User talk:Jaguar/Archive 9

This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.

I looked at your picture, went to the wrong talk page, and saw no messages, so I presumed you were new.

My apologies. I am a bit absent minded at times. Please delete the nonsense from your picture page, and transfer the Gong, to the right page. I you chose.

I'm glad you got the message.

Amandajm (talk) 23:33, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry, I understand. I feel the same way too. I have been away from Wikipedia for a while myself I forgotten how some things eork too! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Hey Jaguar :). As mentioned on the Wikiproject Hampshire talkpage, we've opened Flow up for community testing. I'd be really grateful if you could hammer on the system (if you haven't already!), let me know any bugs you find, and leave a note at the 'first release' page explaining what you, as a member of Wikiproject Hampshire, would need to see to be okay with it being deployed on that wikiproject's talkpage.

Thanks in advance! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 19:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm very sorry about that. Obviously I was being over-suspicious. Thanks for not taking offence. BTW, if anything was deleted that you think needs to be restored, let me know. Deb (talk) 09:48, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

The references are all the same and say nothing about the subject. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:02, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

So, Jaguar.

• Early in 2012 you got in trouble for mass creation of geographical microstub articles which had no encyclopædic value whatsoever; other editors had to work hard to clean up the mess. Then you swept it under the carpet, and "retired" complaining about how everybody was mean to you. Then you came back and started producing lots more shitty sub-stubs which required a great deal of adult supervision. Then you backed off again and said your "stub creating days are over".
• Then you restarted production, including crap like Fond Gens Libres (14°29'0"N 60°5'0"W). Again, there were problems with sourcing and notability, across the board. Then Dr Blofeld encouraged you to create a list of Swedish village microstubs, and those had the same problem, because again you didn't actually understand the subject or read sources, instead and creating articles off a list. All along the way, there has been feedback from other editors highlighting problems with your mass-produced content.
• More recently, I'm glad you have diversified into other work. For instance, assessing articles written by other people; I see you assessed Wiltshire County FA Senior Cup as B-class even though the only prose is in the lede, it doesn't cover much of the topic, it has no independent source, and half of the sections are just empty placeholders.
• And now, despite multiple warnings and multiple editors having to clean up the mess in the past, you're back to copy-and-pasting microstubs on Chinese villages, only using one crappy directory which is in a language that you can't read. You seem to be copy and pasting off the list you used before, since that source is dated "Retrieved 18 August 2011". That cargo-cult attempt at sourcing doesn't actually support what you're putting in the articles.

You've demonstrated that you can edit very many articles and accumulate a large edit count. However, that's a Bad Thing, not a Good Thing, as long as your editing needs adult supervision, most of it gets deleted, and there is no effort to correct the underlying problems that others point out. What, exactly, would it take for you to change direction and work competently rather than quickly? bobrayner (talk) 21:11, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi bobrayner, I will answer your questions. First of all, last night I had created these Chinese articles for 'testing' (not in that bad way), I wanted to make sure I knew what I was doing my re-jogging my memory because in the future I plan to move onto creating some other higher quality stubs at a slower rate (but definitely not China). The second link you put (the one where it said I 'swept it all under the carpet') was me archiving my talk page as it was getting too cluttered? Also, I retired in May 2012 not because "everyone was mean" it was because I couldn't take a lot of the crap I was getting, and felt that I could no longer contribute without five different people scrutinising me. The only reason why I returned to Wikipedia was because of a few good people who emailed me encouraged me to come back and return to editing. And what does 'adult supervision' mean? I'm not a child?

You can be assured that right now I am not going back to China - I have no plans to recreate the 10,000 articles I once had unless I regain everyone's trust. Right now I'm looking for sources to the ten or so articles I created last night - I have already sourced a few. Thank you for your concerns, I am beginning to work slower. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:47, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

He Jaguar, I had a look at Nanloudi Township, and it is weird: the title doesn't correspond to the subject; the article has no link to its chinese interwiki (which is important to avoid duplicates; especially with different translations needed); you accessed the reference in 2011 (not in 2013) and the reference is not a reliable source. This is even after you edited the page with a correction…. Is it possibly you were going a bit too fast to see what was happening? L.tak (talk) 18:36, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I checked: zh:南娄底乡 exists; would that be the appropriate wikilink. What I saw there is links to the Chinese bureau of statistics; which would be reliable sources… Unfortunately they are dead links; and I could't find a correct link. Maybe you have more luck… L.tak (talk) 18:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, that is strange. I don't understand how the title is wrong as every page I put {{subst:PAGENAME}} in its title and the dead links I will check over and repair them now. 2011 was the good year when I started creating the articles, but I'm confused why it's in a 2013 article - I'll go over them and fix them thanks for pointing it out. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:13, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Copy and pasting {{subst:PAGENAME}} into each article is a sure sign that mass-creation of articles has taken precedence over actually understanding what you are writing about. Similarly, copy and pasting a source which doesn't actually mention the subject looks like an obvious attempt to cheat

