User talk:Jaguar

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  1. April 2010 - December 2010
  2. January 2011 - March 2011
  3. March 2011 - July 2011
  4. July 2011 - November 2011
  5. November 2011 - March 2012
  6. March 2012 - May 2012
  7. May 2012 - July 2012
  8. July 2012 - October 2013
  9. December 2013 - May 2014
  10. May 2014 - September 2014
  11. September 2014 - December 2014
  12. January 2015 - March 2015
  13. March 2015 - April 2015
  14. May 2015 - June 2015
  15. July 2015 - August 2015
  16. September 2015
  17. October 2015

2015 GA Cup Wrap-Up[edit]

WikiProject Good Articles's 2015 GA Cup - Finals/Wrap-Up

Symbol support vote.svg

The second-ever GA Cup is now over! The competition officially ended Thursday. Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially to our finalists.

The winner of the 2nd GA Cup is Zwerg Nase! He earned 408 points, over 100 points more than he earned in all previous rounds. He tied with our second-place winner, Sturmvogel 66 with 367 points, in number of articles reviewed (24), and they earned almost the same points for reviewing articles that were in the queue the longest (Zwerg with 322, Sturmvogel with 326). Basically, they tied in points, but what made the different for Zwerg was the advantage he had in reviewing longer articles. It seems that the rule change of earning more realistic points for longer articles made a difference. All of our contestants should be proud of the work they were able to accomplish through the GA Cup. Congrats to these worthy opponents!

Our third and fourth place winners, Johanna and Tomandjerry211, also ran a close race, with 167 points and 147 points respectfully. We had one withdrawal; we found it interesting that competitors dropped out in Round 2 and 3 as well. One of the original judges and co-creator of this competition, User:Dom497 stepped down as judge during Round 3; as stated previously, we will miss his input and wish him the best.

The judges were pleased with our results, even though fewer users competed this time compared to our inaugural competition. We recognize that this might be due to holding the competition during the summer months. We intend on looking more closely when we should conduct this contest, as well as other aspects of the GA Cup. We've set up a feedback page for everyone's input about how we should conduct the contest and what rule changes should be made. If you have any ideas about how we can improve things, please visit it and give us your input.

Again, thanks to all and congratulations to our winners! Please stay tuned for the start of GA Cup #3.

Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar and MrWooHoo.

GA cup notice[edit]

The message was again sent without a timestamp, so bots won't archive it. I believe mass message tool warns you if there's no timestamp? MusikAnimal talk 21:22, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that! This was my first time mass-sending a newsletter and I assumed the bot would automatically sign (with its signature) itself. I didn't see any popup alerting me that there wasn't a timestamp, but it was still my fault. Thanks for letting me know. It won't happen again. JAGUAR  22:55, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
No worries, we did just fine without archiving bots for years :) Maybe the message only shows if you preview first? You are right though that the bot adds a signature much of the time, as we see with the Signpost. I don't have an answer for why it didn't here. Anyway when the message is from multiple users as this one was, you can put a ~~~~~ (5 tildes) within the body of the message itself and that will do the trick. E.g. it doesn't have to be at the end of the message for the bots to recognize it. Hope this helps. Cheers MusikAnimal talk 23:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I definitely won't get it wrong next time. I'm not sure why the bot didn't sign that message but I think it might have been to do with me not putting a timestamp on it. JAGUAR  20:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Frank Jenner[edit]

Hi Jaguar,

Thank you again for your FAC review of the Frank Jenner article. The article has been promoted and I have nominated it to go up on the main page here.

Neelix (talk) 17:47, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Nice work, Neelix! I'll be happy to have a look. JAGUAR  20:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Papa Oppong GA nomination[edit]

Hello, I have another basketball biography awaiting GA review (player name is Papa Oppong). I would appreciate it if you take a look...feel free to start the nomination if you want. TempleM (talk) 17:55, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure thing, taken. JAGUAR  20:02, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2/Editnotice[edit]

Hello Jaguar,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2/Editnotice for deletion, because it seems to be a test. Did you know that the Wikipedia Sandbox is available for testing out edits?

