User talk:Jaguar/Archive 20

Aagadu
Can you please review this another GAN of mine? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:21, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Will be happy to, Pavan! JAG  UAR   15:26, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing the article, Jaguar. To be very much honest, Aagadu is not a good film. But, the article had a very good potential. After watching Chennai Express and Once Upon ay Time in Mumbai Dobaara!, i concluded that a good article cannot guarantee a good film always. Hence, i made this a GAN. I am working on two articles right now—Malliswari (1951) (to be reviewed by Dr. Blofeld) and 1: Nenokkadine (2014) (another commercial failure, but surely a good film). I am not sure you can like the latter, considering that we have 'n' number of films similar to it in Hollywood. Here is its trailer and it can prove me right. What say? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:18, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I just watched the trailer and the part where he was riding the motorbike at 0.35 sounded like a joke! Did they really have to add a sound effect at that moment? I haven't watched the film so I can't judge it but I would agree with you, it seems like they wasted a lot of potential. I remember Mahesh Babu from Pokiri (I've watched it twice because I liked it so much). He must be a good actor so it must have been a shame to star in that film. I'll be happy to review 1: Nenokkadine when the time comes. JAG  UAR   13:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Pavan, even a featured article cannot always guarantee a good film. Battlefield Earth, Gemini and Greed are featured articles, but the first film is the polar opposite of Citizen Kane. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:36, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Interesting. But GA status is more than enough for Aagadu. If 1: Nenokkadine becomes a GA, i shall achieve a strange streak of six GAs of Mahesh's films starting from Dookudu. This, however, shall end with Brahmotsavam which awaits a release this April and marks his first straight Tamil film (albeit being a bilingual). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:41, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Is Athadu on the cards? And before you begin work on 1: Nenokkadine, you may place it at the GOCE; they usually respond six weeks after an article is placed there. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:48, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Not at all. It is a very good film, but i am not very keen to work on it. Pokiri happened with great difficulty and i don't think any film before it can be a possible GA candidate. I am not in a hurry to complete work on 1: Nenokkadine. Today is an exception, because i have barely anything to do. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 13:55, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Jaguar. Congratulations on your recent success of Theatre Europe. Hoping that Jumping Flash! is progressing on a positive note. 1: Nenokkadine is nearing completion and except for two sections (lead and box office), i've completed my job on the remaining sections. It shall be place here once i'm done with them too. Well, what do you think of the article's current, raw status? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 18:09, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I think most of the article looks GA-worthy. I would recommend getting rid of the citations in the lead (per WP:LEADCITE) and move them to the body of the article. The development, release and reception sections look great. Once everything is finished I would be assured that the GOCE copyeditors would clean up the prose in the lead. I can always help out if you like? JAG  UAR   12:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * My work on the article is incomplete. The lead and BO sections are completely untouched. I generally take less time for writing articles from scratch, but 1: Nenokkadine is absolutely tiring. If i rewrite those two sections, add awards and Home media, i will be completely done with this one. I plan to wrap up this by the end of January. Then, i shall ask the GOCE, and once the c/e is done, you can review it. BTW, i have a pending GAN. Can you please review it? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:12, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll review Kumari 21F. 1: Nenokkadine looks halfway done, and once it's finished witht he GOCE I'll be happy to review it. I understand how writing articles can be tiring as I've burned myself out with things on-wiki lately. Jumping Flash! has one oppose now but I think I've addressed it. JAG  UAR   12:14, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review, Jaguar! Excluding Mayabazar (as it is a FA now), i have completed 23 GAs with no failure till now. 1: Nenokkadine will be my 24th, if it passes the review. Let's see what happens, as i am approaching 25-0. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:08, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * That's a truly amazing feat! I've had several GANs fail in the past, so I don't know what my score is. I'm sure 1: Nenokkadine will have no problem passing as it looks promising in its current state. Once it's copyedited I'll be happy to review it. JAG  UAR   15:10, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

update the wikipedia of MAHESH BABU
hello there I am requesting the holder of the wikipedia MAHESH BABU TO ADD MORE INFORMATION TO THE WIKI PAGE SIMILAR TO SALMAN KHAN AND ADD MORE INFORMATION LIKE BOXOFFICE COLLECTIONS AND THE CRITICS REVIEWS AND UPDATE THE WIKI PAGE PLEASE UPDATE THE WIKI PAGES.))

