@Dr. Blofeld and Pavanjandhyala: Hope he comes back. God willing.  — Ssven2 Looking at you, kid 15:48, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks both! I still don't know what to make of this. Outside the sun is out and it puts me off not only editing but staying inside for too long. I don't know what happened to me but I just got so fed up with this place and like Dr. Blofeld put it, the hostility around here. I couldn't feel compelled enough to write anything either, and I'm not sure if I still do. I come back today to revert something and then that led me correcting a handful of annoying errors, but I doubt I'll be able to churn out the monthly 20 GAs like I used to back in the good old days. Wikipedia needs to change, that's for sure. If I do come back properly I'll have to change my editing style. JAGUAR  13:10, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Oh well. I hope to see you back here sometime in the future! Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:30, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you both! I'm still on an extended break but depending on how busy I think my editing might be sporadic at best from now until the end of the year. I've got a couple of projects I'd like to complete until then. JAGUAR  22:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
In that case, best of luck with the projects. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jaguar/Archive_28&oldid=1143864498"