User talk:JaGa

Leave a new message

Archives
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

National historic site

Thanks for the note. You may want to look at the discussion at Talk:National Historic Site (United States) -- it occurred to me there isn't much point fixing links immediately until the targets have been settled. But that should be resolved fairly soon, I would imagine.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:08, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

James Beall

Absolutely. I would have done them last night had it not been so late, but I'll be sure to get to them some time today. AP1787 (talk) 13:57, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

MC2

Not a problem. -- Dcirovic (talk) 12:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Republics of Russia

Hello, JaGa. You have new messages at Ezhiki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Serous cystadenoma

Serous cystadenoma (disambiguation), I think, was generated automatically. AFAIK, the redirects are okay. I am not sure I understand what you're asking me to do. Please explain it. Nephron  T|C 01:59, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nephron, what I wanted was your help cleaning up links to the disambig page you'd created per WP:FIXDABLINKS, but looking at the current what links here list, those links have already been fixed. No worries! Cheers, --JaGa^talk 07:08, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Yadav

Starting to look into the Yadav disambiguation. Harsh ^{Mujhse baat kijiye(Talk)}(Contribs) 05:13, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic! Thanks much. --JaGa^talk 08:49, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Disambig toolserver for other wikipedias

Hi, is there any way to use your tool to my home wiki: id.wp? Thanks. (and kindly leave a message on my talk page when you reply) Bennylin (talk) 16:18, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

'Fraid not. The scripts are based on categories and templates specific to EN wiki; they can't be run against another wiki without 1) creating a similar infrastructure and 2) refactoring the scripts for that specific wiki. --JaGa^talk 12:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Journal

I'll be happy to help. Thanks for pointing out that useful popups tool to me, I've been using popups for a while now, but had this (and similar options) set to "false" (I'm not very adept at these monobook.js things... :-) I'll play around with it! --Crusio (talk) 09:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. Another thing - let's say you fix everything except a bunch of links that all need to be pointed to the same article (Academic journal, for instance). Let me know; I can do mass fixes easily and quickly, but only in the case of "every article left that links to Journal should be re-pointed to XXXX". Thanks for the note! --JaGa^talk 10:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

RE:WCHA

Yeah thanks, that was another user not me! Bhockey10 (talk) 17:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Changes to Brevard County, Florida

I have made a major change to an article that you may or may not like and you may be an interested party, I thought I'd give you a "heads up" so hat you may comment and/or make or suggest improvements. VictorianMutant (talk) 02:36, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Too many lists for Nokia products

I think there are too many templates and lists for Nokia Products. It is too tedious to maintain them. Andries (talk) 19:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I am finished, I think, I hope. Nevertheless, I made several very necessary disambiguations and then I do not think that I have the obligation to fix all the many templates and lists. Wikipedia remains a volunteer project and there is only a moral obligation not to harm it and to clean up the mess you created. I did not harm nor create a mess with the necessary disambiguations.

The non-necessary disambiguations that I made are a different case. Then I should clean up my own mess. Andries (talk) 11:06, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

No need for excuses; hopefully none of the disambigs you create are "non-necessary". You aren't obligated to clean up after yourself; we just ask people to as a consideration. If you care enough to create the disambig, why not care enough to make sure users reach the correct page? But it's up to you. --JaGa^talk 11:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Pilate redirect

When you initiate an official discussion on editing I am involved with, I think you owe me the courtesy of notifying me so that I can participate. I don't appreciate what you did behind my back. Next time, try to be a courteous editor. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE _{GOOD WORKS} 20:32, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I replied to your comments on the Pilate talk page; that should have been enough. Calm down and give WP:CIVIL a read. --JaGa^talk 20:36, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. An while I read that, you read this. --THE FOUNDERS INTENT ^PRAISE _{GOOD WORKS} 23:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Permanent way

Hi. I've gone through the list of what links to permanent way, but I've only been able to fix a few - it wasn't clear which article Permanent way (history) or Permanent way (current) was the intended link (if any) in many cases.

Additionally a lot of the links are from Template:train topics , haven't changed that for the same reason.

(For this reason I recently proposed a merge of the two articles).Sf5xeplus (talk) 21:13, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Great, thanks! It is very confusing; I wasn't looking forward to trying to figure this out so we could fix the links. I really appreciate your help. --JaGa^talk 22:54, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:37, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Nome (country subdivision)

Hi, now that Nome (country subdivision) points to a disambig, could you help out fixing links per WP:FIXDABLINKS? I've found navigation popups to be very useful when you set the popupFixDabs flag to true. --JaGa^talk 19:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Well that's precisely what I've done, fixing all links that had something to do with Egypt to the correct target: Nome (Egypt): [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] etc. As this link was included in a template (that was fixed by another user) the remaining pages appearing here are cached versions of pages including this template, with little to no actual links. Do you know a way to massively purge cached pages with the tool you are suggesting? Place Clichy (talk) 10:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Wow! I do, using WP:AWB, but I am on vacation right now (using an infuriatingly weird French keyboard at my hotel BTW) and can't get to it before Sat. I'll clear it out then if it still needs doing. Thanks for the hard work, it's greatly appreciated! --JaGa^talk 21:12, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

DAB question for you

Hi JaGa, I have disambiguation question for you. I am wondering why Rachel (disambiguation) is not the main point for Rachel. I'm not sure how the Wikipedia can have the main article for that page be the Biblical character without violating WP:NPOV. At the very least Rachel (given name) should be the main article with a redirect to the DAB page. Suggestions? Thanks, -Classicfilms (talk) 19:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! If the Biblical character is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, there's absolutely nothing POV about placing her article there. See David, for instance. If you think it should be changed, put in a move request; but personally, I'd say the Biblical figure is the primary topic, considering her position in Christianity and Judaism, and the frequent references to her in popular culture (Moby Dick comes to mind). --JaGa^talk 19:40, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm unfamiliar with the move process. Can you describe it a bit? Well, I must respectfully disagree with you (and with David too). I am not saying that references to the Jewish/Christian bible do not occur in American (or British) literature. For the Wikipedia to make "Rachel" the biblical character or "David" the biblical character a primary topic,however, is indeed offering a particular point of view by implying that these religious figures offer a global definition of whatever the topic is (in this case names). I'm not saying it is a conscious form of NPOV. But the English Wikipedia is accessed by individuals whose world view may not derive from this particular religious viewpoint -- and I say that for any article that would pertain to any character of any religion. In other words, the most NPOV use of a primary topic article would simply be something like Rachel (given name) . Thanks,-Classicfilms (talk) 19:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Check out this move request link; that's where I go when I need to make a page move. Still, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is what's important here; when you consider incoming links, book searches, etc., it seems the pages are set up properly. (Especially David, which is a vital article.) --JaGa^talk 20:45, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Ha ha, joke is on me for not noticing the link in your first post. :-) I do respect your opinion, I just don't agree with it. I placed the move request on the article page. Thanks again for disamb. help. -Classicfilms (talk) 21:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

