User talk:Jaguar/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Jaguar. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

I Steven shearer wish to talk to a witch and one day become a great majik warlock and help all nice witches so they can live without pain or death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven binni shearer (talk • contribs) 16:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Try laying off the LSD? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I will venture that, while I can't see into your head, I may feel worse about mine than you did about yours, because I was already knowledgeable about what constituted notability, or so I thought, and my articles were probably more developed (although there weren't as many). Who knows, though. I just need to ponder for a while. Tezero (talk) 14:35, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

So Czar told me you are waiting for more input from me in the review. I don't exactly know what else there is to say. I'm still skeptical on the Development section but I'm mostly concerned about the Plot more so. It's kinda how Tezero put it: "has a thin musk of a game's back cover or some other first-party material". GamerPro64 00:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, GamerPro. It's 1am here at the moment and I'm going to stay up all night updating this computer... I can get back to the review tomorrow morning, I will copy edit both the plot and game play sections, I agree that the plot section sounds like first party material! I'll add some more content from the sources too, don't worry. If there are any more concerns please let me know, I should hopefully address all of them tomorrow morning (if I ever get sleep)! Thanks, ☠ Jaguar ☠ 00:11, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Now that I think about it, the lead should mention a bit of the plot, gameplay, and development. Feels bare in of itself. GamerPro64 00:23, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll expand the lead as well tomorrow, I'll let you know when it's all done - this all shouldn't take too long. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 00:26, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

I've made a copy edit for the plot section and a minor one to the gameplay section. I've also expanded the lead and polished some parts of the article. What do you think? Does any more work needs to be put into it? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:04, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

The article Jumping Flash! you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jumping Flash! 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 GamerPro64 -- GamerPro64 (talk) 00:01, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi SilkTork, thanks for keeping the GA reassessment open. I've hopefully addressed all of your points you made, just wondering if you could take another look and see if there are any more concerns? I can address them quicker this time! Thanks, ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Nice work. Well done. Closed GAR as Keep. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 23:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

That's great news, thank you! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:20, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Winchester 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 Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 13:40, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

The article Winchester 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:Winchester for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 08:40, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

The article Winchester you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Winchester 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 Ritchie333 -- Ritchie333 (talk) 13:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I'll need support in doing so though! Hey, any chance you could review Esbjerg for me? Caponer's absent.♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:21, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'm currently working on Odense with Ipigott and Rosiestep, and also Varanasi but it would be good to work on another English town again gradually. Welcome back BTW!!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:26, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Jaguar, with your help on this one and for assisting in improving it up to GA. One of these days, we should try and revive some of those red links from China! You're doing a great job. Hope to see around again soon.--Ipigott (talk) 21:07, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Ipigott! And you're welcome for the review. It's been two long years since the major China blackout, but I would love to start reviving some of those articles again! I don't know where to start though. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:08, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Hey Jaguar, remember to update the list pages like this and dat whenever you promote an article!..♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, will do. Strange, I thought that LegoBot was meant to update them! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:12, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

And thanks for your effective review of Aarhus. Your comments have help to improve the quality even more. On this basis, it won't be long before we see you in Denmark!--Ipigott (talk) 20:54, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

@Ipigott:, you're very welcome for the review! I'll be happy to take on any future Danish reviews you and Dr. Blofeld may have soon... anyway congratulations on getting the five largest cities to GA! It's a good accomplishment - I don't think this has been done before? Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:56, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

The top five of the Largest_cities_in_the_United_States have all been GA at one time or another although three have now been downgraded. Thanks for the offer of more Danish reviews.--Ipigott (talk) 21:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Oreo Priest ^talk 13:54, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Oreo Priest ^talk 18:01, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

I have left another message there, this one directed at you in particular. Oreo Priest ^talk 19:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jaguar. Let's move forward with cleaning up the mess you've made. Here is your table from the ANI page.

UK related	Non-UK (reverted)	Ambiguous (not reverted)
Jaguar F-Type	Suriname	Television Y
Kenya Y	Sudan ‎	Suez Canal Y
Olympic-class ocean liner	Spain	English language Y
Papa New Guiana Y	Russia	World War I Y
RMS Titanic	North Korea
Montserrat	South Korea
Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha	Japan
Anguilla	Poland
Saint Kitts and Nevis Y	Ukraine
Northamptonshire	Brazil
Bahamas Y	Belgium
Grenada Y	Computer
Guyana ‎Y	Personal computer
British Raj Y	Iraq
George Town, Cayman Islands	Syria
Bermuda	Iran
Castries Y	Israel
Saint Lucia Y	Italy
Cayman Islands	Argentina
Sierra Leone Y	Suez Crisis