WP:V. Why do you keep on doing this? bobrayner (talk

) 21:35, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Thanks for solving the first part, but the problem remains you are not adding a reliable source; and didn't answer if the interlanguage link I identified was appropriate...Especially the link from the reliable source is important, because otherwise we have no idea to see if this is bogus-township or not.... Also: how did you do the translation from 南娄底乡to Nanloudi Township? L.tak (talk) 21:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I am looking for a new source now as I have already sourced a few. I'm having a hard time finding sources for Aungo the 'Medicine capital', however I'm still looking. I will find something for them. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:51, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Could you give me an example of an article of your recent Chinese stubs that you sourced with a reliable source? I until now could only find Xzqh.org, which I don't consider one.... L.tak (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Sure, this is one of them that I found that lists every settlement in the Hebei Province - Xzqh.org is the only valuable source I can find so far. It was the only thing I had used. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:01, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't see that as much of a reliable source; but then: my Chinese is not that good…. But this discussion seems mute now the article is deleted, so let's leave it at that…. L.tak (talk) 14:54, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jaguar. Stop me if you've heard this before. Please, please stop creating Chinese township stubs until you understand the language and geography of China! The references I have checked don't contain any reference whatsoever, you are not transliterating the Chinese names, etc ... A lot of people spent a lot of time clearing up after your last foray into this area and I really don't want that to have to happen again. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 08:53, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I agree that I am going to stop making them now, in fact the ten I made the other night was just so I could get used to things again. I spent a while trying to clean up errors but sadly I cannot find any references that refers to the Anguo district, so perhaps those ones may be better off deleted. I feel ashamed. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:05, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jaguar,

the references on your new Chinese stubs mostly seem to go to the same page, about one of the places. Also, they lack interwiki links etc. Given your obvious lack of

I see. I thought I had improved those articles but given the fact I can't find a proper reference for some of them then perhaps a few of them should be deleted... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:07, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I deleted all of your recent ones. Many of them were about places in Baoding, but referenced a page about Xinshi instead (I can read Chinese if I have to, so I can see your references were cut and pasted nonsense). Also, you claimed that you last accessed the references in 2011, which I find strange. Please learn Chinese before you try to work on places in China again. —Kusma (t·c) 13:11, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I also deleted those from July. Do you have any more stubs that need to be deleted? —Kusma (t·c) 13:15, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't think any more needs deleting. Did you mean July last year or this year? I honestly can't remember when last created some... I first started creating Chinese stubs in 2011, so that must have been when I accessed the reference. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 14:08, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I mean this year. Your stubs from last July (those few that haven't been deleted) all seem to have been fixed by a couple of people who can read Chinese (for example, I seem to have edited most of them). —Kusma (t·c) 15:10, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

I understand, thanks for doing this. Would this mean that all my edits would have been deleted along with the articles or do they still count? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Your edits are counted as "deleted edits" (sorry, I don't remember where you can access that number as a non-admin, maybe in Preferences?). —Kusma (t·c) 13:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

This includes deleted edits. bobrayner (talk) 14:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

I have around 9,000 deleted edits. That's quite depressing. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Merry Christmas! I saw your edits on Bentworth recently, I thought the old colonel had been up to his usual tricks!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:55, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Haha he has been! And I think I actually might have seen him the other day in real life... well at least he has stopped editing Bentworth recently, that makes me happy! I missed a lot of people here (but not Colonel Ukiws), that's why I came back! Thank you and Merry Christmas Dr, ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:02, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

LOL, I always picture Victor Meldrew for some reason... Any chance you could GA review The Dorchester for me?♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:08, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