EU treaties

At User_talk:Ssolbergj Ssolberg and I are discussing certain redirects of EU constitution and the like. As you were involved in the editing today, feel free to join in... L.tak (talk) 19:50, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Whorl (biology)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Whorl (biology), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Whorl. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

New question

Here's a new challenge for you. I don't know if it's solvable at your end, and there is a workaround that can be applied in AWB, but I thought I'd ask anyway.

Changing things so that the toolserver recognizes {{morecat}} as "tagged" certainly accomplished its purpose as far as managing the untagged backlog goes, but the unexpected side effect has been that it's shifted a bit of an unnecessary backlog onto the Categorized Articles list, since it now counts articles with the morecat tag as being "tagged with categories" even though that template isn't incompatible with the presence of one or more visible non-stub categories.

It is possible to filter articles out by comparing the list with Category:Articles needing additional categories in AWB's list comparer, so it's not an urgent issue. And, of course, the ultimately correct fix would be for User:SoxBot to learn how to distinguish hidden categories from content ones, so that we don't end up sometimes having to use morecat as a necessary but technically incorrect workaround. But I was wondering nonetheless: is it possible to separate the two lists so that {{morecat}} counts as tagged for the purposes of the "Uncategorized articles" list but not for the purposes of the "Categorized articles" one? Or do we just have to stick with the list comparison workaround? Bearcat (talk) 21:47, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I'll check it out. I'm sure it's possible, just a question of how to do it. I'm about to take a short vacation, so it'll be a couple of weeks or so before I get to look at it. --JaGa^talk 21:55, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

No worries, and no rush. It's not like I work with that list very often; most articles on it will eventually get untagged in the process of cleaning up Category:Uncategorized articles anyway. Bearcat (talk) 22:01, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and two other minor things:

1. The downloadable version of the untagged uncats list still sometimes (but not always) picks up Main Page, even though it never shows up on the primary untagged list.
2. It also fails to pick up articles from the primary untagged list which have a / in their title (e.g. Cortlandt/Cooney family), with the result that after doing an automated run through the downloadable list, one still has to go back to the main list to manually tag any leftover slashed titles.

Again, no rush; these two issues combined generally never account for more than three or four articles at a time. Just so you're aware for whenever you do get a chance to work on them. Bearcat (talk) 22:29, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, the "Categorized articles" report should be fixed with today's run (the October 20 run). Could you let me know if it's OK? Also, do you know of any other slash-containing articles I can look at for minor problem #2? Thanks, --JaGa^talk 01:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I haven't seen any titles with slashes in them at all since your last response, but I'm keeping an eye out to let you know when one turns up. That said, what I am starting to see a lot more of lately, which hadn't been happening so much for a while, is pages that are properly categorized showing up on the list after a page move. Bearcat (talk) 22:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Scratch the first part; I found a few slashed titles that are appearing on the main list right now, but not on the downloadable version: Accelerated Reduction/Elimination of Toxics, First/Dreams Come True, List of UK charts and number-one singles (1952–1969)/NME and List of UK charts and number-one singles (1952–1969)/Record Retailer. Hope that helps a bit. Bearcat (talk) 22:15, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the example. You should see the slashes in the download list now. Let me know if there are any problems - sometimes those slashes cause problems with the scripts etc., so I wouldn't be surprised if something crops up. Looked OK when I loaded the page though. Oh, and if you see the Main Page again, could you let me know? I just added some code to specifically NOT get the Main Page, so we'll see. --JaGa^talk 22:55, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Kataragama versus Kataragama temple article

Thanks for getting involved, I created a brand new article called Kataragama temple, it was not a cut and pase from Kataragama but after you asked for help and merged the history of Kataragama into Kataragam temple (thus denying the possibility of that article showing up in DYK) someone has recreated the Kataragama article by actually cutting and pasting from the history page of Kataragama temple. Now we have two articles one (i.e Kataragama) derived from the previous revision of Kataragama temple talking about the same subject. Although I did not agree with you, but I appreciated your involvement. Can you now do something to resolve this mess please. Thanks Kanatonian (talk) 14:30, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

it is fixed now but do keep a "watch" on it, if you can. Thanks Kanatonian (talk) 15:48, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Why would you start over from scratch when the article already existed? You shouldn't have two versions of the same article in mainspace at the same time. --JaGa^talk 21:30, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Code a new stats analysis?

Hi. Would you be interested in coding a monthly graphic that plots dab vs base page views for the prior month? The dab/base pairs would be only those where, at the start and end of the month, both pages existed and the base page did not have {{tl:disambig}} on it. The base page could be an article or a redirect. I have done a test graph from pageview logs for one month. It showed a linear relationship when both axes are log(10). The "dab high" outliers generally are instances where the base page name is occupied by an article that is not the primary topic. From the same data you could also generate a report that identifies dab/base pairs that merit a proposal at WP:RM. 69.3.72.249 (talk) 03:52, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm already behind in maintenance/new toolserver projects; I'm not taking anything new on for a while. Not to mention, I usually oppose your attempts to move pages based on, say, 3.5% pageviews for the (disambiguation) page. --JaGa^talk 09:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Toolserver question

How come Template:RGSmunicipalities doesn't appear on Templates with dab links today? It had over 50 incoming links and two disambig page links (which I just fixed, but it should still appear struck out). I see that you just fixed another one of these Brazilian municipality templates, too, which didn't appear on the list. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:59, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was surprised at that. I'm not sure why they didn't get picked up; I haven't changed the scripts for quite some time. We'll see if this happens again tomorrow. --JaGa^talk 12:02, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, JaGa. You have new messages at Htonl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