Untouched:

1. Jumping Flash! Y
2. Minecraft Y
3. YouTube Y
4. China Y
5. Norway Y
6. Antigua and Barbuda Y

I have put in bold all of the "UK-related" pages for which the conversion was not legitimate. You must return all of the "Untouched", all of the "Ambiguous", and all of the illegitimate/bold "UK-related" pages to their original English variant, and do so without destroying any edits made since your use of the script. Please report on you progress here; I will be watching this page. Cheers, Oreo Priest ^talk 07:48, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Note: I have been checking off the ones for which the situation is now to my satisfaction. I have made no effort to distinguish between reverts by him, reverts by others, and good evidence that it should stay at UK English. Oreo Priest ^talk 14:58, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the list, Oreo. Thank goodness the discussion is over. I was going to mention this yesterday but I couldn't edit yesterday as I was overtired. YouTube has already been reverted, Norway was reverted by you on the 19th July, Minecraft was already reverted to be days ago. Jumping Flash! was an article I wrote myself and brought to GA a few weeks ago, all the content in it is my own work and when I write I use UK spelling. Jumping Flash! was the very first article I used the script on and I think people mistook that as me changing it from US to UK spelling (which it already was in UK spelling), so I'll leave the one be. Antigua and Barbuda and the Bahamas use British English (unless the Bahamas use Jamaican English, I'll look into that one) so I'll leave them be unless I'm told otherwise. Everything you have highlighted in bold I have already purposely not touched as they are either Commonwealth Realms or countries that use British English. British Raj? That definitely needs UK spelling as it was already written like that before I used the script. Anyway thank you for the list. I'll look into those realms that do not use UK spelling (if there are any, unless Papa New Guiana uses Australian English too). ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Jumping Flash! is most certainly not "an article I wrote myself". The article predates your first en-wiki edit by a matter of years, and this is the entirety of every edit you have ever made to it. Looking at your userpage, you seem to be making something of a habit of claiming credit for other peoples' work. – iridescent 2 18:39, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

No, I meant that I had wrote and copy edited the majority of the article myself whilst bringing it up to GA. This meant that whilst copy editing it I had implemented in UK spelling, maybe going over one US spelling word in the original revision. And I don't understand, claiming credit for other peoples' work? I have never done that? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm. Do let me know which part of Kennet and Avon Canal (on "a list of my best work on Wikipedia") you wrote? Or, on a quick skim, every other entry on that list, all of which at a quick glance appear to have actually been written by someone other than you? – iridescent 2 18:59, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I helped an editor I knew with that article back in 2011, in which I made minor additions to it and I helped it pass the FAC. Is there any reason for this uncalled for hostility towards me? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure the hostility is from your constant stonewalling and misleading other editors. When you assume good faith, and it's infuriating to see that your good faith has been taken advantage of. You've made statements in your defence like 'I reverted Spain', 'I wrote that, so it should stay in UK English', and 'I've addressed everything now, for sure', all of which were false. Whether or not "called for", his hostility, and that of other editors, is certainly understandable, and you've brought it on yourself. For my part, I am not hostile, just very, very frustrated with your behaviour. Any other editor would accept that they've breached policy and fix their mistakes, as mandated, but for some reason you've been trying to deny that you have and weasel out of it while playing the victim. Oreo Priest ^talk 07:32, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

I know you're not hostile Oreo, don't worry I respect you very much! It's just that Iridescent somehow managed to come on my talk page after months of not editing on his account, takes quotes from my user page and uses them in smarmy and aggravating manner with his only intention of causing trouble with me. I hate snobbery so much. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:19, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

With respect, I would like sources on the use of British English in all countries for which you've protested. Jumping Flash!, for all the work you did on it, was created by an American, User:MIT Trekkie, and therefore must use US English, regardless of scripts or how much you expanded it (which of course must seem like a nuisance). I look forward to seeing you addressing the remaining issues. Oreo Priest ^talk 18:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I reverted his changes to Jumping Flash!, and another user converted it back to American English. Jaguar, if I were you, I would seriously reconsider your attitude before someone outright questions your competence. By no standard did you write Jumping Flash!; you contributed 2K out of 15K of content, and you did not create the article. It is bizarre to claim ownership of an article in which your only contribution was copy edits for MOS compliance. In addition, aren't those imgur.com links a copyright violation? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:51, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

