User talk:JaGa/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

→

Archive 15

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 [1]. 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)

Well done. It was your conduct during the RfA that convinced me - sometimes, it is much better to just keep quiet - unlike some other recent RfA's, you responded appropriately without saying too much or jumping in to respond to comments. So remember, when things get hot, have a cup of tea...and again - well done!  Chzz  ►  22:35, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks much, Chzz. Your advice came at the perfect time. I try to practice disengagement when things get crazy, and I really needed that reminder at that moment. --JaGa^talk 22:39, 16 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)

WP:RFA/JaGa

Your request for administrator is going to end in a couple days and you're a sure fine and definite administrator. Gabesta449 ^{edits ♦ chat} 02:40, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I've been dreading RfA for a long time and it's a relief to see it winding to a close. I appreciate the support, especially since it came so early in the RfA. Cheers, --JaGa^talk 04:03, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Congrats!

It appears that you will be made an administrator! Good luck and congratulations! Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:16, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I've been waiting for a bureaucrat to close it for a while and it's finally been made official. Thanks for the support. Cheers, --JaGa^talk 19:09, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

List of short titles

Hello. I have deleted your dablinks tag from this page as I think that it is wholly innappropriate. Firstly the pages linked to are not, or are not merely, disambiguation pages, they are lists of legislation on a particular subject, created as an alternative to the existing jurisdictional lists, because those lists are very difficult to use, because you have to know exactly what you are looking for, when and where it was passed. I think that disambiguation pages do not have red links.

Even if I was wrong about that, if you look at the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:INTDABLINK#Links_to_disambiguation_pages I think that this article comes under the category:

"Certain pages that contain lists of words or names – Britten (surname) contains a link to Britain (disambiguation)" (my emphasis)

I think that you should not place that tag on this article again as the the links cannot be described as ambiguous and there is no other obvious place they can point, as merger would be impractical because there are too many statutes that have short titles (perhaps a number of tens of thousands worldwide) and would probably defeat the point of the lists which is have subject-oriented lists that are not confined to particular jurisdictions and dates.James500 (talk) 16:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I fixed it for you. If you have any questions, you should bring them up at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. Cheers, --JaGa^talk 05:20, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Successful RfA

A consensus has been reached by your peers that you should be an admin. I have made it so. Please review Wikipedia:Administrators' reading list and keep up the great work. Sincerely, Kingturtle = (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Congrats, dude! Ironholds (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks much. I really appreciated your support. --JaGa^talk 19:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's your free T-shirt!

Congrats :). Here's your uniform. Airplaneman ✈ 19:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

• Congratulations, my friend, and don't strain your back pushing that mop! --R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:30, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
• Congratulations on your RfA! Looks like you're already beating me to blocks! (Special:Contributions/74.212.139.146) —GFOLEY FOUR— 21:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
• Congratulations on becoming an adminstrator. I hope you use the tools wisely. –BuickCenturyDriver 09:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks to everyone for the messages. I've dreaded the RfA for a long time, and the support and trust I received from each of you was very encouraging. I will try to live up to that confidence. Thanks, --JaGa^talk 17:15, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Maternity (play) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Maternity (play) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maternity (play) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mtking (talk) 06:54, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, but I just fixed a dablink on it. --JaGa^talk 07:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

A belated congratulations...

Congratulations for topping the disambig hall of fame list for February 2011! Cheers! bd2412 T 17:56, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I was a little embarrassed about winning my own contest, but it's something I've wanted to do. --JaGa^talk 17:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)