DAB Challenge

Yesterday, I made a number of edits to links hidden in template calls, like this one. These edits replaced links to a disambiguation page with links to the correct article. I notice today that these edits aren't showing up in my DAB Challenge count. Just thought you should know. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:24, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. Yeah, the scripts aren't smart enough to detect the {{!}} template. I didn't even know that template existed when I created them. I'll see if I can squeeze it in. Thanks much for the notification! --JaGa^talk 12:34, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

 Done But it won't show up until next month's contest. Should catch most (but not all) hatnote fixes now. --JaGa^talk 02:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Looks like User:Schwyz is possibly back (again, again)

For your information: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Schwyz. Dpmuk (talk) 01:45, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Nice catch! Was the move tool of any help? --JaGa^talk 02:28, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Yep, as I said on ANI it was the tool that let me spot him. As you can see from User:Dpmuk/Schwyz there are two date periods I'm worried about where I think we may have missed socks. Will try and write a tool myself to look for them, although this may take a little time. Dpmuk (talk) 11:27, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to your tool I think I may have found yet another one - see the SPI case if you're interested. Dpmuk (talk) 11:09, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, TurkChan. I saw that the other day but was on the fence - some of the really old history didn't look very Schwyz-like. But I see the user has continued since then with behavior that is very Schwyzian indeed. I think you've got a winner. I suppose, over the next few weeks, we'll be seeing Schwyz burn through all his socks. I'm under the impression that he has dozens - from a long career of moving to a new sock as soon as he draws too much attention to himself. Thanks for letting me know about the SPI - I'm very interested in stopping this behavior. --JaGa^talk 11:30, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem - I've just added another to the investigation as well! Dpmuk (talk) 13:31, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

And another - think I've managed to dig out a sleeper this time so it will have to be done on behaviour alone but to me it's certain. Dpmuk (talk) 01:52, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

That is definitely Schwyz. This user got into some edit wars over moving Lake XYZ to XYZ Lake, and a bunch of Portugal stuff. Pretty scary, considering how long that user has been around. This guy has been single-handedly mucking up Wikipedia for years. --JaGa^talk 02:06, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Think I may finally have linked it back to another lot of socks and we're talking a long time ago - what do you reckon on User:Tobias Conradi. Personally I'm convinced but, if you're happy to, I thought I'd let you take a look and see what you think without mentioning why. Dpmuk (talk) 00:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Ouch, so he goes all the way back to 2003??? Certainly looks like him - the unilateral page moves, the admin attacks, the anti-USA rants. And boy, he has a long rap sheet. Here's an arbitration case that has some familiar complaints. And here's the enough is enough discussion about him. And he never left. Well, I think people should know these accounts are probably the same. But how? Mention it at the next SPI? (Nice detective work BTW.) --JaGa^talk 01:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Interesting the ways you've linked them - I mainly linked them based on the articles moved which are the same as some of the moves done by the current socks (or current socks move back to the title used when created by Tobias), the Lake X/X Lake thing (also with rivers) and the language used in his move summaries. Taken together I'm now 100% convinced. No idea how best to take this forward - this is starting to get stupidly large and I'm starting to feel out of my depth. Posting to WP:AN could make some sense but may also be giving them too much limelight. Dpmuk (talk) 01:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Not to mention people there could give you a hard time since Tobias is already blocked. Perhaps at the next SPI, bring it up? There will probably be people there that remember him in that incarnation. (And yeah, I'm 100% positive too. That's him.) --JaGa^talk 01:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Started an ANI thread. I'm not happy with just two non-admins being the main people dealing with this as it seems so much bigger than that. Dpmuk (talk) 14:57, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I came across this from the ANI link; I'll notify PMDrive1061, who is an admin and can probably help. Both of us have been dealing with this as well, from a somewhat different perspective (I'll go into more detail on the ANI thread), so you're not totally alone. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:27, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have made it clearer what I meant. I'm aware that other people have been looking at this from different angles (e.g. reverting) - although I wasn't aware of your actions - but it seems to me that JaGa and I have been the main ones finding the new socks (apart from the obvious "post on ANI" ones). Oh well by bringing this up again at ANI I've at least found more users actively involved in this and that by itself justifies the ANI thread to me. Dpmuk (talk) 16:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah; I've been watching, but it seems my timing is always a little off. It's not as if it's particularly hard to spot these socks, just that it seems I'm always away from my computer when they pop up. If/when I see socks, I'm ready to get an admin to whack them. But Special:NewPages light up like a damn Christmas tree when I saw TigreTiger (didn't realize what was going on at the time), so I'll know it when I see it. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

That's good to know - especially as you're looking at it from the new pages angle as JaGa and I have mainly been looking for them by page moves. TigreTiger lit up both but I doubt they all will. It's also good to know of at least one admin familiar with the case as hopefully I can just point them at the sock and they're spot it without all the hassle of collecting evidence for a SPI. Dpmuk (talk) 17:01, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

As for User:CSCarlosXXVIII, I'm not sure although it's definitely suspicious. Given when they've been editing I'd have suspected one of the sweeper checks done recently to pick them up but it may be worth asking for CU as I don't know how well they've got the IP range sorted yet. Purely on behaviour I'm very suspicious although, for me, I don't think it's enough to definitely make the connection and block. That said I've found in the past that I'm more lenient than a lot of admins so could be worth an SPI to get some more views. Dpmuk (talk) 11:15, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to wait and see; I don't want to be accused of "fishing". I've left a note about the user's behavior at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject British Royalty; we'll see what happens. --JaGa^talk 11:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Articles with links to disambiguation pages

Was wondering if it were possible to update the script on this page to include a 'Jump' option like on the Disambiguation pages with links page. Sometimes I just go to the latter, pick a number, and go. Being able to do the same on articles would be a nice option. Ulric1313 (talk) 06:38, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll check it out. Should be easy enough. I'm glad you're looking at that report - that one usually gets ignored. --JaGa^talk 11:25, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done Let me know if there are any bugs. Thanks for the request! --JaGa^talk 00:24, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Showing all orphaned files

Hi JaGa. I noticed that your tool does not show any orphaned file in Category:Chemical structures even though there are three orphaned files in that category. In one case, the file is omitted from this list as it is tagged for moving to Commons. I would appreciate having an option to show all orphaned files in a category. --Leyo 09:20, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I've been meaning to do maintenance on the orphan images tools for some time. I'll check it out (but it will be a while - I'm going to be moving soon). --JaGa^talk 11:55, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done At long last. I've added some more info and tweaked the logic; please let me know what you think. --JaGa^talk 07:06, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

It looks great, thank you. I like the new columns Creation date and Notes. I am however, not sure how Orphan since works. December 18, 2010 shows up in the vast majority of cases I checked. Is this the date when you started with a database?