His competence has already been questioned on ANI(but not by me). Truth be told, I don't care if he claims ownership of the main page. It is quite egregious, however, to say you wrote it as a reason it should be in UK English. If after all this time, and all this explanation, he still doesn't understand that a copyedit is definitely not a reason to change an article to British English, then he is denser (or more more wilfully ignoring policy) than I had thought. Oreo Priest ^talk 21:10, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I never claim ownership to any article, I'm completely against the whole concept as it is against policy. I never hinted that I created Jumping Flash, I said that I brought it up to GA and developed it broadly. I'm not sure about those imgur.com links, they seemed to have passed the GAN so I assumed they weren't a violation! Oreo, I'm trying to help you. I hope you retract your claims of me being dense. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Jaguar, dense is the charitable interpretation of what you said. You claimed that you were right to change Jumping Flash! to British English because you copyedited it. You either a) didn't read WP:ENGVAR (particularly 'Retaining the existing variety') throughout this entire discussion, b) did, and had no clue what it meant, or c) did, and ignored it in bad faith. All three are equally frustrating to other editors, which is why everyone is giving you such a hard time. I will retract the "dense" comment if you inform me that c) is correct. By all means, let's move forward and work together, but that means you need to stop misleading or misrepresenting the true state of affairs, and also make a serious effort to understand the policy that has everyone so upset and has landed you in hot water. Oreo Priest ^talk 14:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

• It's just that Iridescent somehow managed to come on my talk page after months of not editing on his account, takes quotes from my user page and uses them in smarmy and aggravating manner with his only intention of causing trouble with me. I hate snobbery so much. Yes, the snobbery of wanting the right people to have the credit is infuriatingly elitist, isn't it? People who single-handedly wrote or worked up an article to featured status often say modestly that they "contributed" to it. But contributions in the form of a handful of copyedits, as you did at Kennet and Avon Canal, still aren't quite the same thing.[1] There's nothing wrong with them, but they're tiny and rather trivial and have nothing to do with getting the article to featured status, so why list it on your page in a way that suggests you had something to do with that? You're basking in reflected glory. Deflecting on to Iridescent's editing pattern (what's it your business?) hardly makes you look better. Bishonen | talk 18:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC).

Bishonen, I'm sorry if you feel that way about me. It might have made a difference if I put "minor additions" next to Kennet and Avon Canal, however I did not like the way Iridescent came onto me for no reason and started using quotes from my own user page (which is of nobody's concern, reflecting on what you said!). I don't how my user page is relevant to Iridescent's unexpected behaviour and how he just out of the blue came here after weeks of inactivity. I don't understand... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

[Copied from my talk page -Oreo Priest ^talk 14:48, 29 July 2014 (UTC)]

Hi Oreo, I thought I'd leave you this message on your talk page rather than mine as my talk page is getting cluttered by others! I've been doing some research into what languages the Commonwealth Realms (the remaining articles you have listed onto my table) use. To make it short, I have started with Kenya (even though it isn't a realm). Kenya is bilingual, as stated in Languages of Kenya however English is its first language. This source states that British English is used by teachers in Kenya, so unless a consensus is achieved perhaps we should leave Kenya in British English? The document is quite long so don't worry about reading it all. I will let you know when I find more about the remaining articles that are outstanding. Thank you. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Kenya can stay. Oreo Priest ^talk 14:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Guyana uses British English. "English is the main language, and Guyana is the only English speaking country in South America, though many people in neighboring Suriname speak it. British English is taught in school and used in Government and business." Language of Guyana. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:32, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Guyana can stay. Oreo Priest ^talk 14:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Papua New Guinea uses a lot of languages with English being the official but spoken by 1-2% of the population[2]. There is no evidence that UK or Australian spelling is used, but since it was a British colony I would leave it as British English instead of American English on the basis of strong national ties (the US doesn't have any ties here). What do you think on this one? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

If there is no evidence, then you will revert it. You may start a discussion on the talk page afterwards if you wish. Oreo Priest ^talk 14:52, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not too sure about this one, I would say under MOS:TIES that British English could be used here, as the US have no ties to Papa New Guiana or anything that would establish American English. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

• Saint Kitts and Nevis is a Commonwealth Realm and all realms use British English as long as Elizabeth II is the head of state. If not this then MOS:TIES dictates that it has strong national ties to the UK, leaving the US with no ties to a Commonwealth Realm whatsoever.

