User talk:Chipmunkdavis

Archives

Shiny stuff Balkan, Caucasus, SEAsia, Malaysia, Philippines, other countries Nature, Geography, Miscellaneous Notices, Chitchat, Office

Welcome! If you post on this page, I will respond on this page. If I post on your talk page, I will have it watchlisted for the duration of the conversation (and possibly longer!), but please feel free to ping me if I appear to have missed something.

		Season's Greetings
		When he took up his hat to go, he gave one long look round the library. Then he turned ... (and Saxon took advantage of this to wag his way in and join the party), and said, "It's a rare privilege, the free entry of a book chamber like this. I'm hoping ... that you are not insensible of it." (Text on page 17 illustrated in the frontispiece in Juliana Horatia Ewing's Mary's Meadow and Other Tales of Fields and Flowers, illustrated by Mary Wheelhouse, London: G. Bell and Sons, 1915.) Fowler&fowler«Talk» 04:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fowler&fowler, very grateful for another yearly welcome. I'm afraid this book was not part of my childhood, I will have to look into it with new eyes. CMD (talk) 16:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I inherited this book from a relative, who may have inherited it from an older relative! Ewing is mostly out of print now. Fashions have changed. Her writing is probably more moralistic than is accepted now, even though she wasn't really by the standards of the late 19th century. Even so every now and then in her books you find some real gems of writing. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:42, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

story · music · places

Happy new year 2025, opened with trumpet fanfares that first sounded OTD in 1725 (as the Main page had it). My story today is about a composer who influenced music history also by writing. -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:37, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy new Year Gerda! CMD (talk) 14:38, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - Today a violinist from Turkey, Ayla Erduran, whom you can watch playing Schubert chamber music --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:11, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