I have two suggestions what could be added to make the tool even more useful:

• In the column Notes it could be indicated if an image has already been moved to Commons. Currently, “only” images containing {{move-to-commons}} are tagged (with Move to Commons), which is also a useful information.
• An option to invert the selection would be useful to be used in subcategories of Category:Wikipedia files with a different name on Wikimedia Commons. This would enable to files that need their links to be fixed to the Commons version. This task could also be done by non-admins to help admins with the work there.

--Leyo 11:07, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks much for the feedback. Orphan since is indeed based on when I started compiling this data; it will be more useful in a few months' time. Regarding Notes, could you give me an example for the already moved to Commons? Are you talking about Commons images that have Wiki pages (usually for a category or some template)? --JaGa^talk 08:47, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for being unclear. I meant images tagged with Template:Now Commons and therefore being in subcategories of Category:Wikipedia files on Wikimedia Commons. --Leyo 19:57, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

 Done If an image links to {{Now Commons}}, a note will show up in the column (unless it's also tagged for deletion or move to Commons). --JaGa^talk 05:59, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

That's exactly how I had it in mind. Thank you! Are you willing to add my other feature request (invert selection, i.e. showing non-orphaned files)? It would also be great if you would update the de.wikipedia version similarly. There would of course be no hurry. :-) --Leyo 09:07, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

FPC

Hi JaGa. FYI, I have nominated a picture of yours at featured picture candidates, located at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mission Santa Clara de Asís. Regards, Jujutacular ^talk 05:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Getting a pic nominated is an honor and a bit of acknowledgment; I appreciate it. --JaGa^talk 05:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

New message from Pumpmeup

Hello, JaGa. You have new messages at Pumpmeup's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Most Active Wikipedians

You are most welcome (and I'm no longer watching.) — Robert Greer (talk) 20:24, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

There have been no objections to the move request. Do you know what the next step is for getting the page moved? The page should reside at Rockefeller Center Christmas Tree and The Tree at Rockefeller Center should be redirected. Currently, it is the exact opposite setup. Thank you for your guidance and assistance. //Brycetom (talk) 22:32, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

We just have to wait; an administrator will close the discussion and perform the move in a few days (unless they choose to re-list it for further discussion, which will take a few more days). --JaGa^talk 22:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

University Oval, Adelaide and Park 12

Hi! Discussion has moved to Talk:University Oval (Park 12), Adelaide#Relisted move discussion
If this is of interest to you, your opinion is solicited. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 09:13, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mission Santa Clara de Asís

An image created by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your image, File:Mission Santa Clara.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! Maedin\talk 19:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

List of Kangxi radicals‎

On the List of Kangxi radicals‎, I think the better solution is, rather than unlink the disambig pages and redirects, to create articles on the characters (which we will eventually have for all of them anyway). Cheers! bd2412 T 19:06, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

But the list already links to the radicals through the "No." column. I just unlinked the handful of wikilinked Pinyin transcriptions. --JaGa^talk 19:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Bonus List Issue

The Bonus List seems to be stuck as has been 13 hours since it last updated when I write this.

Just letting you know.

Ulric1313 (talk) 08:06, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I just took care of it. Thanks for letting me know! It wouldn't have got unstuck until I got around to noticing the problem. --JaGa^talk 08:39, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus edits

Hi. It wasn't immediately clear to me why you made these edits at Northern Cyprus. The new image of the "green line" is probably useful, but I'm not sure why you chose to delete three other pictures. There may very possibly be a good reason which I'm missing, but I'd be grateful to understand your rationale. I hope you'll consider putting your comments on the article's talk page so that everyone can easily see them. Thanks. Richwales (talk · contribs) 17:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

That wasn't my edit. Check the history again. --JaGa^talk 17:18, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Oops. Mea culpa. I'll readdress my question to the IP anon who edited after you. Richwales (talk · contribs) 17:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem. I'll bet you're glad you were civil in your first message! Thanks for AGF. --JaGa^talk 18:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

/* Talkback */

Hello, JaGa. You have new messages at N2e's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I just left you another couple of messages. N2e (talk) 17:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

And another. (I appreciate your help on this. Clearly, if I could get the tool to work, I could do this much more efficiently). N2e (talk) 17:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanx

Lol, i'm the fastest gun in the west ;-) . Thanx for that report link. It will be very useful for my future catches. Best of regards. --Dэя-Бøяg 22:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. The more people keeping an eye on things the better. --JaGa^talk 22:31, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

re: real-time dab fixin'

Hi - thanks for the message and the welcome! Dab fixes were one of the very first things I did as a brand-new Wikipedian, yon those many years ago, when I was unaware of ANI and wikidrama. I like doing it because of my WikiGnomish nature - checking things off of lists appeals to me. In early 2008 I cleared something like 45 days of the backlog at Copyright problems by myself, so I'm either devoted to the project, a WikiGnome in serious need of an intervention, or completely insane. ;-)

Yup, real-time is a tough one. I had to stop last night because of a headache - not that real-time gave me the headache, because it didn't - so today I picked up with standard, which isn't quite as difficult, though I've had to make some judgment calls. In both, it's as if the most commonly used definitions of those words aren't listed, and Wiktionary isn't much help. I'm going to stop 'standard' later tonight and do some of the smaller ones, then I'll come back to the tougher ones. In real-time. :-P Thanks again - KrakatoaKatie 01:15, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Ha, yeah, I'm a list-ticker too. I created the DAB Challenge with the hopes that other people get the same joy I do from seeing numbers go up, goals reached, etc. - and it's been a success. I suppose it's not unlike gaming, getting a bit of happy hormones with the completion of an attainable task, just we actually get something meaningful from the time investment. Hope to see you around! --JaGa^talk 03:01, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Dear God, I just read the cluster headache article. I'm terribly sorry you have to deal with that. --JaGa^talk 03:07, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

