User talk:Jaguar/Archive 29

Re: Nights: Journey of Dreams
I currently have no projects other than nominating Lenalee Lee to GA once it's copyedited. I'll try to take a look at it.Tintor2 (talk) 22:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll be happy to review it when the time comes. JAG  UAR   22:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Women's contest
Hi, how are you? Haven't spoken to you in a while on here!! You interested in participating in the November contest? Sign up if interested. I do hope at some point we can do the South England contest!♦ Dr. Blofeld  21:41, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've just signed up! It's good to hear from you again on here! Looking forward to another full scale contest. November isn't even that far away now which is scary. JAG  UAR   08:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Welcome aboard! Yes, the year has gone very quickly since the Destubathon!♦ Dr. Blofeld  10:35, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Swap
Hi, if I was to do a source review for Nights: Journey of Dreams, would you do one for Sonic '06? Our articles at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Image and source check requests have been at the top of WT:FAC for almost a month now. JOE BRO  64  21:08, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * sure, sounds good. I'll get to it tomorrow or the day after. JAG  UAR   21:26, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Hii
Hii Jaguar, I hope you are fine. Can you please review this article? It won't take much time. Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:37, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Taken! JAG  UAR   14:01, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yashthepunisher (talk) 14:11, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review of Fawad Khan
+	Hi! I've requested a peer review for Fawad Khan, it was listed as GA but failed FAC. It'd be kind of you to review it.(Peer review/Fawad Khan/archive1). Thanks Amirk94391 (talk) 09:39, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Wazir (film)/GA1
Since the article as it is clearly misses the "well-written" criterion—the new Visual effects subsection has clear prose problems, for example—I don't know what to conclude about your reviewing beyond seeing another premature promotion. There's nothing wrong with taking time to work with the nominator to get an article to the point where it truly meets the criteria, at which point the listing has been earned.