LOL, that's a perfect stereotype! The Dorchester looks like a good article, I'll have a read through it tonight and a proper look through it tomorrow, I'll be happy to review it. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:13, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in, but as we have mutual aquaintances I should point out that the fellow is in fact a retired Wing Commander. Good luck with the FA -- give me a shout if you need any better photos and I can zip over there (that one of Hall Place is a bit dark, for example). Ericoides (talk) 06:02, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ericoides, yes I too have mutual acquaintances and knew he was a retired Wing Commander! I'm interested in getting Bentworth to FA, and if need be I could go out any time and take pictures, but the problem is that I don't have a working camera (I got a 5 megapix phone though). These past few days have been very nice, so we could make the most out of the clear skies! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:04, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, you can reserve it here and review it whenever the hell you feel like hehe! I don't be-lieeeveee it!!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:23, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll have a quick read through tonight and will leave some comments tomorrow. It looks very well-written! What don't you believe? Aha :) ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I've addressed all points except the currency converter which didn't work.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:34, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I was thinking more about getting one or two of the other villages up to GA status. I don't think Bentworth is polished enough especially in the history/geography to be FA worthy. It is very comprehensive though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

why does it not conform to your policy. it is a legitimate threat. i could shake the ground beneath your feet. cambodia is ready, let her go.

you can switch to an advisory role is you wish to continue serving. but please make an effort to share responsibility.

a puma!

--Jason Bourne Jr. (talk) 14:26, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

???????? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 14:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

that is 7 question marks wasted. how asian of you. --Jason Bourne Jr. (talk) 14:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand? I'm not Asian? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

singapore. asean stuff. hong kong. interested? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jason Bourne Jr. (talk • contribs) 14:29, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits to Wells Cathedral however I have just removed the link you added to Salisbury Cathedral which I had just previously removed as it was already linked earlier in the article and a reviewer at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Wells Cathedral/archive1 had commented about the overlinking.— Rod ^talk 17:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't know that the link was already mentioned. I'll stay off editing Wells Cathedral. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:50, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

No need to stay off it (you could even comment at the FAC). I've just installed

User:Ucucha/duplinks which finds duplicate links which is another useful gadget I didn't know about until today - might be useful to you for this sort of thing.— Rod ^talk

17:55, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry for the long reply, I've been on and off Wikipedia lately. I've installed the duplinks you mentioned and should put it to good use soon! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

	Happy New Year!
	Hello Jaguar: Thanks for all of your contributions to improve the encyclopedia for Wikipedia's readers, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 07:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC) Send New Year cheer by adding {{ subst:Happy New Year 2014 }} to user talk pages with a friendly message.

	Happy New Year, 2014
	From Amandajm (talk) 08:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

As you are listed on the wikiproject page for South Sudan as a member, I was thus wondering if you are interested in collaborating on a page together? There is more info on the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_South_Sudan#Agricultural_page?Lihaas (talk) 07:16, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Oh wow, I actually created that page back in July 2011! I had no idea. I'll have a look. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:09, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Wwell if youre interested we can start discussion the scope and layout to get it going(Lihaas (talk) 06:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)).

Hi, Thanks for your edits to Wells Cathedral, however please take a look at the long discussions on the talk page and at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Wells Cathedral/archive1 before resizing the images etc (Tate v Tate gallery is also discussed). I welcome everyones input and comments but some of these changes have taken a long time to arrive at consensus.— Rod ^talk 18:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for telling me, I did read most of the comments left at the FAC, and I only thought that resizing the image in the Arts section would be valid as I use a small monitor. I tried editing one section and my edits got reverted by three different people. I think that article will get its FA soon. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:00, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, hope you're "spiffing" as the colonel might say :-). Any chance you can review this one?♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

'Spiffing' article! Sure, I'll have a quick read through now and should leave some initial comments tonight or tomorrow. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Oh. I see it's already done. I was literally just about to review it! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:19, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Can you review Fantasia (film)?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah sure, I'll make a start on it right away. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:29, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Jaguar, I've reverted your edit to

Chinese style guide for details. Cheers, ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk

Philg88,

WP:MOS-ZH. "My master, Annatar the Great, bids thee welcome

!" 16:22, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

@Lieutenant of Melkor:, sorry, yes I did, text is correct, link is wrong - I've corrected it. ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 17:20, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Sorry about that Philg, I didn't know. It was just that I used to do it all the time when I created subdivisions I didn't know! I don't know why but every time you create a new Chinese article it comes up on my watchlist? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:29, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

