User talk:Jaguar/Archive 27

Importance of WP:UST
Hey Jaguar, could you please reformat the importance scale to include a bottom category, I do not know how to do that. I put it on the Project talk page but I don't think you noticed... Thanks, Alex the Nerd (talk) 22:35, 1 February 2017 (UTC)Alex the Nerd

CSS styling in templates.
Hello, Just heads up that there is currently work on an extension in order to enable CSS styling in templates. Please check the document here to discuss best storage methods and what we need to avoid with implementation. Thanks--Melamrawy (WMF) (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Medstead
The article Medstead you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Medstead for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bungle -- Bungle (talk) 21:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Not sure why it has failed it as I passed the article! Bungle (talk • contribs) 22:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Western Thrace
Is there an obvious reason why this category should link to Portal:Turkey and not to Portal:Greece? As you review every edit by hand (and only make 50 edits per minute), I expect you did this on purpose. —Kusma (t·c) 21:43, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Uh, that's strange. I did add it on purpose but had no idea Western Thrace was a province of Greece and not Turkey. FYI, I manually removed around 100 miscategorised cats on Armenia and Turkish Cyprus before editing, so I did make the thorough pre-requisite checks. Thanks for letting me know—I've corrected the portal. JAG  UAR   22:32, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I haven't had access to a computer running Windows in ages, so I haven't used AWB for a long time. Back when I did, something like ten years ago, I ran into similar trouble when trying to find categories that might be suitable to be mass-tagged for WikiProjects. I gave up automatically including subcategories quickly, as so many of them were slightly offtopic. The category system has improved quite a bit since then, but is still messy enough to require a lot of attention in order to avoid mis-taggings when you base any AWB edits on categories. —Kusma (t·c) 20:01, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Sometimes it comes down to bad categorisation, and in rare cases (like what happened yesterday) the person tagging them doesn't know that it shouldn't be there. I remember a couple of years ago I found Taiwan tagged in the Guam category, which made no sense! Although I took extra steps to minimise mistakes, I had no idea Western Thrace was in Greece and couldn't have known unless I was savvy with Turkish geography or if I searched for the article itself. Anyway, I've stopped tagging now—I don't know how some people manage to do it! JAG  UAR   22:43, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

CSS styling in templates
Hello everyone, and sincere apologies if you're getting this message more than once. Just a heads-up that there is currently work on an extension in order to enable CSS styling in templates. Please check the document on mediawiki.org to discuss best storage methods and what we need to avoid with implementation. Thanks, m:User:Melamrawy (WMF), 09:11, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Question about a GA Review for Mozilla Public License
I started a GA Review of this article but the nominator said they don't have time to work on improving it right now. They've asked if they could withdraw the nomination without having it be "counted as a failure". If you could weigh in on their talk page that would be helpful.

As an aside to all of this, since I will then be unable to complete the Review, I assume I won't receive any GA Cup points for it - not sure how to do all the cleanup from a GA nom withdrawal (in terms of the code/templates/etc). Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 17:23, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * you still gave a proper review for the article, so you should still receive your points in the GA Cup. When you close the review, it still technically counts as a "fail" regardless of the circumstances. I wouldn't say it's a bad thing in this case, though, so I'll let Pokajanje know. JAG  UAR   17:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for the reply and letting them know - they did seem concerned about having a "failure" on their record. So, I want to confirm (since it's never happened to me in the course of GA Reviewing) - I now have to "Fail" the article within my Review.  Shearonink (talk) 18:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine 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 TarkusAB -- TarkusAB (talk) 12:20, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine
The article Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine 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 TarkusAB -- TarkusAB (talk) 13:21, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Editor of the Week
User:Shearonink submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
 * I would like to nominate the entire Judging Team of the present GA Cup. In the course of a competition - from the First Round through the Finals, they had to score and judge an untold number of GA Reviews - and MrWooHoo has less than 4000 edits! What these editors do is pretty darn amazing. All 5 editors take the time for a friendly competition that gets folks to plow through the GA backlog and make a difference around here! I don't really know if this Gang of Five - MrWooHoo, Jaguar, ZwergNase, 3family6, Figureskatingfan - are all well-known or not. Some of them have toiled on the GA Cup since its inception. All I know is that whenever I have a question or a concern, they answer it quickly and that the Judging/Points-scoring seems very fair. I don't know how they can keep up with the blizzard of Reviews and the points and the judging and answering posts and so on and so on. Editor Figureskatingfan has won Editor of the Week before but I hope is eligible to receive a second. I sure as heck think they all deserve it as a group.