LGBT articles of Brazil

Hello JaGa! I am Brazilian and I need of you to correct my translation edits, because you are from an english speaking-country, please help me in the Same-sex adoption in Brazil, Changing legal gender assignment in Brazil, LGBT rights in Brazil, Recognition of same-sex unions in Brazil, Age of consent in Brazil, Prejudice in the Brazilian LGBT community, and Criminalization of homophobia in Brazil. 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take a stab at it. I'll work on articles as I get the chance. Thanks for the note. --JaGa^talk 16:26, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Naval Service

Thanks for the link to that tool, I had fixed the ones for the Irish service but forgot to do the UK one too. --Kwekubo (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for the fixing. --JaGa^talk 20:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, JaGa. You have new messages at R'n'B's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Bonus list expansion: response

• I really think that there are plenty of one-link dabs to go for another month. I've been scanning through the "easy" ones and I'm just finishing the "M"s.--JustAGal (talk) 22:19, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll hold off on the expansion until February then. --JaGa^talk 22:22, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Change the Articles about Indonesian Company and Television

Good Morning, JaGa..

I hope you understand, so I registering patents and Television logo A company in Indonesia is to Wikimedia Commons, but I am very difficult to remove the logo, because I am not an administrator wikipedia ...

but what I ask from you, please do not be a wise guy in this business .. yes, although this wikipedia the free expression, but I want you to not interfere with what I have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, so I ask you to not at all saying that it was not fair use, because actually I register the logo of a company's patents, although not me who makes, but you have broken the code of conduct in cyberspace, which prohibits a person to freedom of expression in cyberspace. thank you and apologize in advance ...
.::LFi (talk) 09:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)::.

Please sendback to my wikipedia talk
.::LFi (talk) 09:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)::.

Not in commons, but in wikipedia english version....
.::LFi (talk) 09:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)::.

Looney Tunes

I have performed real mergers and placed almost all the information from the articles into the list. Also, per your comment, Nasty Canasta was kept as an individual article. Greetings!

Wow, thanks! I really appreciate the civility. Usually things like this tend to get nasty. --JaGa^talk 23:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

e.g. Cory Williams

Here's the entire header for Cory Williams: "Cory Williams (born August 5, 1981), also known as "Mr. Safety" from SMP Films, is an actor and YouTube personality who lives in Thousand Oaks, California."

The article clearly makes no attempt to demonstrate notability. Which claim is notable? His birth date? His nickname? That he's uploaded videos to YouTube? Or that he lives in Thousand Oaks? The rest of the article adds nothing to that header, besides that he's acted in some advertisements.

Clearly Cory Williams is a textbook example of a page that does not meet notability, per the guidelines, and I quote: "A7. No indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content). An article about a real person, individual animal(s), organization (e.g. band, club, company, etc., except schools), or web content that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant." MarcelB612 (talk) 06:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

OK. What does this have to do with me? --JaGa^talk 18:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Bonus List Stuck

The Bonus List seems to be stuck as has been over 17 hours since it last updated when I write this.

Ulric1313 (talk) 18:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the message! That's actually how it's supposed to work. For the first day of the month, there are no DAB Challenge updates; that's so the winners' results can be displayed. It will resume updates at 12:00 UTC Jan 2 - a couple of hours from now. --JaGa^talk 19:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Matti Järvinen

I see that you tagged Matti Järvinen for speedy deletion under CSD G6. however, G6 is only for changes which are "non-controversial or consensual", which was very unlikely to be the case here, as your proposal was to revert a change made only a few hours ago. JamesBWatson (talk) 17:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Washington Township

As this isn't a see also or a hatnote, I'm not willing to undo my edits. Nyttend (talk) 12:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I still don't think it a good idea, but since I now understand that it's getting in others' way, I'll not complain or revert. Nyttend (talk) 03:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Designations of Scorpius X-1

Hello and happy New Year! I have replied to your question on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Astronomy#Help_with_designation_abbreviations Designation abbreviations. Hope it answers it. Should you need more info, please feel free to ask, I love doing this kind of research. Best regards, CielProfond (talk) 20:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Wow, perfect, thanks! I'll try to use this information to put together some meaningful redlinks. Thanks again. --JaGa^talk 22:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Civil parish

I could ask you the same question! I agree that there is a problem with incoming links, but there is a bigger problem with the target you prefer. I have taken the issue to WP:RfD. --Mhockey (talk) 10:12, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

List of most popular given names

The links are fine as they are and are useful. It doesn't need to be changed. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 01:51, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

You are using disambiguation links that are not the actual titles of those articles. For example, the title of the article is Jaden, not Jayden (given name). This seems inappropriate. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 15:55, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT. But please don't just revert my work; I put a lot of time in that article. --JaGa^talk 16:49, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

And I've spent many, many hours on that page, more hours tracking down links for the various names, and it doesn't make sense for you to add incorrect information. I don't think that page needs what you have been doing to it. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 18:22, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Marc Johnson

I, imediately after converting main entry into a disambiguation, I actually converted tens of references to the jazz musician in other pages where his name occurs. You can check to my log for that. Thanks for providing the additional list. I will be working on it in the next 24 hours maximum werldwayd (talk) 04:41, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Now all suggested links changed as per disambiguation. Thanks for leaving a note on my talk page. It was very helpful werldwayd (talk) 05:27, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Dalinks

Hi, thanks for your understanding and for the information. Bye. Nortmannus (talk) 06:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Doge's Palace

hello there,

I didn't think it controversial, because clearly there is another building with the exact same name and function in the same country. See also the Italian name for it, which disambiguates. So IMO this is a clear-cut case. But since it does seem to be an issue for some users, I will post a request move now. Gryffindor (talk) 17:04, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. --JaGa^talk 17:05, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Our old friend again