It's no big deal. Not sure why it comes up on your watchlist though, are you watching Category:Township-level divisions of Guangdong? Maybe that's why. Cheers, ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 21:50, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Strange, I'm not watching that page... Maybe you have created articles which were previously my deleted ones? 8000 is a big number after all! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:54, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Ahhhh ... that's it. Yes, I have noticed the warning on some of those page creations. Brings back many fond memories of 2011 ;). I was surprised to find that some of your stubs survived unscathed - a few with that Fujian reference for places in Guangdong somehow slipped through the net but they're fixed now. Best, ► Philg88 ◄ ^talk 03:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

So I've noticed that you have been promoting articles to GA status but have not properly closed their reviews. I myself had to update the talk page to Voyager (video game) because of that. Revision You've done that again with Descent 3 so I suggest you read this for closing future GANs. Thanks for your attention. GamerPro64 22:41, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Duly noted and I used to do so before but for some reason I must have forgotten for both Voyager and Descent 3! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 15:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the smooth review of the The Jungle Book (1967 film). Koala15 (talk) 18:50, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome. Well done on all the work you have put in! If you have any more reviews that need doing in the future you could let me know? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:54, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Addressed bastion, thanks for that. If you're up for a real epic film review I've just nommed Ben-Hur (1959 film) after at least 100 edits.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:44, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

You're welcome! That was the quickest review I have ever done. I'l pass it in a minute. If you want to I can review Ben-Hur, I'm up for an epic review! I've had a look through the article and the prose looks nice. I mainly focus on copyediting issues, do you want me to review it? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:57, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Let me know when you're on here and I'll nom it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm at college now. I'll be back at 5 ☠ Jaguar ☠ 13:38, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Cool. I'm just preparing the first Academy Award winner Wings (1927 film) at the moment for GA. Linked you the grant request by email.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Ha Krimuk beat you to it on Ben Hur. Perhaps you could do Wings instead which I nommed earlier, the first ever Oscar winner, that's an honour isn't it! Don't worry when I have Clockwork at GAR you can definitely review that one!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:20, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

That's quite annoying as I was up for an epic review LOL! Nevermind though. I'll be happy to review Wings, it would be another good honour. And Clockwork too! We were just learning about Kubrick's techniques of direction in A2 media an hour ago... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, with a bit of luck I might have some other great films for you to review over the next few months!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Great I look forward to it!! I'm gonna have a quick read through Wings now and will leave some initial comments tomorrow if that's OK.... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:30, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Grant has been approved and books on their way! I won't be taking on Kubrick first though! Any chance you can review Culture of the Cook Islands/or and Shawnee on Delaware, Pennsylvania for me?♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll be happy to review both of them if you'd like! Sorry I've been off Wikipedia for more than a week because of the sun, college, etc! I'm on here for good again so I can open the GAN for the Cook Islands' culture by tomorrow afternoon. Let me know about Kubrick too, as a matter of fact we're studying his films and it could appear in the final summer exams... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 00:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

It seems someone already took up that review within the same hour I came online... I was just about to open the GAN! It's almost as if people know!! Never mind, I can take up the Pennsylvania one tomorrow. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 00:20, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Yeah LOL, well I wasn't sure if they were going to review them or not, I don't want to overburden them, they do enough great work as it is! Two Kubrick books arrived today BTW, but it'll be articles like Althorp and Waldorf I'll be tackling first. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

That's good that you've ordered those books. Sorry for the late reply as I've been out all day and night! Let me know if you have any GAs that need reviewing and I'll be sure to open the GANs faster this time! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:32, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

The Ritz book is a beast! Can you review Tephrosia apollinea? It's about as comprehensive as it can be for an obscure plant, I ransacked the web on it. Review shouldn't take more than a few minutes! We must resume on that Hampshire town article some time..♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:09, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I'll be happy to review it. Prepare yourself for the world's fastest GAN! And that would be great too. I have a LOT of books about the history of Alton and its area. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

World's fastest GA review complete. World's fastest GA too - it passed! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:25, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I've seen many GAs as short with less sourcing. Length isn't important, a basic grasp of the topic is. And I've ransacked google books and JSTOR for sources for it and found all I could!♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:39, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick review on

Thanks for letting me know. I'll have a look through the article now! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 17:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Jaguar. You have new messages at Lady Lotus's talk page.
Message added 17:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

LADY LOTUS • TALK 17:57, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

FYI: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Plants#Tephrosia apollinea. Sasata (talk) 16:10, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to London soon and will be back in a few hours. I'll take part in the conversation when I get back! Thanks 86.140.148.251 (talk) 16:12, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