I'm not sure why you're in such a hurry to pass articles, but it reflects poorly on the GA process to promote articles when they still have rough places per the criteria. However, it is a problem, and one you don't seem to be taking seriously. This isn't the first time you've reverted yourself at my request and then reverted back before the issues have fully been dealt with. If I must, I'll do what I did last time: take this to GAR until the article does meet the criteria. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:47, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've opened the review again. I have no problem with waiting longer and I thank you for taking your time to comb through the article's prose, but this isn't the first time you've taken over one of my reviews. I know that you and I hold different interpretations of the GA criteria; I regard it as a lightweight process and am more amiable than others in overlooking minutiae. Please feel free to continue the review. It's just that I've reviewed dozens of Indian/Bollywood film articles over the years and always expect a good quality from them. JAG  UAR   19:31, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Jaguar, I wanted to let you know that I won't be able to finish the review and the checking until late tomorrow at the earliest; something came up that keeps me from finishing it as I hoped. Please don't close the review until you've gotten an affirmative from me regarding the issues I've raised (and the ones still to be raised). Thank you very much. BlueMoonset (talk) 17:38, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries. Thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look through the article soon and will see if I can help out. JAG  UAR   17:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Advice
Hey Jaguar, so good to see you back! I’d like to nominate Paolo Maldini for GA soon, but think it needs a little more sourcing, and perhaps prose tweaks before it’s ready, particularly in the International career section probably. Please take a look at this when you have some time to give me some advice for areas of improvement. Thanks! Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 18:05, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi, it's good to be back! I skimmed through the article earlier (I don't have time to do a full review at the moment) and it looks like the prose is in a good enough standard. It definitely meets the broadness aspect of the GA criteria. I did notice that the first paragraph of the Early career and 1990 World Cup subsection is unsourced, and that having both a picture and two quote boxes conflict with MOS guidelines as it squashes the text. It's certainly in good shape though—with a little polishing it should pass a GA review. JAG  UAR   19:23, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Super Mario Galaxy scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Super Mario Galaxy article has been scheduled as today's featured article for November 1, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/November 1, 2017. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 13:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drives
Hi, I noticed you created the GAN Backlog Drive last year. Would you be interested in starting one this year? If not, I'll be interested in taking up this project, but will probably need some guidance from you. Let me know what you think. The GA nominations are adding up and we have some from December 2016 still in backlog. Thanks! MX ( ✉  •  ✎  ) 22:57, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * so sorry for the late reply! I'm not sure if I'll have the time to run another GAN backlog drive as I'm busy judging the Woman in Red contest for the remainder of this month. The GA Cup has been put on hold indefinitely until enough interested is generated, but the GAN backlog is quite high at the moment so it would be ideal if we could have a backlog drive for next month or in January. The trouble is that when I started the last one I don't think there was enough interest in it. It turned out that not enough people participated and the backlog remained almost the same. JAG  UAR   19:42, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Final Destination 3
Hello, I was wondering if you would be interested in leaving some comments on the FAN of Final Destination 3, or if you don't have the time them maybe just an image review and as a QPQ I'll do the same for Sonic Spinball. PanagiotisZois (talk) 23:04, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy to. I'll leave some comments tomorrow if that's OK. I'm lucky that Sonic Spinball has already received three prose reviews, so all I think is outstanding now are source/image reviews. JAG  UAR   19:42, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you. :) Take your time with it. I'm in no hurry. PanagiotisZois (talk) 20:36, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Super Mario World
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Super Mario World 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 Slightlymad -- Slightlymad (talk) 04:40, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Super Mario World
The article Super Mario World 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:Super Mario World for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Slightlymad -- Slightlymad (talk) 08:20, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Super Mario Bros.
Hi Jaguar, I was wondering if you'd like to help me on something I've been working on for some time. I felt like a criminal delisting Super Mario Bros. as a GA earlier this year, and have thus started a draft to improve it at User:TheJoebro64/drafts/SMB. However, I've gotten stuck at the reception and legacy sections (which are both sections I really hate writing). Would you mind giving me some tips on how I could improve them? JOE BRO  64  00:40, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * , this essay—Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections—bring a couple of interesting points about how this section may be written well. Slightly  mad  07:55, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I was actually thinking of taking this article on myself after I got Super Mario World to GA, but I saw you had the same idea when you posted on WT:VG last week. I'm going to lie, it's a lot of work. If you want to take this to GAN then you would have to recover every reliable review there is. The trouble is that there's going to be very few original reviews that are accessible. I can't even fathom how many video game magazines there were back then—especially since it was during the 1983 video game crash. I like writing detailed reception sections but I only make it as comprehensive as possible if I know I'm going to take it to FAC. With the legacy section you'd have to mention the impact the game had in helping resurrect the video game crash in North America. I should imagine there are books on the subject, but like I said it's not going to be easy! I'll take another look at it in the day. JAG  UAR   10:35, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact, I was able to find the only original review. It can be seen here. JOE  BRO  64  19:12, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind taking a shot at SMB, but it would take a while. An article of that magnitude can't be half-done. JAG  UAR   17:03, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Super Mario World
The article Super Mario World you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Super Mario World 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 Slightlymad -- Slightlymad (talk) 08:21, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Your "USEnglish" script
By chance, I stumbled over your "USEnglish" script today; and it actually looked very promising, as Wikipedia currently only offers British-, Canadian-, or Australian-ortiented language scripts. I found and fixed two syntax errors (a single quotation mark missing in line 22 and line 617, respectively) and got the tool running for me, though I did notice it changed words like "installment" to "instalment" (I'm not a native speaker, though I believe the prior is correct in U.S. English?). I also see that you had the documentation page for the tool deleted. Hence, I wondered why exactly you dropped the tool, and if you plan on ever finishing it. Cheers! Lordtobi ( &#9993; ) 00:11, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
 * thanks for fixing those errors! To be honest I forgot all about this script. I made a start on it a couple of years ago when I noticed there was no script for changing a page into American English, though there are scripts for British and Canadian English. It was then I thought that having such a script would actually be counterproductive, and perhaps nobody ever made one for that reason. If people had the ability to change the spelling of an article to and from US and UK English, imagine the edit wars and disputes it would cause. Coincidentally I am making a draft proposal for a reformed ENGVAR, as I think the current model is flawed. However if there is enough interest for a US English script I might finish it. JAG  UAR   10:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I would very much love to see a finished version of it, as for general purposes and spellchecking on pages where a specific language model is already given. My focus currently lays on the Rockstar San Diego article I majorly expanded, because, as I am not a native speaker, I often miss such things. Lordtobi  ( &#9993; ) 17:29, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Super Mario World
Hello Jaguar:

The copy edit that you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Super Mario World has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Good luck with the FAN.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Really appreciated. JAG  UAR   22:41, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Super Mario World
Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:01, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Knuckles' Chaotix
Hi, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting on my FAC for Knuckles' Chaotix. It's been a while since the last comments. JOE BRO  64  01:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll take a look shortly. JAG  UAR   17:52, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

I've just nominated Super Mario World at FAC, if you're interested in leaving some comments... JAG UAR   21:28, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Already done. Made my comments as soon as you started it, actually. JOE  BRO  64  21:31, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Parinda
Hi Jaguar, Wazir's review has been halted for an indifinite period of time. In the mean time I expanded this article of an interesting 1989 hindi film, about which very limited information was available on the internet, specially its box-office info. Can you please review it? It's very short. Yashthepunisher (talk) 06:07, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, I will most likely finish the review tomorrow. Really sorry about Wazir by the way. If you've addressed all of BlueMoonset's current issues I'll promote it—to me it meets the criteria. JAG  UAR   20:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jaguar, really appreciate it. Yes, I have resolved all of BlueMoonset's queries. Yashthepunisher (talk) 04:35, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I would appreciate it if you'd let me do one last pass through those queries today to be sure; I know that some of them were, in fact, resolved by me in my most recent spate of edits a week ago (hardly an "indefinite period of time"), as they hadn't yet been by Yashthepunisher. And I hope that the Parinda review will be more thorough than the original one for Wazir. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * can you raise any issues you see fit on the talk page? I'm sorry but the GAN has been closed. My initial review may have been a bit shoddy by my standards but thanks to your input and Yash's prompt responses the article meets the GA criteria. I knew the review was going to stall for a while so I went ahead and made a few minor tweaks to it. I also copyedited and made a few adjustments to Parinda prior to reviewing too. I'm confident Wazir meets the criteria; I ensured that all of your queries were addressed before editing. If you think anything is outstanding I'll be happy to address them myself since I'm no longer reviewing it. JAG  UAR   19:48, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Jaguar, I've made the changes to Wazir myself rather than explain what was needed; it took less time. However, I've just read Parinda, which you passed as a GA, and I find problematic sentence structure, unclear phrases, characters whose names are spelled different ways, repetition between sections: in short, not meeting the GA criteria. I'm very disappointed to see this, and will leave it to you to decide whether you will redo your review with more care or not. Perhaps, if you're not able to see these issues in Yashthepunisher's prose, you should let someone else do the review honors in future. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologise for my "indifinite" comment. Being a non-native English speaker, I'm not very good in writing prose. So, I've listed Parinda at the GOCE for a thorough copy edit. Yashthepunisher (talk) 11:23, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Your signature
Please be aware that your signature uses deprecated  tags, which are causing Obsolete HTML tags lint errors.

You are encouraged to change
 * → JAG  UAR

to
 * → JAG  UAR

Respectfully, Anomalocaris (talk) 10:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that! I've changed it now. JAG  UAR   21:31, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! —Anomalocaris (talk) 09:41, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Super Mario All-Stars and Advance.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Super Mario All-Stars and Advance.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) 18:49, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Why
are you still using AWB to introduce typos, such as here? If you aren't interested in putting in the time to check whether something you think is misspelled is in fact the correct name, you have no business running AWB. —Kusma (t·c) 14:49, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Out of the 50+ edits I made to smooth out a user's problematic entries for the Women in Red contest only one mistake was made. A mistake which has been made before. One might say that was embarrassing, ho ho ho! I always correct myself after I think it's changed an authentic name, but this little one slipped away. JAG  UAR   17:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No, the mistake has not been made before. While the edit summary suggests it, the editor apparently did not go through with misspelling the river's name. If you have a 1 in 50 error rate (and yours is frequently worse), you should not be running AWB. —Kusma (t·c) 21:50, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No need to fear my infinitesimal typos. I rarely use AWB anymore—do you regularly check my contribs or do you patrol these pages? JAG  UAR   12:19, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Every time I talk to you about AWB, you say you have almost stopped using it, but then you do start again. I do click on your "contributions" link every now and then and then have a quick look (with popups) at anything that looks like mass edits. I don't usually pay any attention to your manual edits. —Kusma (t·c) 15:10, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