Every part of that claim is false. You again either didn't read it or are deliberately misrepresenting the section you linked. :*Australian Defence Force (Australian English)

• Vancouver, British Columbia (Canadian English)
• Usain Bolt (Jamaican English)
• Christchurch (New Zealand English)

What's all that then? Four Commonwealth Realms with their own varieties of English? So that section definitely doesn't say to use British English for all Commonwealth Realms. The strong national ties for Jamaica are to Jamaica; likewise for all other Commonwealth Realms. You have provided no satisfactory evidence that it should stay at British English. You will revert this at once. Oreo Priest ^talk 08:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

It was a mistake to say all realms using British English, realistically I meant nearly all. Those four you pointed out are the only four that use their own variations of English (unless I'm missing one). I can't find any evidence on Saint Kitts and Nevis (or any Caribbean country) using Jamaican English so I will revert them all to US spelling temporarily. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

You still haven't. Oreo Priest ^talk 20:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I've restored Saint Kitts and Nevis fully now. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:37, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

You overwrote some HDI changes that you missed. Oreo Priest ^talk 21:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

• The Bahamas and Grenada are other realms, MOS:TIES dictates that these have strong national ties to the UK, leaving the US with no ties to it whatsoever. English is the official language as with all Caribbean realms.

No, it doesn't dictate anything of the sort. And nobody's measuring US ties. These too you will revert. Oreo Priest ^talk 09:50, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Wow, I've just found a revision before mine that was made two hours before I changed the Bahamas in UK spelling through the script.[3] It seems that an IP changed some of the words in British English before me. I've reverted these two back to US spelling temporarily. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:18, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

• Saint Lucia and Castries use English as the official language, I can't find any evidence of using British English (Caribbean English are dialects only) so should we leave this on the basis of MOS:TIES? Oreo Priest ^talk 08:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely not. You haven't been following the discussion at all if you should suggest that. Restore the previous versions. Oreo Priest ^talk 08:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

They are temporarily restored. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:19, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Your use of the word "temporarily" here and elsewhere leaves me very uneasy. What exactly did you have in mind? Oreo Priest ^talk 20:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I plan to host a discussion to their respective articles on what variant of English should be used for Caribbean countries soon, I think it's best to see what the community thinks. In my honest opinion I think that WP:ENGVAR could use with some updating! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:32, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

That's legitimate. I too think WP:ENGVAR needs an update - though I think it needs to be more explicit that a handful of tenuous historical links to Britain don't automatically make a page require British English. For example, I far too frequently see Brits insist that articles on any part of Europe need to be in British English. Brits are responsible for at least 80% of the linguistic disruption I've seen. And for the record, I am neither British nor American. Oreo Priest ^talk 21:21, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I see your point and I completely understand. For what it's worth, I'm only half British and I hope nobody sees me as an orthographic imperialist! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:49, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

• Sierra Leone uses English as its official language but I can find no evidence of UK spelling so I'll revert this back to American English.

Wait, hold on. Checking this revision it already seemed that Sierra Leone already used British English? There was a Use British English template at the bottom. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:35, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Did you check why? It dates back to this unjustified edit using the very same script that caused all the trouble by the author of the script, who explains that he doesn't believe in WP:ENGVAR. He provided no more justification than you did. Please restore US spelling to the article. Alternatively, find out exactly what constitutes Sierra Leonean English and implement that. Oreo Priest ^talk 08:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

The revert is a good start, but you've deleted a whole bunch of intervening edits. Please restore those. Oreo Priest ^talk 20:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll get to it now. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:32, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of leaving Commonwealth Realms (essentially British countries in cultural aspects) in American English - it doesn't make any sense? US spelling has no ties to these countries at all, it makes sense to either leave the ones I mentioned above in either British of Jamaican English? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:15, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

I get that you don't like it. Could you give WP:ENGVAR a re-read and point out the part where it asks whether or not you like it? If you can prove that British English is the English that these countries use, they can stay British (though it appears you can't). Otherwise, you will revert them. Oreo Priest ^talk 08:38, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

You're putting words in my mouth. At what point did I ever say I don't like ENGVAR? I didn't did I? I said that I don't like the idea of leaving the UK-related articles in US spelling. Read my sentence "I don't like the idea of leaving Commonwealth Realms" - I didn't say "I don't like the idea of WP:ENGVAR" I said Commonwealth Realms. I've read through the policy nearly ten times now and I'm still trying to find out what uses British English or not. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm not twisting your words, you're parsing them in a way I didn't intend. The it was the idea of leaving the Commonwealth Realms in American English. Oreo Priest ^talk 20:08, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

This is a reminder that you aren't finished with the cleanup, and that I haven't forgotten. If you do not address the outstanding issues, you will be blocked. Oreo Priest ^talk 21:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Whenever I will get a stable internet connection I'll restore the three remaining articles (which I swore I already restored, but I'll take your word for it). I would have done them now but I can't take the risk of losing everything I edit. Ireland hasn't been treating me very well! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Oreo, did you check them before warning me? All of them except Papua New Guinea have already been restored a long time ago. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