Hi. It's been a while and I'd been hoping I wouldn't have to post something like this again. Anyway, what do you reckon of User:TopoChecker - they've started a lot of RMs recently in a similar vein to User:Schwyz. If you agree it looks suspect I'll start an SPI. Dpmuk (talk) 22:16, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

It's hard to say for certain. I'd bet that's someone's sock - considering their very third edit was a move request - strange for a newbie! And the RM's and province-focus are certainly in Schwyz's vein. But I don't see the incivility, rambling edit summaries, blank user page and mass moves I expect from him. But that (gratifyingly) might just mean that Schwyz has finally realized he can't get away with that behavior any more. And the talk page comments seem to be in line with Schwyz - lots of people upset about undiscussed changes. I'd say you're probably right. --JaGa^talk 22:43, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Finally got round to creating the SPI here. Dpmuk (talk) 22:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Mississippi Central Railroad

Hi, now that Mississippi Central Railroad is a disambig, do you have any suggestions how to disambiguate the links in {{North America Class I}}, {{Mississippi railroads}}, and {{Tennessee railroads}}? I'm at a loss myself, so your help would be greatly appreciated. Here's links to Dab solver to make finding the links easier: Template:North America Class I, Template:Mississippi railroads, Template:Tennessee railroads. Thanks, --JaGa^talk 21:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

I've had a look and as I don't know which of the railways those initials relate to I think it would be more appropriate to leave that for someone who does know. At least at the moment people are being directed to a page where they can work out which railway they might want to look at (and it might even be all three). SilkTork *^YES! 22:36, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

WP:APO needs your help

Hey, we need your help at WikiProject Anthroponymy! Come check out our new layout.

Wikipedia ads	file info – #226

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Anthroponymy at 02:07, 28 January 2011 (UTC).

Talkback

Hello, JaGa. You have new messages at WhiteWriter's talk page.
Message added 20:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mass page moves

Composed this reply, but when I hit save you had deleted the section:

Plenty of history of editors having problems with Kwamikagami's "novel" approach to collegialism and consensus-building, just see the history of his talkpage. Zuni is a classic - he even managed to avoid having a link on the dab page he created to Zuni people. He knows he's causing disruption by his refusal to discuss his moves, he knows he's creating work for others to fix, but he doesn't give a damn. I'd suggest a topic ban on page moves and disambiguation as a start.

Best wishes, DuncanHill (talk) 21:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that guy drives me up the wall. Totally irresponsible! Doesn't even think through the moves - just does them, and tells you to revert for him if it was a bad decision. Reminds me of some of the pagemove sockmasters I've been battling. But I've got to back away from it all. I get so annoyed with him, it'll just get ugly, and that makes me the bad guy. I regretted that DPL comment as soon as I submitted it, even though I don't think I was wrong. --JaGa^talk 22:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

And of course we actually cannot undo the moves without admin tools. He's being at best ignorant by suggesting we do. DuncanHill (talk) 22:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

True. I appreciate the comments BTW; at least I know I'm not going insane. Sometimes dab-madness can be powerful. This guy and his 10,000+ unfixed dablinks was like a knife to the heart. I just hope he runs out of obscure and dead languages sooner or later. I wouldn't be surprised if he decided that every US state has its own dialect of American English and therefore requires a dab page. --JaGa^talk 22:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Holy disam Batman!

1,500? Wowsers. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 02:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Heh, yeah I went a little manic. Now you have to catch me! --JaGa^talk 04:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Doubt thats going to happen :) That's a huge lead off the bat. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 09:11, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah. Its over already. :-D --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 06:30, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Ha! I know you, player - you're just lulling me into a false sense of security. :D You'll have 4 grand before this month is out. I'll be lucky to get second (BD2412 is looking sharp as well...) --JaGa^talk 06:36, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Not this time. :) Already running out of easy pages to do. --User:Woohookitty ^{Disamming fool!} 11:14, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Kerry

Your recent edit to County Kerry was extremely confusing. You changed a number of links to point to DAB articles, with no edit summary to indicate why. Given that all those articles are actually redirects to the articles where the links initially pointed, it seems to have been a pointless edit. Any reason i shouldn't revert? Is there something arcane I am missing? Fmph (talk) 10:18, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for asking me about it instead of just reverting. The reason I linked to the (disambiguation) redirects is to indicate those are intentional disambiguation links per WP:INTDABLINK. If a link is meant to go to a disambig, which is often the case for these surname links, we use the (disambiguation) redirect which tells the WP:DPL project that the link doesn't need to be "fixed". Thanks again for asking. --JaGa^talk 16:20, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately they are not meant to go to the DAB links. They were meant to go to the page they were originally pointed at, being the articles about the relevant septs and clans. I'll revert it now that I understand your intention. Fmph (talk) 13:30, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

The links are not intended to go to the DAB page. They are meant to go to the O'Connor page (for instance). What has happened is that that page has become a default DAB page. But the link is not intended to go to a DAB link. So WP:INTDABLINK doesn't apply. Fmph (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

The O'Connor page is a disambiguation page. If you say the link should go to that page, then it's a WP:INTDABLINK. You have two choices, as I see it. Either redlink it - O'Connor (sept), O'Connor (clan), or some such (which would be nice because it would spur article creation, and I do think a sept/clan article for O'Connor is needed) or leave it as an intentional dablink using O'Connor (disambiguation). --JaGa^talk 18:58, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

There is another option, one which I think is much more likely to be useful to people and that is to put most of the current content into O'Connor (disambiguation) where it rightly belongs and put the content regarding the O'Connor clan into the O'Connor page where it rightly belongs, and leave the links as is. Wouldn't that be smoother? Fmph (talk) 19:34, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Absolutely! That's a grand solution. --JaGa^talk 20:26, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Discworld task force

Your edits to Discworld-related articles have been noticed, and are appreciated. A few of us are trying to establish a Discworld taskforce to monitor and improve Wikipedia's Discworld coverage. If you are interested, please go here and leave a comment that you wish to participate.--Mobtown Mongrel (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Educational value