You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week: Thanks again for your efforts! Lepricavark (talk) 19:09, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Wasn't expecting this! Thank you for nominating, ! JAG  UAR   19:28, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Congratulations. Buster Seven   Talk  13:29, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Medstead
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Quid pro quo
Hi Jaguar. I currently have Resident Evil 5 nominated for FAC (see here) but it's only gotten one reviewer in over a fortnight. I notice you have several video-game related articles at GAN. I was wondering if you'd like to trade reviews? If you're happy to comment on my nomination I'll review one of your nominations. No worries if you're not interested or too busy. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 07:29, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I left some comments, but I'll come back and take another look at it soon. You're welcome to take any of my GANs—I'd appreciate it! JAG  UAR   18:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello again. So my FAC now has three votes of support including yours, which I am quite pleased about; thanks again. Anyway having played this game many times before I know that since nobody has done one yet, in a week or two one of the FAC co-coordinators will ask somebody to do a source check before the article is promoted. I'd like to beat them to that, if I can haha. If you're interested I'd be happy to review two of your Wipeout GAN's in exchange for you reviewing the first (or second) half of the sources at RE5 to check they back up what they say they do. But as always, no pressure, you've been a big help already. :) Freikorp (talk) 09:16, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll be happy to, ! I should finish the source review by tomorrow at the latest if that's OK. Once those two Wipeout GANs are out of the way then it will finally become a Good Topic, which is exciting. JAG  UAR   12:59, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello again. Just letting you know that I've finished the initial comments for both the GANs, but I won't be able to follow up any of your replies for a couple days as I'm going away. :) Freikorp (talk) 11:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! No worries. I've got more time now so I'll get to attending those GANs right away. JAG  UAR   16:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi again. I'm going to review Wipeout (series). If you have the time i'd appreciate it if you could comment on my current peer review nomination. :) Freikorp (talk) 06:38, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout Pulse
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout Pulse 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Hitomi Tanaka page deletion
I've created a new Hitomi Tanaka page. I used sources from Playboy, New York Daily News, TV Tokyo and others and it should be fine in my opinion. Since you were involved in the discussion before, I wanted to bring you back.ChiefWahooMcDonalds (talk) 22:11, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Video games reception sections
I was looking back over the reception section in Burning Rangers, which I think you improved significantly by the end of the FAC, and I wanted to ask if you think it would be worth adding something about reception sections to the videogame guidelines page. I'm not at all involved with the WikiProject, and didn't want to poke my nose in without getting another opinion, and since we'd recently had a conversation about it at the FAC I thought I'd ask you.

I've reviewed a few videogame articles at FAC over the years, and I think the problems I commented on for Burning Rangers are very widespread, not just in videogames but in TV and film articles too. I think it would be helpful to codify some principles, not just in a user essay such as the one I wrote, but in WikiProject guidelines. I've no doubt the principles would go beyond the points I made, but of course I'd like to see those in there too. Do you think this is worth suggesting? Is that guideline actively maintained and referred to, or is it not something most WikiProject members would pay attention to? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I've been thinking about this lately too. I agree wholeheartedly; after reading your essay and implementing the improved changes on Burning Rangers, it has actually changed my mind on how I should write reception sections. It will take some getting used to, but overall it's a much better way of writing a reception section. The problem is very widespread, but up until now I'm sure not many people are aware of alternative ways of writing them. Speaking of which, I recently wrote a large reception section for Wipeout 2048 (just before my epiphany at Burning Rangers), and looking back at it, I think it's a monotonous and arbitrary list in prose form (rest assured I will get around to changing it before I nominate it for FA!). I have around 70 video game GAs and counting, but only one of them has a 'premium' reception section. I think it's absolutely worth perusing this idea as it will benefit the readers, though I can't help but think it might be difficult to implement. Since is more adept than me at writing reception sections, perhaps he would like to chime in. We would have to think of a way of how to rework this guideline, and decide whether or not it should be more of a recommendation for FAs or if it should be encouraged for all articles. The guidelines are all actively maintained, and I'm confident all WPVG regulars abide by them.  JAG  UAR   23:43, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I saw this and it occurred to me that and it occurred to me that my reception sections are full of "A said B"s! (Ridge Racer Revolution, Black %26 White (video game), Dungeon Keeper, Theme Hospital, Theme Park (video game), Dungeon Keeper 2, Micro Machines (video game), Micro Machines 2: Turbo Tournament, Destruction Derby 2, and Dungeon Keeper (2014 video game) all spring to mind) I guess I need to start improving or rewriting them... Adam9007 (talk) 03:46, 16 February 2017 (UTC)