An exceptional barnstar for you
I make it $25 that you've won. Please double check. If you would like to donate any of your winnings into the Women in Red Book Fund to raise money to buy books for editors of women topics who need them on demand please add your name and the amount you'd like to donate in the sub section below the prize winners on the main contest page.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Sonic Spinball scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Sonic Spinball article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 9, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/January 9, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me?  10:43, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * has there been some kind of mistake? I never nominated this? And also it says it's scheduled for 9 January 2019 whereas the TFA page says 2018. JAG  UAR   11:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The 2019 was my typo, now fixed, the link to the TFA page is correct. TFA coordinators select from the available unused FAs, they don't need to be nominated at WP:TFAR, and most are not. Or are you saying that you don't want this article to run? Not a problem if that the case, since video games are one of the few areas where we are spoilt for choice. If you are happy for it to run, you don't need to do anything. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:05, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I wasn't aware that articles were selected at random! I'm happy to keep this for the January 2018 date. It's either that or wait for its 30th anniversary in 2023! JAG  UAR   14:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I've had to rearrange January's list, the article is now at Today's featured article/January 19, 2018 Jimfbleak - talk to me?  16:23, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you for Nights: Journey of Dreams! - Do you still do GA reviews? I have a few open, and would be most interested in Sonne der Gerechtigkeit, sung for the peace prayers in Leipzig, among others. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:47, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I forgot I even had this! I'll see if I can find the time to take the review tomorrow, and hopefully a few more... JAG  UAR   20:48, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

"Factoids"
The definition you were given on this recently was only a partial one, which is a little misleading. The OED also states that:

"2. Chiefly Journalism and Broadcasting. A brief or trivial piece of information, esp. any of a list of such items presented together."

Your use of the term was absolutely spot on in the context in which it was used. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 21:29, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks . I actually looked this up too and can confirm the definition: a brief (usually one sentence and usually trivial) news item. I thought that was the only meaning. Talk about being one-sided! JAG  UAR   21:36, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh there are many, many problems with the approach being taken in that thread. It's all rather depressing really. - SchroCat (talk) 21:50, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Satya
Hi Jaguar, hope you are fine. Can you please review this article for GAN? Yashthepunisher (talk) 13:06, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay! I've opened the review. JAG  UAR   15:14, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

MLS Cup 2017 GAN
Hi Jaguar! First, Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! Me and a couple editors have gotten the MLS Cup 2017 article up to pretty good shape, which I think should meet GA now. When you've got a minute, please take this one up; the article isn't too long so it shouldn't take a ton of time. Thanks! Vaselineeeeeeee★★★ 01:14, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you! And to you too. I've just reserved the review and should finish it tomorrow. It looks to be in pretty good shape. JAG  UAR   19:27, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! On a related note, MLS Cup 2016 is siting in the queue and a review would be very much appreciated.  Sounder Bruce  20:08, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
 * No problem. Taken. JAG  UAR   21:52, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

A GA pharaoh again
Dear JAGUAR, I was wondering if you would agree to do the GA review for the pharaoh article on Neferefre ? Just as you did for Nyuserre Ini, this would speed up the nomination at lot and guarantee a quality review. If you cannot do the review, could you possibly suggest another user who might? I would really like to avoid waiting 6 or so months as I had to last time I waited for someone to take up a GA review.&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 15:43, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * of course, I've taken the review. I should have it finished by tomorrow. Looks to be in excellent shape (just like Nyuserre Ini). JAG  UAR   16:18, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, this is great, I am looking forward to your comments!&#32;Iry-Hor (talk) 16:23, 31 December 2017 (UTC)