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. FallingGravity (talk) 21:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

You're looking for Template:Editnotices/Page/Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2. This should only be used if usage of American English has been a persistent problem MusikAnimal talk 22:24, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Ah, thanks! That was the one. There's a bit of a dispute on its talk page regarding the usage of British numbers and spelling. I didn't see a red "page notice" link when I clicked edit, so I attempted to create an editnotice manually. The editnotice is also used throughout the Harry Potter articles (not done by me). I'll fix it now. JAGUAR  22:27, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battlefield Germany[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battlefield Germany you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg 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 AdrianGamer -- AdrianGamer (talk) 10:01, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battlefield Germany[edit]

The article Battlefield Germany you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. 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:Battlefield Germany for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AdrianGamer -- AdrianGamer (talk) 06:21, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Stefan Bonneau GA nomination[edit]

Hello, could you please see the Stefan Bonneau article and start the GA review if you want? Another user, Hansi667, has put in a lot of work into expanding it. TempleM (talk) 15:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

No problem. I've taken the GAN JAGUAR  21:16, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi Jaguar. The dead links and prose issues are taken care of. Hansi667 (Neighbor Of The Beast) a penny for your thoughts? 20:47, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll have another look. JAGUAR  21:42, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


I've nominated this article for FAC which also happens to be my first attempt. It is also the first Indian Telugu film article to be nominated for such status. If interested, please leave your comments here. All constructive comments are welcomed. Yours sincerely, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 09:08, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look shortly. JAGUAR  10:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments, Jaguar. One share-worthy thing. The language's name is Telugu, not Tegulu. Strangely, Tegulu is also a Telugu word, which means arrogance. Face-smile.svg Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:55, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Oops!! Sorry that was a typo. I'm about to go out now, but once I get back I'll take another look at the FAC. JAGUAR  11:57, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Mullum Malarum FAC[edit]

Kailash29792 has nominated the article for FAC. Feel free to leave comments at its FAC page. Face-smile.svg  — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 09:25, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it soon. JAGUAR  10:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Britain (video game)[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:01, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Vishal Bhardwaj[edit]

Sorry to disturb you. Can you please review this article? Its quite small in size, and won't take much time. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:48, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

I'd be happy to! I've taken the GAN. JAGUAR  13:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. :) Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:53, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
I'll be on a wiki-break from sunday, so if you could finish the review before that. Yashthepunisher (talk) 04:15, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay. I'll finish it today, that's a promise! JAGUAR  12:26, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject French Overseas Territories[edit]

Hi Jaguar. There is currently no content in this template. See Talk:Charles Houël du Petit Pré. Is it to come, or was this in error? Bests, Savvyjack23 (talk) 23:50, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, appears to be an error. I'll get back to AWB and fix it. Regards JAGUAR  23:52, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I've noticed that some edits have content while some others don't. Thanks for your contribution. Cheers. Savvyjack23 (talk) 23:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
OK, I've re-programmed AWB to remove all malformed templates and I'll replace them with the proper French Overseas Departments template. Thanks for pointing that out to me! Looks like I'm going to be up all night. JAGUAR  00:03, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome and believe me, I know exactly what you are going through Face-smile.svg. By the way your | blp=yes isn't registering either as seen in Talk:La Perfecta and in a few others. Savvyjack23 (talk) 06:31, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Why are you (i) placing additional project banners at the top of the page, instead of after the last one that's already there; (ii) ignoring the presence of {{WikiProjectBannerShell}} and putting project banners outside it; (iii) not setting |class= when the other banners have it set consistently; (iv) adding an unnecessary newline before the closing double brace? See this edit which exhibits all four problems. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I wish I knew why. That's just the ways of the Kingbotk plugin which I find annoyingly limited. It always adds an unnecessary new line before the closing brackets and I can never set a class or importance parameter without having to manually choose "find and replace" and go over whatever I edited all over again. It does, however, have the option of adding banner shells to the talkpage, which I always do. Not sure why it missed adding a banner shell in the instances you mentioned? JAGUAR  21:55, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm not asking you to add a banner shell. I'm asking you to check if there is one already, and if so, put your additional banner template inside that banner shell, and not before it. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:52, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Also, don't move WikiProject banners around so that they are split by something else. In this edit, you moved the {{WPAVIATION}} so that it was after the {{reqphoto}}. There was no reason to do that, and no reason why you could not have simply put the new {{WikiProject French Overseas Departments}} in between {{WPAVIATION}} and {{reqphoto}} leaving both of those where they were. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:43, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
It's the plugin for AWB. I think it's flawed. I don't know if there are better scripts out there that allow you to customise talk page tagging but the Kingbotk plugin I use is made so you can't change a thing. If I had a script that did its job properly I'll be more than happy to run over the pages again and correct any annoyances. JAGUAR  13:29, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