 * I was planning on adding a section to the guideline on common FA writing tips but haven't gotten around to it. Much easier to point editors to the same advice that invariably affects each nom than to repeat it anew. czar  05:04, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I was wondering if this method of writing reception sections should be recommended for GAs as well as FAs, or if it should just be a loose tip in the guidelines. Adam, I have like 50 reception sections that could do with rewriting! But I'll definitely change my attitude next time I nominate something for FA. JAG  UAR   10:53, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout Pulse
The article Wipeout Pulse 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:Wipeout Pulse for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 04:01, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout Pulse
The article Wipeout Pulse you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wipeout Pulse 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 13:02, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Articles for deletion/Hitomi Tanaka (3rd nomination)
You are invited to join the discussion at Articles for deletion/Hitomi Tanaka (3rd nomination). As you have participated in a previous AfD on this article, you may be interested in commenting on this third AfD. Thank you. Class 455 ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  00:07, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Burning Rangers for TFA

 * Hi Jaguar. This is just a friendly note to let you know that the Burning Rangers article, which you nominated at TFAR, has been scheduled as today's featured article for March 2, 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/March 2, 2017. Thanks! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:37, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for "one of the least respected video games of the 1990s" ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball 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 Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout Fusion
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout Fusion 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 IDV -- IDV (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout Fusion
The article Wipeout Fusion 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:Wipeout Fusion for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of IDV -- IDV (talk) 14:01, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout Fusion
The article Wipeout Fusion you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wipeout Fusion 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 IDV -- IDV (talk) 20:41, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

take care
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Malaysia_in_fiction&oldid=763529272 - that could be considered offensive by some JarrahTree 00:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Another miscategorisaion. Thanks for letting me know about this, usually it's been a 99.9% success rate. JAG  UAR   00:09, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I havent been back to your AWB work on the 4th (hard to wade through your edit storm of the 14th and nearby) - but if you have any sense of self preservation - go back and check the others close to that edit - I know some people in Indonesia or Malaysia who would have your guts for garters JarrahTree 00:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

99.9% is overly optimistic, as evidenced by Category:Bishops of Leicester (ancient), Category talk:Councillors in the East Riding of Yorkshire and a handful similar, the questionable Category:Woodland Trust... not to mention that you added and then removed Portal:Essex to quite a lot of pages. Looking through your AWB contributions, one almost certainly finds a mistake. At your rate of sometimes 50 edits per minute, the reason is (AGAIN) that you do not review your edits properly. If you want your AWB access to be removed again, please continue in this way. —Kusma (t·c) 10:39, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Winslade
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Benissanó


The article Benissanó has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern:
 * This article is a duplicate of Benisanó. Indeed this article refers to the corresponding article in spanish as of es:Benissanó which redirects on es-wikipedia to es:Benisanó which is linked on wikidata to en:Benisanó.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Robby (talk) 21:45, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * As this is the official name in Valencian, this page clearly should not be deleted. I have turned it into a redirect instead. —Kusma (t·c) 16:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine
Mifter (talk) 12:01, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Your review, sir
As requested: The 3 listed authors are the 3 reviewers (James Mielke goes by "Milkman" in the review). Editors Ford and Pfister are Reviews editors for EGM and 1up respectively, and Hsu is the EGM editor-in-chief. I think I'd probably remove the scanned image from the url portion of this ref if you use it in an actual article, but I leave the formatting and all that to you. Good luck with the FA! -Thibbs (talk) 01:05, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Brilliant! Thanks a lot! The formatting looks good. I'll get to implementing it right away. JAG  UAR   14:34, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball
The article Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball 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:Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