@Oreo Priest: All of them have now been restored along with their HDI info. Now, if I have missed anything out (which I'm pretty sure I haven't) I apologise in advance for my incompetence. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:22, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

You didn't finish fixing Sierra Leone. As I said almost two weeks ago, your sloppy revert erased a bunch of intermediate edits and you need to fix this. Oreo Priest ^talk 10:33, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

More egregiously, you have never even so much as addressed the Ambiguous (not reverted) column, and further Antigua and Barbuda is untouched beyond a protest that it shouldn't be changed. I made you a crystal clear list, so it shouldn't have been so hard to see if you "missed anything". Address all of these at once. Oreo Priest ^talk 10:39, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I have reverted them, under the extreme protest of them staying in American English. Forgive me for playing the victim again, but I feel like I'm being bullied into reverting them into the wrong language with the alternative of being blocked. It doesn't feel right for a Commonwealth Realm to be in American English when they have no ties to it whatsoever. In fact the United States wasn't even around when most of these colonies were formed! I have reverted every article, except English language, where I hope to host a proposal on what form of English it should be in. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:44, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I have some soft evidence that Antigua and Barbuda uses British spelling - in the article the "Antigua Labour Party" was already used in its British variant (labour), and the real party is named that. I'm not sure if a name of one party is sufficient evidence to denote that British English is used in Antigua and Barbuda, but it seems plausible. What do you think? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:49, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I feel like I'm being bullied into reverting them into the wrong language with the alternative of being blocked No, you are being forced to undo a whole host of illegitimate, policy violating unilateral edits that virtually everyone who saw agreed were egregiously wrong. I even offered you the option of providing proof, but you have not been able to in most cases. (No, the article on the Labour Party is not sufficient).

It doesn't feel right for a Commonwealth Realm to be in American English Hopefully in the future you will substitute this logic with evidence and proper discussion instead of unilateral action. Oreo Priest ^talk 08:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Suez Canal has been restored, Television was already reverted by somebody a while ago, World War I is in British English according to the consensus that had been made (and we took part in) and I will see what the community thinks about English Language. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 14:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I will see what the community thinks about English Language. Absolutely not. You will revert it at once and then you can begin a discussion. You don't get to pick and choose and stonewall when you were the one who made the illegitimate, policy violating unilateral edits in the first place. You don't get to wrongly change the status quo and then force others to come up with a consensus to overturn it. Oreo Priest ^talk 08:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I have reverted them How can you say with a straight face that you restored all the content deleted in the edit I pointed out to you with your most recent edit? It is simply exhausting trying to double-check everything you've done to see if you're misleading us or lying to us; more often than not you are. For this same reason, I'd like you to actually provide the diffs that show that Suez Canal and Television have been fixed. Oreo Priest ^talk 08:26, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand what you're trying to suggest with Sierra Leone, the differences you pointed out doesn't make sense? This is my edit I just made to restore the rest of the edits made between 30 July and 22 July (I used the script on 22 July and reverted to that revision 8 days later).

By the way, English language already used British English (see the 'Use British English' template). My change with the script only changed a few words but I have reverted them anyway.

And look at this - Television was already reverted by AVarchaeologist three days after the changes were made!

And yesterday I restored Suez Canal. I can't believe you're accusing me of lying or misleading when all you had to do was simply check the histories of those articles - the proof was all there. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't accusing you of lying here beyond your insisting you'd completed everything when you hadn't. I asked you to provide the histories and proof, because I think the onus is on you to prove that you've completed a task, not for me to do detective work and repeatedly check the pages to see if you have. Oreo Priest ^talk 20:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

At any rate, you're done now, much to both of our relief. If I were you, I would not make any linguistic changes to any articles without first obtaining a clear consensus, even if to you it's clear which one it should be. That way we can both avoid this sort of unpleasant headache in the future. Happy editing! Oreo Priest ^talk 20:16, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Oreo! I apologise for my disruption and sometimes making things worse. I'm also sorry if it took too much of your time, but I think we're both glad it's over now. I won't make any language changes to any other articles in the future now. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi,

About two days ago you reverted my edit to the Russia article, where I updated the population to the latest known number, based on the official sources we've always used. I have been making similar edits for years, so it'd be good to hear what made you RV it.