Hello, fellow member of the French Overseas Departments and Territories wikiproject. Just popping in to say hi. I noticed a potnetial similarity between your views about the EU and wikipedia. I would certainly agree about the EU but I perhaps do not know wikipedia governance well enough. Munci (talk) 19:43, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi Munci! Thank you for joining the French Overseas project. I'm still in the middle of setting everything up and tagging project templates on every talk page. There's still a lot to do, but I'm ploughing through it. I used to have a dozen userboxes criticising the EU but now I've reduced it to a couple. I have a lot to say about the EU and Wikipedia, but if I did I'm afraid my reply might be a few paragraphs long! JAGUAR  19:47, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Marie Serneholt[edit]

If you want to, please take a look at this weeks TAFI selected article, Marie Serneholt. Regards.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Category:Geography of Queen Maud Land[edit]

Why are you adding this category to articles that are already categorized in sub-categories of Geography of Queen Maud Land? - 4ing (talk) 13:59, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I'm adding the category to Queen Maud Land to make it a lot easier for me to tag WikiProjects to their respective Antarctic territories. It's mainly a personal preference, but if you want I could remove the category and tag the WikiProjects another way, I really don't mind. JAGUAR  14:02, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
I can't see sufficient reason to deviate from Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing pages: if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it is not normally placed directly into C. - 4ing (talk) 14:08, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
OK, I'm going to remove the categories from Queen Maud Land now. At the same time I thought it might be helpful to organise all geographical features into one category, but I think I was over-categorising things. Sorry for any inconvenience caused. JAGUAR  14:10, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

On second thought, I originally thought that placing all articles in one big category would be helpful to myself for tagging projects, however now that everything is finished I think the categories are redundant and should be removed per Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing pages. It's redundant to have a main "geography of the Ross Dependency" whereas it already has sub-categories. Unless anybody disagrees, I'll begin removing the redundant categories now. I'll link back here if anyone questions why I'm mass-removing everything. JAGUAR  18:28, 21 November 2015 (UTC)