Your GA nomination of Bismarck (video game)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bismarck (video game) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 14:21, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Tobruk (video game)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tobruk (video game) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 15:41, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Navy SEALS (video game)
Any chance of doing this one? I always loved the level where you go up on an elevator. I always used to jump off the top and kill myself on it just to hear the blood curdling scream haha. Great game. That was my favourite on the C64 along with Pang and Miami Vice.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:55, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks pretty good. It appears that it has a lot of reviews but I'll have to find something on a background or development. I'll take it on after I'm finished with the article I'm in the middle of writing. The only hard part will be searching for development sources, but then again I haven't searched yet! In the mean time I'll search it up on YouTube to give me an idea of gameplay. JAG  UAR   18:00, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Theatre Europe
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Theatre Europe 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 J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 13:20, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Theatre Europe gameplay 3.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Theatre Europe gameplay 3.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Mayabazar
Mayabazar turns a FA! Thanks for your contribution as a reviewer. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:46, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Well done! That's amazing news! Barnstar is on its way... JAG  UAR   13:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello
103,000 edits... And only 15 pics uploaded. Strange indeed
 * Hi. I've just counted and it turns out I've uploaded 47, but I don't know if non-free images count. JAG  UAR   13:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * 80 overall files uploaded (including revisions—for example), and 20 uploaded to Commons, according to X!'s Tools. – Rhain1999  (talk to me) 13:42, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Rhain! That's a lot more than I originally thought. Although I think a number of them have been deleted. JAG  UAR   16:10, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Rare
Hello Jaguar! I remembered that you said you wanted to work on Rare together? I've completed my rewrite with some help from others, but would you mind giving the article a minor copyedit? You also seem to be an expert on Rare it would be really great if you can check whether I had missed any important information about the company. Thanks! :) AdrianGamer (talk) 15:34, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll see what I can do. I've just done a quick read through and I can already think of some extra content to put in. JAG  UAR   15:37, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I gave it a minor copyedit. But I'm not going to lie, it is missing some content which could be mentioned, especially in their early history. JAG  UAR   15:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I know. Most sources ignored their early history and jump straight to Donkey Kong so I had hard time finding which of their 60 early games are particularly important/notable to include. AdrianGamer (talk) 11:44, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Request
Hi Jaguar, it's me again! I would like to thank you for your participation in the peer review of Sonam Kapoor. It's now nominated for FAC, Featured article candidates/Sonam Kapoor/archive2, if you'd like to further comment. I would totally understand if you are too busy to review. Thank you. :) --  Frankie talk 21:54, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, I've been somewhat overcome with other things, but I promise to leave some comments at some point. JAG  UAR   15:35, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Giant Bomb's GAR
Giant Bomb, 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. GamerPro64 04:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Navy SEALS (video game)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Navy SEALS (video game) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 16:00, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Theatre Europe
The article Theatre Europe you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Theatre Europe 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 J Milburn -- J Milburn (talk) 16:41, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Navy SEALS (video game)
The article Navy SEALS (video game) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Navy SEALS (video game) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld (talk) 17:21, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks! It's one of my pet hates too, and I'm sure everybody can agree on that. JAG  UAR   19:53, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The Battle For Midway
The article The Battle For Midway 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:The Battle For Midway for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hellknowz -- Hellknowz (talk) 23:01, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest 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 SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 03:40, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Just so you know...