Additionally, I will now insert it back, and going forward would appreciate a discussion before any further attempts to revert sourced data.--Therexbanner (talk) 14:58, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I think there has been a misunderstanding! I reverted those by accident, there is currently a WP:ANI discussion about me and the misuse of a script that changes an article from American English to British English, two days ago I changed Russia into British English. Due to the conclusion of the ANI discussion I was told to revert every non-UK related article back to American English, and this included Russia. I think I deleted your population edits to Russia by accident! I'm sorry about that, but at least it's all sorted now! Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

No worries at all, happens to all of us sometimes. Cheers, --Therexbanner (talk) 15:09, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jaguar,

is there some good reason why you replace {{Use British English}} with the less obviously named {{EngvarB}} in articles that obviously should use British English (like Nottingham)? To me, it seems like {{EngvarB}} is only for articles where British English should be used, but should not be called British English (say, articles about topics that Irish nationalists care about deeply). If you don't have a good reason, could you revert your template changes? Thank you, —Kusma (t·c) 08:07, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Kusma, the script I use (Universal British) is programmed to replace {{British English}} with {{EngvarB}} for some reason - I don't like it myself and I wish that it didn't do it. I thought about re-programming it myself so that it could exclude it. If it means anything, I am half-Irish and I've avoided using this script for places in Northern Ireland! There would be a bloodbath if someone proposed Irish English over British English in Derry, for example LOL! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:44, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I have reverted your edits for you. You should not use a broken script (you are responsible for everything you do with the script). —Kusma (t·c) 20:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Kusma:, there has been a misunderstanding - the script is not at all broken, I just said that I disagreed with it replacing {{British English}} with {{EngvarB}}, that is how the script always has been. I wasn't implying it was broken? If you agree to this, I should re-revert all the edits I have made? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't mind you doing your edits again, but this time don't change the template. If the script can't help you to do it any other way, then the script should not be used. Or if you do use the script, you have to manually clean up the mess you make while using it. "The script did it" is not an excuse for a partially bad edit: your script-assisted edits are entirely your own responsibility. —Kusma (t·c) 21:12, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

I will re-revert the edits and put in the British template back, but if I were to modify the script itself I would need the creator's permission. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:16, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

The community has reached a consensus on banning you for using the specific scripts you were using. The final consensus states, "... be banned from using any automated script or tool relating to ENGVAR, broadly interpreted, through Dec. 31, 2014. Manual ENGVAR edits would not be affected. Jaguar must also participate in cleaning up the damage done to the satisfaction of the community. Violations of this ban would be dealt with using escalating blocks." I have left additional comments on the ANI thread. Please remember that this is a specific ban and not a block; you are still free to edit, just not with those scripts. This message was left per policy. Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk | ctrb) 06:32, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

New Years Eve seems a bit long though. Maybe a month or two would be reasonable? I wish I could have contributed yesterday. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

The consensus was crystal clear. Don't try and fight me on this or slither your way around it. See Appealing a ban. Take the issue back to AN/I if you feel really strongly that you need to attempt to reduce your ban (also see the expected duration of bans). I would highly recommend just waiting it out. It's not an indefinite ban, just four months. Again, the community has decided, you will wait until New Year's to use those scripts again. If you violate it (including not "cleaning up the damage done to the satisfaction of the community" - many editors say^[1] that you are stubborn to take responsibility for your edits and fix them. They are your edits and need to be corrected by you.), you will be met with escalating blocks. This is obviously a strongly worded letter - I'm making sure I get the point across. MrScorch6200 (talk | ctrb) 18:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I see, I was more or less talking to myself when I wrote that reply. I'm sorry if you took it the wrong way. Don't worry, I have no intentions of violating the ban, and I have no intention of 'slithering' my way around it. I have already fixed the errors I have seen fit and am awaiting further confirmation. If the community feels that I should wait until 2015 to use any script, then it's not a big deal! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:12, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Good. I'm just making sure we won' have an issue with this in the future and that this can all be resolved ASAP. Best of luck, MrScorch6200 (talk | ctrb) 18:27, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I saw you reverted my edits on these three articles where I updated the HDI info. Wondering if you plan to restore that info or if I should do it myself. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'll restore them myself. I've been put under so much pressure to restore US spelling before I'm doing it too hastily. I'll restore your edits now. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:32, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Glancing at your talk page I see what you mean. I can restore them if you prefer (not difficult). EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:34, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

@EvergreenFir:, I've restored all your HDI information in those articles. Sorry for the clumsiness, I'll be more careful in the future! Thanks ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:39, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks again! EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:40, 30 July 2014 (UTC)

Jaguar, an issue recently came up with Talk:Gasketball: the "GA" template that you inserted there had an incorrect field, "subtopic", which caused the article to be uncategorized. The correct field is "topic" (yes, it makes a difference!). In addition, you were retaining two fields from the "GA nominee" template that are invalid in "GA": "status" and "note".