FAC request
Hi. When you get the chance, could you review the article referenced above? If you can't, please reply. Thanks.  MCMLXXXIX  21:31, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a look at it soon. JAG  UAR   22:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Whenever you have the time, could you do a source or general review for my new FAC of Naruto? 1989 14:16, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball
The article Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball 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 Indrian -- Indrian (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wipeout Pulse
Mifter (talk) 12:01, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

March 2017 WikiCup newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
 * 🇪🇺 Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
 * 🇯🇵 1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
 * Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Question
Is the IP addresses concern about the article valid considering what you said in your support for the Naruto Uzumaki article?  MCMLXXXIX  10:38, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I was about to add a comment regarding the validity of the IP's oppose, but deleted it before I published the edit. I don't think it is valid to be honest. They didn't specify on what is missing or if the book they mentioned will add any significant content to the article. I think it's comprehensive enough, but if the IP isn't going to add anything then their oppose should be treated with a pinch of salt. It certainly doesn't fail the comprehensiveness part of the criteria—I wouldn't worry about it. JAG  UAR   10:43, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. If you can, could you review the FLC related to the show?  MCMLXXXIX  12:58, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Could you take a look at this one as well when you get the chance?  MCMLXXXIX  17:53, 15 March 2017 (UTC)


 * When you get the chance, could you do the source review for Naruto Uzumaki? One already happened, but the coordinator wants someone more experienced to do it. If you can't, please reply. Thanks.  MCMLXXXIX  14:45, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * sure, I'll do a full source review as soon as I can. I'm kind of desperate, but do you think you could do a prose review for the gameplay and reception sections for the Nights: Journey of Dreams FAC? It got an oppose the other day, but it would just benefit from more in-depth prose reviews—other than that it passes on everything else. Don't worry if you can't do it! Thanks. JAG  UAR   16:14, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I'm not experienced with prose reviews.  MCMLXXXIX  16:21, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
As it stands right now, there *are* 8 (instead of 5) contestants in the GACup Final Round. Take a look at the color-coding for WikiProject Good articles/GA Cup/2016-2017/Pools/Round 3. Shearonink (talk) 14:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Sonic the Hedgehog Spinball
Mifter (talk) 00:01, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Binsted
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Binsted 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 Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 03:02, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

4th GA Cup - The Final
--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wipeout Fusion
Mifter (talk) 12:03, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nights Journey of Dreams Soundtrack.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Nights Journey of Dreams Soundtrack.jpg. 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 section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:53, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout HD
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout HD 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 06:22, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout HD
The article Wipeout HD 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:Wipeout HD for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 02:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout 2048
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout 2048 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 02:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout 2048
The article Wipeout 2048 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:Wipeout 2048 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 12:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Binsted

 * Thank you again! JAG  UAR   20:45, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, it was a pleasure. Nice to see "small places" get their due. Shearonink (talk) 20:50, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea what is up with Legobot...
Why did it send you a Fail notice for Binsted when I passed the article as a GA... Any ideas? 20:49, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it. It happens often! Even if you do everything right the bot will occasionally send the nominator a "your GAN has failed" template. It's happened to me a dozen times. I had to delete the notification as I didn't want people to think it actually failed! JAG  UAR   20:51, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Nice to know it probably wasn't something I specifically had or hadn't done. In any case, I've now fixed it all up for the article's talk page. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 21:04, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout HD
The article Wipeout HD you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wipeout HD 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 22:41, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Simone Russell - featured article candidate
I've nominated the article about the episode Simone Russell for Featured Article consideration. I would really appreciate any comments or feedback on this nomination. I understand that you are busy so it is completely okay if you are unable to do this. I apologize for any inconvenience.