This edit, with the edit summary "rm overlink, cleanup using AWB", broke a wikilink by creating a link to a page that does not exist. Fixed now, cheers. Nortonius (talk) 12:10, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Thanks for letting me know, I'll change the parameter to avoid making the same mistake again. JAG  UAR   12:32, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for setting up to do this btw - appreciate it. Blue Square Thing (talk) 15:30, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Another barnstar

 * Thanks! Still a lot to do. JAG  UAR   15:38, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Please stop
Hi, could you please stop using AWB to remove WLs in articles. Looking at your recent edit history, it looks like you have made a significant number of edits which are removing useful and relevant WLs which do not constitute overlinking. thanks. Fenix down (talk) 13:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi. WP:OVERLINK states the name of high-traffic articles such as the names of countries to be redundant, especially in the lead. I've been thanked by numerous people for doing this, and I thought it was a favourable thing to do. The AWB edits also include a handful of syntax and typo fixes. JAG  UAR   13:05, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * But only when such an article has no real relevance to the subject (see The example article section. In this case you are removing links to the country, it looks like mainly Russia, from articles about settlements within that country and in instances where that link only appears once. Fenix down (talk) 13:09, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think countries need to be linked; for example everybody knows where Russia is, so there would be no need to link the country. That would constitute overlinking. I done the same thing for England and Wales, and I've been thanked numerous times for doing so. It is commonplace for the name of the country to not be linked in the article. JAG  UAR   13:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Well your personal views are not really relevant, a simple sample check would indicate that you are demonstrably wrong, that overwhelmingly, the country in which a given settlement is contained is linked. For example please see Rochester or London, in almost every instance where the country is mentioned in the lead section it is WL'd, indicating convention is that the country is linked. Furthermore, if you are going to perform a large number of automated edits to articles in a given topic, it would be useful in future to drop by that particular topic's project page and discuss first. If you gain consensus then your edits are worthwhile, if you don't have that they are at best contentious and at worst disruptive. Fenix down (talk) 13:32, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I apologise. I didn't realise (still not sure) if it was part of a guideline, but I've been through a few years of seeing countries such as England unlinked. I gained confidence to do this through receiving numerous thanks and barnstars, so I thought I was under quiet approval from others. I will avoid Russia as a whole and will read more about it before deciding what to do. JAG  UAR   13:37, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:DUPLINK: What generally should not be linked: The names of major geographic features and locations, languages, nationalities and religions. JAG  UAR   13:40, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * But the most salient part of that is Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, in the instances in question here, particularly your editing of set indices, it is fundamental to the context of the article. That is why I noted above the example article section as in that instance you would not link to the country because it is not relevant to the article subject. I would reiterate, that if, for example, you wanted to perform similar edits on French settlements, you should start a thread at WT:FRANCE and see what people have to say on the matter, given the fact that you have made hundreds upon hundreds of very similar edits indicates that there is in fact a consensus that such linking is desired. Fenix down (talk) 13:47, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * (ec)Please don't remove the context from your quote when it is very relevant, like here. Your quote is preceded by the following condition: "Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, the following are not usually linked:" (emphasis mine). E.g. a country is particularly relevant in the context of an article on a city in that country. Linking is not only needed because people may not know what X or Y is, but also because it may be a logical next step in a person's search / Wikipedia wandering. Going from a city article to the country article is a very logical step, and should be made easier, not harder. This is the reason that e.g. New York City has a link to United States in the lead, just like 1839 in the United States has, or that Austria at the 1996 Summer Paralympics has a link to Austria. A good example of when to link what: Nietzsche-Haus, Naumburg links to Naumburg, not to Germany: but Naumburg links to Germany. In general, please don't remove links to the country a geographic location is in from articles on that geographic location. Fram (talk) 13:53, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll ask for opinions before I set out unlinking the names of countries again. I understand it now, but I think WP:OVERLINK contradicts itself with do not link to the 'United States', because that is an article on a very broad topic, which is directly below the "What generally should not be linked" header. But nevertheless I understand it. Might be worth requesting comments for this matter at some point. I'm not sure what else I can do with AWB in the mean time. I did program it to unlink "town" and "village", so maybe I'll continue with that soon. JAG  UAR   13:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