I've gone back and also corrected two earlier GAs you reviewed: Talk:Development of Fez, which had the same issues as Gasketball, and Talk:Aarhus, which correctly used the "topic" field, but also included the two invalid fields mentioned above. I haven't yet checked further back to see whether your earlier reviews left the same template issues.

Rather than edit the "GA nominee" template into a "GA" template, Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions#Passing recommends using the supplied "GA" template (copy/paste), and then copy/pasting the subtopic name from "GA nominee" into the topic of "GA" and also filling in the "page" field. Once that's done, the old "GA nominee" template is deleted, and the changes saved.

I see you are reviewing another GA nomination, so this should come in handy if the article passes all the GA criteria. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 18:36, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for pointing that out, BlueMoonset! GA templates always have confused me. I'll be sure to implement those changes in the future. If there are any more mistakes with previous GANs I will fix them. Regards, ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:29, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate the warm welcome. I've been on other wikis before, so I know how to use them, but thanks for the advice. :) Gameditor^Talk 20:11, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

@Gameditor: aha, I understand! Sorry for that but I couldn't resist turning the red link to your talk page blue! I too have had the same experience with most other Wikis. Anyway, welcome! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:12, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for that! The color red was just... too bland. But now my sig has it grey, so you did nothing to turn it blue! :D Cheers! Gameditor^Talk 20:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

BarsofGold (talk) 22:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout (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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 05:40, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jumping Flash! 2 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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 05:40, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Please take care to add attribution to articles you copy from elsewhere on Wikipedia, even if you are the main writer of the text. The article St. Mary's Church, Bentworth was a copy from Bentworth, with text written by others as well (e.g. Dr. Blofeld), so you should have followed the guidance in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. I have now added the necessary backlink in an edit summary to the article, but normally this should be included immediately. If you are aware of other instances where you also didn't include attribution, please do so.

The article also needs work to get the referencing correct; you copy pasted the text, but that meant that the pointer to some named references has gone missing, as evidenced by the big red error at the bottom. Fram (talk) 11:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Fram. I copied most of the text of that article from Bentworth only to get a start of things - it's not something I would usually do but I had no choice. I will copy edit the article soon to make it differ from Bentworth. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:42, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I've traced that you are the one who nominated Benedict Cumberbatch article to GA status. I have just some concerns as the edit made by Lady Lotus drastically changed the lead paragraphs. She/He has listed credits even with no known notability/importance which made the paragraph even more like plain list of credits. I have, from the GA nomination history, found out that this is a major concern for the article.

The user has also deleted the educational attainment of the subject for no known reason. I object to this edit because the degrees he has attained are relevant to the profession he has now. They're are there to reflect the training he has as an actor.

Another concern is the deletion of "voice artist" in his profession. Cumberbatch's voice work exists outside radio as he has done dubbing, rehearsed reading, commercials, voice overs, etc so merely labeling him as a radio actor is not only insufficient but incorrect.

I sincerely hope you attend to these concerns. I have already written to the user in question and has also posted these concerns in the talk page of the article. I am going to revert the edits done by Lady Lotus for now. Thank you again and have a nice day!GreenEcoFashion (talk) 20:10, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

First, I removed the educational parameter because it stated that he received a BA in Drama, and a MA in Theatre, his BA and MA are already addressed in the alma mater parameter, I found the educational one redundant.

Second, I expanded the lead in hopes to get the article to FA status and a 4 paragraph lead is normal in a FA. What you call "no known notability/importance" is simply opinion, and what I stated was his first film appearance which I find has merit and his first theatre appearances, which has merit.