Hi. Can't you see that the talkpages are already tagged with low importance? Thanks. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 20:58, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I think I have the answer for the handful of duplicated "|importance=low" parameters. AWB is limited in what it can do as the only way I can tag articles for low importance is to overwrite the WikiProject template. I think if somebody assessed it as low importance before I got to it with AWB, then it'll create a duplicate. I'm sorry if it's caused any inconvenience, AWB does suck. Thankfully it's only a handful. If you spot any more, I think I can fix them (again) with AWB. Regards JAGUAR  21:04, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
seriously bad idea. Frietjes (talk) 23:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Oh my. What in god's name is that? That has to be a glitch. I've never seen AWB do that before. JAGUAR  23:27, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
You have made a lot of bad edits recently, all using AWB, adding non-existent WikiProject templates and also breaking those that are already there. Please observe WP:AWB#Rules of use item 1, and preview your edits before saving. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:35, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
24 edits in a row to the same page, all with the same broken regexp will do that. Frietjes (talk) 23:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
Sorry about that. I made a few errors with the first fifteen talk page templates I added, but I won't let this happen again. I still don't understand how I could have edited the page 24 times in a row, I think something like that would be impossible to do deliberately. JAGUAR  17:18, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
please stop your edits on Talk:Admiralty Mountains. (talk) 18:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Done and fixed. JAGUAR  18:48, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
um, no, what about all your other edits? we should start a WP:BOTREQ to rollback all of your edits? (talk) 20:05, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
okay it looks like it's time for ANI to have you blocked? this is after you said you fixed it. (talk) 20:23, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
I don't think any rollbacks would be necessary. At any rate, I have now finished tagging the Ross Dependency for New Zealand and on top of that, practically almost all stub tagging for the overseas territories is now complete. Any future tagging would be on a much smaller scale and I will do that without AWB. I realise that I made a few errors today, and yes, I take full responsibility for my AWB edits and during the tagging today I personally skipped over 300 articles that were either off-topic or already tagged. I didn't just leave it on "auto-pilot" and let it make errors without me knowing. What isn't my fault however, is how some articles are in the wrong categories and I genuinely have no idea why it causes errors such as text duplication. I really don't have an explanation for that, so it has to be a glitch. I've seen it happen before and I either skipped them or reverted them myself. JAGUAR  20:44, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
And when I said "done and fixed" I was referring to your first message you left here. JAGUAR  20:46, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
What happened? I thought you were going to take me to ANI to get me blocked? Tosser. JAGUAR  16:50, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Wow, seriously? you are insulting someone who cleaned up your mistakes? Frietjes (talk) 02:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Re edits like this. Altering stub to Stub is pointless, the values fed into |class= are case-insensitive. Adding |importance=low before an empty |importance= is also pointless, since the second overrides the first and the page remains in Category:Unknown-importance French Overseas Departments articles - it is not added to Category:Low-importance French Overseas Departments articles; but it also means that the page ends up in Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. Are you still omitting the WP:PREVIEW step? --Redrose64 (talk) 00:40, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
can you stop using AWB until someone can show you how to use it without introducing loads of errors. I just spent way too much time reverting about 130 of your edits. if there is already importance parameter, don't add a second one. if there is already a project tag, don't add a duplicate project tag. given how many times you have been asked to stop, we should probably just have your AWB rights revoked. while cleaning up your edits, I noticed that Redrose64 has been cleaning them up as well. Frietjes (talk) 02:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I'll stop using AWB for project tags now. Let me explain everything:
  • I had no idea that the capitalisation of "stub" would make any difference. The Kingbotk plugin always writes it out with a capital 'S', but for what it's worth I did change it to the lowercase 's' in my recent edits.
  • I take steps to make sure that I don't make any errors. I don't know how else to say this but I really have no idea on why it duplicates |importance=low sometimes. To counter this I program AWB to skip all pages with "importance=low" already set, and last night it automatically skipped over 1000 so I assumed it worked. I don't know why it still makes errors especially when I make several attempts to safeguard it. JAGUAR  14:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
You made 5663 edits on 23 November, of which 5607 were in the 227-minute period between 15:19 and 19:06. That is a rate of 24.7 per minute, which is well above the maximum rate of six per minute permitted for registered bots performing non-urgent tasks - see WP:BOTREQUIRE; and you have not, AFAIK, registered yourself as a bot. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:45, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Pinto FAC[edit]

I see that you're back. I've nominated the article for FAC. Since you'd copy-edited it, you might be interested in reviewing it. Thanks, Vensatry (Talk) 17:39, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I'll be happy to have a look soon. JAGUAR  20:42, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay. I'll get on it tonight, I promise. JAGUAR  16:51, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

AWB 2[edit]

are you actually checking before you do anything on AWB? At 20 to 15 edits a minute, are you sure you are getting it right?