The link is here if you are interested: Featured article candidates/Simone Russell/archive1. Thank you for your time. Aoba47 (talk) 03:43, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay, I'll leave some comments within a day or two. Been really busy lately! JAG  UAR   11:47, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Binsted
Hello! Your submission of Binsted at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Josh Milburn (talk) 19:35, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Wipeout 2048 gameplay.jpg
Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia: You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.
 * File:Wipeout 2048 gameplay.jpg

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following [ this link]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you.  Mini  apolis  01:58, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wipeout HD
Hello! Your submission of Wipeout HD at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:36, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Shruti Haasan filmography
I hate to be too formal these days, so i'll keep it straight. Hope you would throw some comments here. Pavanjandhyala 10:45, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Good to see you back! I wondered where you went. Hope everything is well. I'll leave some comments soon—been quite busy lately. JAG  UAR   11:48, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I am going to leave but not sooner. Three huge tasks to be finished which will take months. Please do make a visit to this, those three tasks and the constructive refreshments i take in the process (smaller GAs, FLs etc.). Pavanjandhyala  13:18, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Wipeout 2048 copyedit on hold
Since you've resumed working on the article, I'll resume copyediting when you're done (if you still want a copyedit). All the best,  Mini  apolis  13:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll let you know when I'm done with the reception section! Just need to condense it and after that it should be good. JAG  UAR   14:43, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

I've finished condensing the reception section and tried organising it so it reads like a more cohesive prose rather than a mish mash of critics' opinions. I'm going to nominate it for FA eventually, so any help with copyediting will be appreciated! JAG UAR   14:32, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Congratulations on the GA. As soon as I finish working on my current article, I'll get back to it. All the best,  Mini  apolis  15:30, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ... and the copyedit's done. Good luck with FA and all the best,  Mini  apolis  00:19, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout 2048
The article Wipeout 2048 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wipeout 2048 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 23:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wipeout HD
— Maile (talk) 00:52, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Papua New Guinean language talk page
Hi Jaguar I appreciate the edits you made to the talk pages of Papuan languages back in December, however there were some unfortunate examples such as this this when using awb you added some templates that was rather redundant. Therefore I hope you do not mind where in some cases I will be removing the templates of Papua New Guinea where the Melanesia and PNG template is already present. If you object it is fine, please just respond here or leave a message on my talk page so we can work it out. Thanks Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 02:18, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout (series)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout (series) 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 06:40, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Wipeout 2048
Hello! Your submission of Wipeout 2048 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Sounder Bruce  01:40, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout (series)
The article Wipeout (series) 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:Wipeout (series) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 09:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wipeout (series)
The article Wipeout (series) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wipeout (series) 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Talkback
 Sounder Bruce  23:59, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks Dr Blofeld!! That's all of them now. JAG  UAR   18:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Binsted
&mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 00:01, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

FAC
Hey Jaguar, would you mind taking a look at this FAC? Thanks. Numerounovedant  Talk  04:25, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm really sorry Numerounovedant but I've hardly had the time to do anything over these past two weeks! JAG  UAR   20:15, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries at all. Numerounovedant   Talk  05:50, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wipeout 2048
Mifter (talk) 00:02, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

The Cleanup Barnstar

 * Thanks for the barnstar! JAG  UAR   11:36, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Wipeout source and image review requests
I just removed the requests for the source and image reviews from Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Image and source check requests; that template is used when a review has acquired three or more supports but is still missing a source or image review, or both. Quite a few FACs get a source or image review without having to request it, so limiting it only to the ones that just need those reviews means it acts like a high-priority template -- those ones all really need those reviews, because they're likely to be holding up promotion. If you see others adding requests before that point in their FAC, feel free to undo the addition, but leave them a note like this to explain what's going on. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:27, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, and sorry for the mistake. I had no idea that a FAC needed three or more supports in order for the nominator to request a source/image review there. I wanted to get a small head start so to speak and decided to put it up there early, but wasn't aware of that. I'll keep that in mind and will remove any other requests that have no more than three supports. JAG  UAR   17:19, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries -- most nominators only find out about this through a note like this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:31, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Wipeout (series)
Materialscientist (talk) 02:43, 31 March 2017 (UTC)