GA review
Hi Jaguar. Since you regularly edit and review good articles, I was wondering if you can take Ride the Lightning for a review? I've been waiting 4 months for a review and I would appreciate your help. If you're not available at the moment, please leave a reply here so that I know to contact another user. All the best.--Retrohead (talk) 14:09, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, sure I'll take the review. I'm sorry to hear that it's been four months. I've helped propose a new GAN backlog drive for March, and I hope that will be a reality soon. JAG  UAR   16:37, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Excellent idea, I'll gladly participate. There's a big waiting queue at the music articles.--Retrohead (talk) 21:21, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Although the GA Cup is commencing on 1 March, I'm trying to propose a more lenient GAN sweep in February or something. JAG  UAR   13:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Curious
Was this edit summary directed at me or the template?-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 20:59, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah no, I couldn't source it in the template and it broke some of my edits, so I had to preview it a few times. In fact I thought I sourced it but I realised it didn't work until I got the revert. Sorry for the misunderstanding! JAG  UAR   21:01, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I leave a lot of self-criticism edit summaries. I said 'sourced it then' because I thought I already had! This couldn't be any worse honestly! JAG  UAR   21:03, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I was hoping it was directed at the template, which makes it rather humorous. Naughty template!-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I should have made it a bit clearer, but I rarely leave edit summaries because I know a lot of people don't read them. Ugh, a trout is in order! JAG  UAR   21:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

GA Review
Hey could you take up Randeep Hooda's GA review? I go back to college in a couple of days and want to get the review done ASAP as I won't be active (once I go back to college), and the article has been of good quality for quiet some time now. Take a look only if you feel up for it and have time to spare. Thank You! Numerounovedant  Talk  8:00, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey, I'll be happy to take it. I understand the urgency, so I should finish the review today. JAG  UAR   13:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you for understanding and taking up the review so quickly! All your help is greatly appreciated! :) Numerounovedant   Talk  21:42, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Rare RM
I'd strike or remove your comments that can be construed as direct accusations on the Rare move discussion. Much better to walk away from a discussion than to let it get the better of a cool head, I say. czar 01:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. It's just that there have been a lot of instances where I haven't responded to people acting irrationally and there have been plenty of times on where I haven't stood up to myself and said the right thing. I got a bit involved, I think I'll go to bed now. See what happens in the morning. JAG  UAR   01:17, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Marvel vs. Capcom Origins
Hiya, Jaguar! Could you do me a huge favor and quickly glance over Marvel vs. Capcom Origins for me? I've been working on getting all of the Marvel vs. Capcom articles to GA status, and this is the last article I need to work on before the overall series' page. I'm more worried about submitting this through GAN than my past submissions because of its length. Despite it being the most recent release, there's remarkably little coverage of the game (probably since it's a re-release). Do you think, in its current state, it'd be okay or not? I'd appreciate any tips and criticisms you have to offer. Also, thanks again for reviewing my last two nominations! Wani (talk) 00:23, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey, it looks great! Honestly I wouldn't worry about length if there is a lack of coverage out there; in fact a lot of my GAs are quite short due to the extreme lack of information out there, but as long as it's comprehensive in terms of the information you already have then it should be fine. Is the "See also" section necessary? I would recommend merging it with the prose, if I were to review it. But it looks good overall, it should be OK to submit. If you like, I could review it. JAG  UAR   16:56, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * That's good to hear. I've removed the section since I couldn't find a useful way to integrate it into prose, and I'm also going to go ahead and submit the article to GAN. If you'd be willing to review it, that'd be awesome. I don't want to force you to do it though. Wani (talk) 18:16, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll be happy to review it. JAG  UAR   20:38, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hey, Jaguar. If you're not already aware, I've finished fixing all of the minor issues you pointed out. For some reason, the bot hasn't transcluded the edits I made to the review page to the article talk page yet. Wani (talk) 21:24, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry. I think I'm partially to blame because I haven't come on today. I'll promote it now. JAG  UAR   21:39, 4 February 2016 (UTC)