Maluku is in Indonesia, and is not in Guam territory. Please, dont just promise to mend your ways with AWB (like the talk item above), slow downand look at what you are doing. JarrahTree 00:24, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject United States Territories. The aim of this project is to bring together editors working on articles related to the current sixteen Territories of the United States - there is nothing about the HISTORIC Spanish east indies (1890s to 1940s) being something current. Your are rapidly adding a contemporary project tag on a historical subject. PLEASE do something about you AWB editing. Before someone blocks you. JarrahTree 00:31, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I do watch them as they go by, and I have personally skipped over 200 that didn't belong to Guam (including the Philippines as a country). I hope nobody takes this the wrong way (I know they will anyway) but it really isn't my fault that things that aren't related to Guam are still placed in the Guam category. I ask myself why on earth was the Philippines and Maluku in the category? Sorry, just a rant. I can't do this any other way but I'm always doing my best to be careful. Rarely these things happen, and I don't know which settlements aren't in Guam, so if they are pointed out to me I'll remove them myself. Regards JAGUAR  00:32, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Some eds would take your explanation as a sign you are prepared to admit so something, that is a start.. You have to get a handle on the spanish east indies - they finished in 1940s, I am almost certain the U S Territories is considered to be a contemporary project, you need to ascertain at the project whether it includes historical (which should be handled by former countries project anyways). Dont take my messages as a blame trip, its all the more that you get a good understanding of how some material is not that easy to run AWB over. Take it easy, just slow down and check things. cheers JarrahTree 00:37, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm always trying to be more careful running AWB and I'm trying to aim for a 100% accuracy rate. I made a handful of ugly errors a couple of days ago, which were speedily fixed. Tagging pages for a project in a category isn't easy, and usually the category itself is so vague that it covers things from plants to people, which I mostly try to avoid. I think that the project's scope should cover anything contemporary as well as whenever the country had sovereign rule over the territory. For example if the US had a territory since the 1800s then I'd like to add a project tag for a battle that occurred in that time period, etc. I've almost finished tagging everything for US territories, thankfully they have less territories than the UK and France. JAGUAR  00:42, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Hang on - you personally might like to add 1800s us territories - but there is nothing in the statement of the project that it relates to anything, and if someone looks at the talk page and sees us territory - and there is nothing to qualify that it was historically and not contemporary, you are gonna find yourself deep in there. Speak to others on the territoy project and make sure there is a clear consenus in the project space that it will be including historical territory... otherwise youre leaving yourself in even more vulnerable positions.
The territory finished in the philipines in the 1940s, make sure you are really clear that the project tag you are placing at 20 a minute looks like contemporary. Some people are not going to be happy unless you find some way of clarifying the context and saying it was... between... and ... otherwise someone will want to really have a go. JarrahTree 01:14, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I understand. I'll ask others on what they think about the project scope and whether or not it should be revised. I would personally like to keep it to all current territories (and their histories under US rule) rather than every territory once held. The difference between the British Empire project and WP:BDT is that the latter encompasses current territories, while the former, well, 25% of the earth's surface. That would be fun tagging. Anyway, I find myself stuck with the US project, so I'll ask others for help. JAGUAR  01:18, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
The members of each WikiProject reserve the right to determine which pages fall within its scope. The one place that WP:OWN does not apply is in the case of WikiProject tagging: if the members have said "this WikiProject is not interested in this article" (or the opposite), you can't go against that decision. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:28, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

re Little America[edit]