This is me, Jaguar. I'm not logged in. 16:13, 5 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.148.251 (talk)

@Jaguar: I know! I added the citation tag myself because it looks like OR. The lead doesn't need sourcing either. It now looks stubby and flawed, rather than seeming like a half decent summary of what info seems to exist on the web. It has been researched more than some of their other articles, it just happens to contain less content because info on it is so sparse. If I didn't think it was an adequate summary of a very obscure plant species I'd not have nominated it. I think it's pretty informative given the circumstances. Obviously I could pick a very prominent genus or something and write a 100kb article. It's amusing to be lectured on length when 98% of their articles are one liners! They continue to moan about the length but still nobody has shown me a single missing source which contains any real information about it. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:31, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

It's very sad to see the article to be reduced like this! I don't know much about flora to be honest, but when I reviewed the article the prose and references were in excellent standing. If it's a content issue then someone is more than welcome to submit Tephrosia apollinea for a reassessment. The article is still very informative but the way it looks now doesn't look as good as when you nominated it. I have reviewed a lot of GA articles now and as a reviewer I think that length should never be a issue - some of the shortest GA articles are under 400 words in length (there is a list of the shortest GA articles somewhere but I can't remember how to find it). Just as long as it is written well and it is informative it should easily pass the GAN. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 16:44, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Here's the list of

very short Featured Articles. This proves that length isn't really a problem! ☠ Jaguar

☠ 16:47, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I managed to find scraps on JSTOR which have fleshed it out a bit. It needs cleanup and the JSTOR journal sources formatted now. I still stand by the original as acceptable for GA.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:07, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

I know you're perfectly capable of conducting a decent GA review and I have no reservations about you reviewing future articles. It's best though not to proclaim things like "world's fastest review" as it's likely to attract unwanted attention. I think though the snobs at WP:Plants would have turned their noses up at it even if your review was 20 kb long.. I now have the books on the Ritz and Waldorf, a little daunting how much I need to read and do..♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:50, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

At the time I had no idea this article would attract so much attention and scrutiny - I though it was just a quiet little article about a species of plant that barely anyone would know about. You'll have to excuse the "world's fastest review" as that was just a random outbreak of witty humour I sometimes have. My god, is that discussion still going!? The article met the GA criteria and I can't say to them enough times that it was the only quick-pass I have ever done. This could be looking very bad on me as they might think my reviews aren't either long enough or don't have good content in them. I'm on and off Wikipedia at the moment as I've been very busy on this half-term. I want to join in the discussion but I don't have the time as I have six GARs to do!! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:20, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

If it means anything I've contacted a few very experienced editors who can't see what all the fuss is about with it being a GA either, so it's not an error in judgement at least in the eyes of experienced non project reviewers, although I don't think anybody would encourage a straight pass. The reviews are supposed to be constructive and see the article improve. You weren't to blame for it as it was a short article and you obviously couldn't see anything to complain about. I hope this won't deter you from future articles and reviews, although of course I hope you can provide half a dozen or so pointers at least, although it might be difficult at times! What's annoying is that they continue to moan about it being inadequate yet none of them can show the sources and back up their claims! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:39, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that. Yes I agree that because I didn't know much about the contnet I found it nearly impossible to spot errors or points to make with that short (at the time article). I always to my best to try and make as many points as I can, but with Tephrosia apollinea I tried to find some points but couldn't find any. The prose was good and it complied per the GA criteria. I still review GANs of course - I have about five left to do at the moment. It's annoying that this has come under so much scrutiny, this is just bad luck. The article does look good now and very extensive - want to nominate for FA? ;-D ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:19, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I've definitely exceeded what is really required for GA now, yup. However much I expand and improve it though I would be very surprised if a single project member would stand up and say "nice job" in expanding it. They're just waiting to point out errors and remove things.. I've reached page 27 of the web now, I rarely go beyond page 2 in web searching!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:46, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I know, life's full of people like that. You have done an impeccable job on the article - it is beyond GA! It's impressive for an article like that to be so extensive when there is barely any information on the web describing a species of plant. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:51, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Well, at least now they can't call an almost 27kb article a "stub"!♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:00, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I wanted to inform you that the article, Miley Cyrus, you promoted to GA status is now a FA nominee. I would like it if you would review it. As I know that you haven't really promoted a lot of FA's, you could review it or put me in touch with another FA promoting user. Thanks, Shane Cyrus (talk) 11:45, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. No doubt other people will come and review the FAC as Miley Cyrus is a popular article on Wikipedia. I'll review the FAC, although I don't have a lot of experiences with the FA process yet (I've helped promote two and reviewed one). Thanks, ☠ Jaguar ☠ 14:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