Hi, JaGa. In addition to my requests to move "Avatar" and "The Day the Earth Stood Still" based on educational value, I also made a request to move "The Amazing Spider-Man" (see discussion here). Basically, I think the comic book series, the current primary topic, is not a primary topic because it does not have the educational value that the other moves' topics have. It is certainly an originating term for other topics, including the 2012 film, but my impression is that origination is not the criteria. My brief research of the comic book series shows that it is well-known but not necessarily educationally valuable. In addition, I also cited the other Spider-Man films' popularity to strongly indicate that the 2012 film will be a contender for reader traffic. I ask about this in part because we have some topical pairings out there where we have the source material as the primary topic and the film adaptation as the secondary topic. For example, we have Apt Pupil and Apt Pupil (film). In contrast, we have Road to Perdition (film adaptation) and Road to Perdition (comics) (source material). I was not sure how widely "educational value" could apply, and any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:40, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree that "originating term" isn't part of the primary topic definition. Regarding educational value, well, we're learning as we go along - we've only recently tweaked PRIMARYTOPIC to include the term. IMO, educational value doesn't really come into play here, since everything is within the realm of pop culture; a movie doesn't strike me as any more educational than a comic book. That said, I see your temptation to invoke educational value; the comic is venerated in the comic community, and has certainly been influential. If I remember correctly the #1 issue of Spider-Man is quite valuable. WP:RECENTISM may be more significant; sure, the movies are probably getting more traffic, but they're very recent.

Sorry for the wishy-washy answer. The changes to PRIMARYTOPIC have made things murkier, but that was the intention, to encourage discussion. I would probably support the dab in this case. --JaGa^talk 18:31, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the response! Sounds like you intended for "educational value" to apply to topics of a classical nature. I was not sure how well it applied to The Day the Earth Stood Still since it is a very reputable film that was iconic of the times. Even JHunterJ who disagrees with the Avatar move supports the 1951 film's move. Would it be too much for WikiProject Film to provide some idea of how educational value could apply to the scope of film? Or just see what kind of ideas come naturally to us in these kinds of discussions? Erik (talk | contribs) 22:33, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I did think of educational value in terms of classrooms and hardbound encyclopedias. But that doesn't mean it's set in stone. PRIMARYTOPIC is intentionally vague for situations like this. I'd like to see WikiProject Film have an interpretation of "educational value" for its own purposes. I would imagine something that says cultural and historic significance should be considered when determining the primary topic – preferably with examples – and states that the question of whether educational value outweighs search statistics must be decided in the article's discussion. Except worded better than that.

It's exciting stuff, really. If the "educational value" concept survives, we'll be a step closer to being that respected encyclopedia of everything instead of a slave to "what's hot this month" in Google search results. --JaGa^talk 03:57, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Reading to Plymouth Line

Hi SilkTork, now that Reading to Plymouth Line is a disambig, don't forget to WP:FIXDABLINKS - or at least get some of those who have been discussing the split for so long to help out. This tool will help. It's mostly template fixes so it shouldn't be too hard for someone who's familiar with it. Cheers, --JaGa^talk 04:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi JaGa. I am always puzzled as to why you ask me to do work which you are as capable of doing yourself as I am. We have spoken about this before. Wikipedia is a volunteer charity project, and people do their best in the time they have available to them, and people will tend to work initially in areas that interest them, and then help out on tedious tasks if they have the time or inclination - but nobody is compelled to do anything (well, other than to take care they are not doing harm). That particular splitting you are talking about was a long and complex one that nobody had done for more than two years because of the amount of work involved. Sending people a nag message at the end of it instead of pitching in and helping out yourself is not conducive to the spirit of support, co-operation and collaboration that embodies the spirit of Wikipedia that I respect and enjoy so much. If you spot a spelling mistake - fix it yourself instead of sending someone a message. If you see that an article needs sourcing, it's acceptable to put a general message on the article asking people who are interested in that sort of work to alert them, but it's even better to do the work yourself; it's not really done to pick on the last person who edited the article to ask them to do all the work. You may not have noticed but I did send a message to those people involved in that article letting them know what had happened, and that clean up work might now be needed as I am not an expert on the topic. I know you are well intentioned, but I have already indicated to you that I am uncomfortable with these messages. I would respect you much more if you pitched in and did the work yourself rather than send people these messages. I would love to know that you were helping out by tidying up after me. I would think that was great. Really I would. How about creating a template to be placed on newly created disamb pages that says that work on sorting them out needs to be done. And the template could put such articles into a category to enable editors to work through all the articles that need attention. I think a general message would be more in the spirit of Wikipedia than putting the weight all on one person. If we make a task too onerous for one person, then that task will be ignored. SilkTork *^YES! 09:43, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

SilkTork, every month I fix several thousand disambiguation links left behind by editors like yourself, so don't worry about whether I "pitch in" or not. And in the past, I have tidied up after you (remember my request for help on Mississippi Central Railroad that you dismissed with "it would be more appropriate to leave that for someone who does know"? Well, I was the one who figured it out.) The concept is simple; you make the mess, you clean it up. We work hard at the WP:DPL and people like you are no help - literally. And you'll notice, in the note I left on your page, I asked you to at least ask others to help out. Could you do that? Because I'm not sure how to clean this up - or even if the split was a good idea. --JaGa^talk 09:57, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Categories

I noticed this edit where you added a number of categories. Two things: category links have square rather than curly brackets, and care must be taken to not introduce redundant categories. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 18:33, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

You got the wrong editor. Mine was the edit before the curly-braced categories. --JaGa^talk 18:43, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Oh. Sorry about that. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 19:37, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your input - I am not very experienced with Wikipedia and finding (the hard way) what works and what doesn't. I did not understand why the subheadings were bold, which is what lead me to reintegrate that into the article. Not actually trying to bury or suppress anything. I take all your points. Earthboathjb25 (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Turnpike

The problem with your edit is you are defining REDIRECTION as a primary page, which I don believe you can do. While locally you may refer to a Toll Road as a Expressway or Turnpikes, 60% or so of the article that link to turnpike are linking to the 1707 Turnpike trusts- hence the way I attempted establish Turnpike as disambiguation instead of cutting the article free from toll roads. Your definition is regionally specific. Perhaps you would like to suggest to me, a better way, but what you have done is broken the linkage in maybe 200 articles. User RnB has started to discuss this on my talk page- perhaps you would like to add a few ideas there. --ClemRutter (talk) 22:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, you could start a discussion at WP:RfD, but really, if you simply fixed the dablinks you cause when you create a new disambig, it won't come to the attention of the WP:DPL project at all. --JaGa^talk 23:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Right see where you are coming from- we are both attempting the same thing.