Just asking, but what does Little America have to do with New Zealand? Herostratus (talk) 18:52, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Little America (exploration base) is in the Ross Dependency, which is a New Zealand territory of Antarctica. Furthermore the base was in the New Zealand-owned category, so I think it falls under WP:NZ. If you think it should be removed from the talk page, please feel free! Regards JAGUAR  18:54, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
The Ross Dependency is a claimed New Zealand territory of Antarctica but "most countries do not recognise territorial claims in Antarctica." And since AFAIK no Kiwis were involved in any iterations of Little America (unless some random individuals by chance) it's pretty peripheral to New zealand so yeah I removed it. Herostratus (talk) 04:49, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Deletion review for Folklore Museum of Velventos[edit]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Folklore Museum of Velventos. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -PanchoS (talk) 02:34, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject British Overseas Territories tags[edit]

Hi Jaguar! I've reverted some of the tags you added to articles that I don't think are relevant to the project. Specifically, the articles are about multilateral treaties that are extended to British Overseas Territories. Regards, – Zntrip 22:09, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, ah sorry about that! I forgot remove all treaties from the category in which I'm tagging. I've now stopped my tagging and removed all keywords such as "Agreement" and "Convention" etc so it should omit all treaties from being tagged. JAGUAR  22:11, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
No worries. It's a common mistake. It's happened before with the Romania and New Zealand WikiProjects as well. – Zntrip 22:14, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I also reverted a recent edit that added Wikipedia:WikiProject British Overseas Territories to Category talk:Moorish architecture as it doesn't seem related. Thanks. APK whisper in my ear 01:28, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I haven't reverted anything, but how exactly is a historic medersa in Morocco related to a British overseas territory or treaty? Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:32, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry about that. There are a few entries in Category:Gibraltar that slips by, and some omissions in the category is questionable! I've removed the tag from Bou Inania Madrasa. I have no idea how they're related or even in the category. I have now finished my tagging for WP:BDT - anything other tagging is optional and will be done manually but I can rest now that the bulk of tagging is done. JAGUAR  14:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Rawson Plateau[edit]

I've been resolving the actual location of "Rawson Plateau" in Antarctica (Admiral Byrd mentions it in his book "Alone") -- and I want to gather up a scrapbook for my buddy - his son.

His father always 'treated me 'right' back when I called for his son Ken at home back in the '70s (when we were High School) - perhaps he knew of my Dad (being USNR in WWII & Korea)...or I just acted right.

Gathering the facts and the history of real heroes - especially when you know / of them...even if you did not really know way back then -- is gratifying. Pulling this together for KLR (Junior) on his 60th in January will be a treat.

Any further details and/or sources you could recommend would be appreciated. Sincerely (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2015 (UTC) Michael McCrave (

Hi Michael. A geographical search of the Rawson Plateau puts it at 85° 52' 00" south and 164° 45' 00" west, though there is no satellite or terrain coverage of that area. In these cases Wikipedia usually acts as the best reliable information, given that the article cites reliable sources. It's in the Ross Dependency which is claimed by New Zealand and from what I can find it was mapped by Admiral Byrd in his 1928-30 expedition on behalf of the United States Geological Survey. I'm afraid information on this plateau is scarce, but is there anything else I can help you with? JAGUAR  20:39, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Jumping Flash![edit]

DYK for Pssst[edit]

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 00:02, 21 November 2015 (UTC)


Hello Jaguar,

Just being curious: why do you first add pages to the category 'Geography of the British Antarctic Territory' and now say this category is redundant and revert all your contributions? Kind regards, Coldbolt (talk) 18:40, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I explained above for self reference - I added the main category 'Geography of the British Antarctic Territory' to make it much easier for myself to tag articles for their respective WikiProjects, but now they're all tagged I see them redundant as 4ing pointed out to me that per Wikipedia:Categorization#Categorizing pages: if a page belongs to a subcategory of C (or a subcategory of a subcategory of C, and so on) then it is not normally placed directly into C. If you disagree with this, I'll be happy to revert my actions. I know oddity with adding a category then removing it - but I think that the geography of certain areas are already covered in different categories. Regards JAGUAR  18:47, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Ah I understand. Thankyou for your clear explanation. Coldbolt (talk) 19:49, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg A cup of tea for you from Kurdistan. :) Serchia (talk) 16:44, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)