• 'Hey Jaguar', please do review the Miley Cyrus FA nomination. Do consider this as it isn't getting much attention. Some people have commented but are haters. You know what I mean? They do not review or promote it, instead they give the suggestions as oppose or withdrawal issues. Thanks a looooot..... Shane Cyrus (talk) 12:29, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

I'll start reviewing the FAC right away. Yes I understand what most of the people at the FAC's are like - the majority of them are very smarmy - they do nothing but criticise and suggest closure rather than offering helpful comments and actually help getting the article promoted. It's surprising as Miley Cyrus is a very popular article on Wikipedia, I would have thought this would get more attention! Don't worry, I'll start the review now. I want to say well done on all your work to the article and thank you for those barnstars!! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:35, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks, Don't know why people don't know to not show their hate for someone on Wikipedia! Shane Cyrus (talk) 05:42, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

@Shane Cyrus:, I've just read through the article and its FAC's comments - I'm afraid I can't support this until some of those references have been replaced. If I support this now then I might get a huge backfire from some people at the FAC! Maybe Lady Lotus can help with some of the sourcing? But the majority of the prose is good, if I get some time later today I can help with a few things here and there but I might lose internet connection any moment! Thank you, ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:12, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I accidentally found my way on the GA nomination page for Benedict Cumberbatch and I enjoyed editing the article based on your suggestions. I do wonder how I can monitor such nomination pages so I can help in the nomination process of certain articles? I would like to help. Thank you!Chocolate Charlie (talk) 06:16, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for attending to those suggestions! I'll review the GAN in a minute to see if that article meets the GA criteria. You can add certain pages to your

WP:GAN shows all of the GA nominations - you can have a look through there to see what you're interested in. But the GA process is a whole different story... if you have any questions feel free to ask! Regards ☠ Jaguar

☠ 19:27, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Special Barnstar
	You are fantastic to have promoted so many articles. You truly deserve. Shane Cyrus (talk) 14:52, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! I haven't got a barnstar in a while. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:28, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

	The Special Barnstar
	You truly deserve! Shane Cyrus (talk) 14:53, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article

The article

Can you check back on the Bieber GA and suggest what still needs improvement. Thanks, Shane Cyrus (talk) 11:31, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

I have, we'll wait for Snuggums to make the comments and once you address them I'll have to make sure the article meets the GA criteria. This is turning into a bit of a nightmare! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:06, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Previews

• (Link1) - Des Barres, Nicholas Dean sub nom. Nick Rox. "E. Storm's Saturn Previews - Jumping Flash."
  DieHard GameFan
  . No.31 (Vol.3, Iss.7). P.72. July 1995.
• (Link2) - Des Barres, Nicholas Dean sub nom. Nick Rox. "E. Storm's Saturn Previews - Jumping Flash."
  DieHard GameFan
  . No.31 (Vol.3, Iss.7). P.73. July 1995.
• (Link3) - Staff. "PreScreen - Jumping Flash." EDGE. No.19. P.42. April 1995.

Reviews

• (Link4) -
  DieHard GameFan
  . No.34 (Vol.3, Iss.10). P.16. October 1995.
• (Link5) - Keller, Craig sub nom. Evil Lights. "PlayStation Nation - Jumping Flash."
  DieHard GameFan
  . No.34 (Vol.3, Iss.10). P.28. October 1995.
• (Link6) - Keller, Craig sub nom. Evil Lights. "PlayStation Nation - Jumping Flash."
  DieHard GameFan
  . No.34 (Vol.3, Iss.10). P.134. October 1995.
• (Link7) - Staff. "TestScreen - jumping Flash." EDGE. No.22. P.62. July 1995.
• (Link8) - Staff. "TestScreen - jumping Flash." EDGE. No.22. P.63. July 1995.

Hope you can use them for your GAN. -Thibbs (talk) 01:45, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you so much for those articles, Thibbs. I'll implement them into the article now and hopefully it should pass the GAN! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:59, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, you may want to review this. He's a minor character actor so there's next to nothing really written about him. I'm lucky to have written that much about him! It's about as comprehensive as I can make it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:35, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Sure, I can review it straight away. The content looks good and like you said, it is as comprehensive as it can be! I'll make a thorough review. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 14:28, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. 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.