• Problem caused by Turnpike being a redirection turned to Toll roads (which is correct for about 150 of the 400 links) and leaves 250 connected by an obscure link through Toll Road.
• Eventually we need to edit about 415 articles, about 250 need the Turnpike changed Turnpike trusts in the United Kingdom and 150 to US Toll roads. A nice job for AWB, sadly a Window specific piece of software.
• In the meantime, I see one of 3 options.
  • A major rewrite of Toll roads, Turnpike etc
  • The direction I took which reduces the missing links by 250, at the expense of adding one click to all the regionally specific articles, thus not breaching WP:FIXDABLINKS
  • Correcting the redirection Turnpike -> Turnpike trusts in the United Kingdom with a hat note (For Roads in the US see Toll roads). I have resisted this which technically is the better option, as I have no desire to cause regional conflicts!

While this is being sorted setting the Turnpike ->Turnpike (disambigation) is ugly but restores the links.

If you taking ownership of this problem, I leave it to you to do it another way but the priority in the medium term is to get it sorted so Turnpike in the 250 or so history articles connects to the article that describes them.. I still see the action I took as a middleway that does the job.

--ClemRutter (talk) 10:22, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

? --ClemRutter (talk) 12:10, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I have tagged Talk:Turnpike (disambiguation) for a Requested move to widen the discussion. --ClemRutter (talk) 21:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Error

Something's wrong with the Bonus List and the Challenge Leaderboard.... --R'n'B (call me Russ) 00:20, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I've been away from the wiki for a while today - is there still a problem? Looks OK right now. --JaGa^talk 06:23, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it cleared up about an hour after I left the above message. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Response

Hi again - I have not edited anything since your last note, so I am a bit surprised that you have undone all of the edits I made before that, including researched citations relevant to the story.Earthboathjb25 (talk) 14:11, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Your first warning came on Feb 23. The advert-style editing you did after that first warning is what I reverted. --JaGa^talk 17:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Question 4

You may want to re-read that. 28bytes (talk) 06:57, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Whoa! Thanks for the note. --JaGa^talk 07:02, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Just a followup note, you say you'd help them figure out how to get it deleted. What do you mean by that? What exactly would you do? I'll move this to the RfA page if you want, but I don't think it's important enough a question. Swarm ^X 07:46, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

I was imagining, if they said they were the user, I'd tell them to log in and leave a message in that discussion or my talk page. Then I could do a CSD G7 on their behalf and reference that comment. --JaGa^talk 08:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Why would you not simply delete the page yourself? Swarm ^X 08:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I was thinking in terms of my current non-admin status. Of course I would delete the page myself if the IP could prove they were the user by logging in. There have been times in the past users have assumed I was an admin and I helped them as much as I could; I guess I was drawing on those memories. --JaGa^talk 09:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the followup. It's hard to worry about a candidate who forgot they would even have the delete button! Regards and best of luck in your RfA! Swarm ^X 10:58, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

4. A user page created in 2006...

Thanks for that - it was a good, reasoned answer.

I'm sorry I felt I had to have to add that optional question; I know how grueling the RfA process can be! But it does help clarify. Given your specific contribs, I wanted to see how you thought around the kind of issue that an admin may come across. I never pose trick-questions, or ones that just mean regurgitating policy.

The example actually happened to me, the other day, more-or-less. But after that happened, the IP blanked the page again, this time putting an edit-summary: see [13]. I emailed OS, and they decided to remove the page.

(I'm only telling you this 'out of interest', this isn't a test or something!)

Best of luck with the RfA. I'll have to check over your contribs a bit more, when I have time, before I can support - but your response to that q certainly leans me toward supporting. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  09:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

That's OK - it was an easy question (heck, they "both" were!) - and I am kicking myself for messing it up. I'm not making a great first impression and it's worrying me. A lot of my contributions are buried deep in my disambig wikignomery and that might be hurting me as well. I actually wanted to RfA for the last couple of years but have put it off because of the grilling candidates go through. But I figured, well, I just need to go for it. I've been around for a long time, made a lot of contributions and know policy; I know I'm good enough for the job. But whether RfA agrees? We'll just have to see. Thanks for the note, I really appreciate it. --JaGa^talk 09:12, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

My advice is, to try and relax. It's 6 hours in, with 6 days to go. Take your time over any other questions; there is no huge rush. Drink tea, keep calm, and don't keep refreshing the page every 5 minutes (I know what it is like). For showing contribs, you could always start trawling through your old contributions, find good stuff, and note the diffs somewhere - gnome work is valuable, but yes, hard for people to evaluate...but it might be useful (not urgent! like...tomorrow, the day after...) if you can, somewhere in the RfA, say "A few examples of my work are [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]..." type of thing. Obviously choosing things which - whilst they may be minor and gnome-ish - demonstrate 'good things' in some way. Chzz  ►  10:22, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. You're right, I was in 5-minute refresh mode at first last night, and I wouldn't have lasted a week at that rate. I've stepped back from it, giving it some time to sink in. I'm going to check for updates much less frequently and find other things to occupy myself with. I'll try to work in the examples if I get the chance (but like you say, no rush, I won't force it). Thanks, --JaGa^talk 20:53, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Toolserver

It looks like you need to update your scripts to use the hostname 'sql-s1-user@toolserver.org' -- see here. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll do that. --JaGa^talk 18:51, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done Good thing you let me know; I wouldn't have noticed for a while. Thanks for the support BTW. --JaGa^talk 21:07, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

My pleasure, truly, and I wish you success. If the disambig report is updated before 00:00 UTC, then we should be able to get a Daily Disambig for today, too. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 22:28, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Well Done!

A very manly man, just like you!

You have been awarded the Manliness Award for helping to construct a great encyclopedia.

Keep up the great work!

A Very Manly Man (talk) 07:59, 14 March 2011 (UTC)