Third, being a "voice artist" is another term for "voice actor", so him listed as an actor has the term covered. He has only done a few films as a voice artist, so it isn't a dominate credit to his career, if the majority of his career like Grey DeLisle, then keeping "voice actor" is appropriate. And for his radio credits, there is nothing wrong or incorrect about him performing in radio when he has nearly 40 radio credits. LADY LOTUS • TALK 20:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi GreenEcoFashion, I agree that maybe the lead was possibly "too listy" but the other parts of the article outweighed the lead as it all met the GA criteria. I'm not too sure what's going on here, but I hope that you and Lady Lotus can agree on something in the article? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:42, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello thanks for a quick reply! I am all for a compromise with Lady Lotus. I have raised other concerns on the talk page for other users to chime in and give their perspective! Thanks again!GreenEcoFashion (talk) 20:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the review of Woodspring Priory. The links to the British Newspaper Archive work for me - I got a free subscription from Wikipedia:BNA you might find it useful for Hants articles as well.— Rod ^talk 12:50, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestion, I might sign up to it as I plan to get some Hampshire articles up to GA soon! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:38, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout 2097 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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 16:40, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey Jaguar, how's it going! I saw your work on some articles (great job btw), and I thought you'd have exeperience telling which articles are good for GA/FA. I'm currently working on a draft for the Sleeping Dogs (video game) development section (currently on ga review). Me and Tezero will be taking it to FA, but I need the most feedback I can get on the draft. Is there any way you can take a look at my draft (User:URDNEXT/sandbox) and see if it's good enough for FA? I'm structuring it similarly to Batman Arkham Asylum. Thanks! URDNEXT (talk) 14:29, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey URDNEXT! I'm good thanks, I frequently review Czar and Tezero's GA nominations when possible and more recently I do nominate and review a lot of video game articles for GA now. I've been keeping a close watch on Sleeping Dogs for quite some time now and I was actually going to review it but looks like I was beaten to it again! I'm pretty confident it will pass the GAN this time, so I'll take a look at your draft now and I'll let you know if it meets the FA criteria. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 14:47, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, Jaguar! URDNEXT (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article PlayStation (console) 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 Red Phoenix -- Red Phoenix (talk) 01:20, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

The article PlayStation (console) 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:PlayStation (console) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Red Phoenix -- Red Phoenix (talk) 20:00, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

The article Wipeout (video game) 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 (video game) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Czar -- Czar (talk) 23:40, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

The article Wipeout 2097 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 2097 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Czar -- Czar (talk) 23:40, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

The article Jumping Flash! 2 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:Jumping Flash! 2 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Czar -- Czar (talk) 23:40, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article British Raj 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 Lemurbaby -- Lemurbaby (talk) 00:01, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

The article PlayStation (console) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:PlayStation (console) 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 Red Phoenix -- Red Phoenix (talk) 21:03, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wipeout 64 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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 13:01, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

The article Wipeout 64 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 64 for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Czar -- Czar (talk) 20:01, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Given the amount of work that remains for the Wipeout (and Jumping Flash) articles (the open GANs), I don't think they can be brought up to snuff within a GAN-sized time period. I recommended having them partially rewritten to mind the actual sources and copyedited and whatnot by others before having them come back for the GAN check. Would you be all right with my closing them? I wanted to check with you and make sure you were okay with that before I did so. czar ♔ 20:33, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

@Czar: Thank you for the reviews, they are all very comprehensive and helpful! I have read through them all and agree that there were a lot of things I had overlooked during the GAN process. I can copyedit them but it will take me a little while longer to sort out the sources. If you like, you can close whichever ones you see fit and I'll renominate them once they have improved. By the way, just wondering, with the first Wipeout I know that the people in the infobox are unsourced but I copied them out of a page from the game's manual (I have the original copy of the game), is it possible to use the manual as a reference? Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:38, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Sounds good. I'm happy to read through them again in the future, but I'd like to see that everything that can be cleaned up has been before it gets to me (otherwise the reviewer is doing the writer's job). Copyediting is important, but even before that is to go to each sentence and verify that the claims it makes are actually verifiable in their closest source—especially the claims that would make a reader incredulous, such as one about how the game received positive reception (for which you'd need some kind of source that claimed that, e.g., Metacritic). I think the game's manual is an appropriate source for the game's credits, so it would be fine to cite that. (Of course, an online source would be even better so the reader doesn't have to blindly trust the text.) czar ♔ 21:14, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

@Czar: I didn't know that you were going to close Jumping Flash too, I thought it was only the Wipeout articles you were going to fail? Thank you for your feedback on all of them. I will take your advice and improve them now, despite it feeling it will take some time for me to find the appropriate sources. Would you mind reviewing some of them again in the future? Your feedback is always appreciated, and I'll take this as a learning curve as I have now had six GANs failed in a month! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:27, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that—I had mentioned it in the first sentence, though. Don't be discouraged. You're familiar with how the GAN works so I'd just give the articles the same review before submitting them. And I wouldn't mind scanning them over in the future at all, but one at a time might be the way to go (at least at first). Looking forward to it! czar ♔ 20:15, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

The article Wipeout (video game) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Wipeout (video game) 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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

The article Jumping Flash! 2 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Jumping Flash! 2 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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

The article Wipeout 2097 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Wipeout 2097 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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

The article Wipeout 64 you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Wipeout 64 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 Czar -- Czar (talk) 17:02, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Jaguar. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15