... and today, pictured on the Main page, Tosca, in memory of her first appearance on stage OTD in 1900, and of principal author Brian Boulton. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:17, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Today, between many who just died, Tobias Kratzer on his 45th birthday who was good for an unusual DYK mentioning a Verdi opera in 2018, - you can see his work in the trailer of another one that I saw, and my talk page has a third (but by a different director). 2025 pics, finally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear about a musician who hasn't recently passed away :) CMD (talk) 06:48, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2 others, though: today I have a composer (trumpeter, conductor) on the main page who worked closely with another who became GA yesterday, - small world! To celebrate: mostly flowers pics from vacation ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I knew I remembered you from somewhere: User talk:Chipmunkdavis/ArchiveOffice#GAR questions from Clovermoss! I'll have you know that the article cites way fewer primary sources now and is probably closer to a proper GA status than it used to be. I've read multiple books and made 400+ edits, but there's still a long road ahead. For example, the country interactions still need to be more seriously fleshed out. Not expecting you to do anything about that but figured you might find an update like this interesting. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 04:49, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Covermoss, I am always happy to hear about article improvement. It does look rather well sourced, although I note there is a citation to Encyclopaedia Britannica in the lead! I also see "Adherents commonly call their body of beliefs "The Truth"", which doesn't seem to be in the body. That said, I don't think you need to worry about GA status. Thinking about Government interactions and FAC, it might be worth getting some in put from those with much more FAC experience. It is my impression that a list of individual countries is not the best way to get through FAC, as it heads towards "overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings" territory and is not conducive to presenting an overall picture. This is not to say don't flesh it out, just a note that perhaps the fleshing out will identify strands of information that can be put together as a summary, perhaps with details moving to the subpage. CMD (talk) 07:22, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well the problem is that most reliable sources focus on government interactions rather than beliefs (this limited scholarship focus is mentioned somewhere in the article already), so I don't see how this could be an FA without that. What is wrong with a citation to the Encyclopedia Britannica? I didn't add it but I don't see why it can't be there. I already have someone that will help me with FAC when I'm ready, it's just that getting the article in the best shape I can before all that part I'm still working on. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:54, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Britannica has a no consensus on WP:RSP, so usually it gets raised if its present and replaced. Good to hear you've got a plan for the FAC. CMD (talk) 17:17, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like concerns about reliability are about the online version? The one citation is to their print edition. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 08:12, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For FAC, the concern is not reliability per se, but the "high-quality" aspect of FACR1c, hence the preference for secondary sources. CMD (talk) 09:28, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. I take breaks from the topic area on a somewhat frequent basis for my own good, but I'll try to remedy that when I feel ready to go back at things again. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 12:19, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel you. I've been avoiding updating some articles following this news. Getting in the way of a Good Topic that news is. CMD (talk) 13:35, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Specifically see Wikipedia:Administrators' Noticeboard#Minor WP:HOUNDING and WP:BATTLEGROUND behavior from Chetsford. guninvalid (talk) 14:53, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chipmunkdavis, it seems your signature shows up as "CMD". This can mislead people into believing that is your real username; you should change it as to not give the impression of being the User:CMD; thank you. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 16:28, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the note Yovt. I've had this signature for awhile, it has worked well for me. CMD (talk) 16:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chipmunkdavis. Thanks for creating the WikiProject Malaysia Triple Crown. It's good to see more interest in the Triple Crown awards in general. While I'm completely OK with you giving this award out since the person obviously meets the criteria [1], I'm just letting you know in general all awards, including project ones, go through the nomination process whereby someone is nominated (by themselves or others) and someone who is not the nominator checks and gives out the award. Also for future reference you can nominate someone for two awards at once, including with the same set of articles, as would have been the case here where the same three articles quality someone for both the Standard Triple Crown and the new WikiProject Malaysia Triple Crown. I would have approved both had they been nominated together, but people still have to be nominated. Also feel free to process other awards that get nominated. It seems like I'm doing it all myself these days so it would be good to have other people reviewing general nominations. No pressure though. Have a nice day. Damien Linnane (talk) 12:37, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Damien Linnane, my apologies. I looked around and didn't see any instructions regarding this. The WikiProject listings said to simply add to the list, and as they look like one-offs without what seems to be the advancement progression the standard crowns have, I didn't expect them to go through the same process. I waited until the Standard Crown, which I thought was the more serious crown, to be verified to then add the WikiProject one. Could perhaps the Wikipedia:Triple Crown/Nominations#Example nomination list have a multi-nom example? Let me know if it helps for me to fill out retroactive nomination paperwork. I've not really dealt with the Triple Crown area before, but it seemed an interesting way to support enthusiasm for article improvement, hence my nomination and creating the new crown. I tried to match the low pixel quality of the existing ones. CMD (talk) 12:46, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Oh it's not a problem at all, and there's no need to retroactively nominate them, I just thought I'd let you know for future reference. To be honest, the WikiProject Triple Crown's just never really took off, and I often forget about them as it isn't uncommon for there no be nobody nominated for one for many months; there has probably been a point where nobody has been nominated for one for an entire year. So it was exciting to see you make a new one. The old ones images were almost all made a long time ago. I'm happy for images to match the exiting quality or to be different, so it doesn't bother me if you change that. Anyway, thank you for pointing out the instructions were't clear. I've made some changes on both the nomination page and the main page accordingly. Damien Linnane (talk) 04:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Damien Linnane, the information for future reference is taken on board. WikiProject Triple Crowns would require WikiProjects to take off, which is likely the main problem. The intersection of active WikiProjects with Featured content creators? Likely small. Still, I've spent some time poking around thinking about how to make WikiProjects work, and I'll keep this in mind, with proper procedure, as a potential tool. CMD (talk) 06:12, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Flag changing IP(s) Moxy🍁 05:28, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CMD, hope you've been doing great! :) I thought I would reach out to you since in past FLNs, you gave really valuable/unique insights and feedback and I have a feeling you might have some interest in this list too. I've been working together with a Ukrainian editor Shwabb on the list List of Ukrainian placenames affected by derussification and its been going well through the FLN process since late February. That said, one thing I've been a bit unsure of is the "Notes" column in the tables. The column is supposed to indicate the official reason for the renaming (either the namesake, it being a restoration of the original name, or having a change in spelling/wording to match standard Ukrainian) but the column feels unnecessarily wordy/repetitive. In the Populated places table, Shwabb put in a test sample of slightly shorter Note entries for the first two oblasts (Cherkasy & Chernihiv oblasts) but I don't feel too convinced that these samples are the best option. What do you think?

One idea I had was just to turn into a "Namesake" column so that it'd include only the names but this doesn't work too well since it doesn't include the name changes that don't involve namesakes. I was thinking that figuring this out might need some out-of-the-box solution or a fresh perspective. Any ideas/suggestions would be really appreciated and feel free to let me know if you have questions or suggestions/comments on other part of the article too. Thanks, Dan the Animator 04:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Danttheanimator, I realise I haven't replied for a couple of days. You are right, it's a topic that I would be interested in. I have read the article, spent some time trying to figure out exactly how many specific meanings "placenames" had, and had a few thoughts. I just haven't had the time/headspace to formulate thoughts for the FLN, although I hope to soon. Best, CMD (talk) 14:24, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks CMD and no worries! There's no rush with FLNs and I've been busy with other things too so feel free to take as long as you'd like. In case it helps, I'll probably have a lot of availability in the latter half of next week if there's any followup questions/replies though don't worry if you reply after that. Keep me posted and many thanks for taking the time to look into it :) Dan the Animator 15:03, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Could you look at the new article for Tu Le and see if there's anything that needs improving? Much thanks. Travelmite (talk) 02:53, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Travelmite, thanks for putting together the article. Some notes are that the lead should be remade as a summary of the article, rather than being written on its own. "called for the expulsion of Tu Le for her public criticism of the party and undermining their election campaign" should be preceded by some information on what this criticism was and when it took place. There should be some geographic context for readers, where is Fowler, where is Cabramatta? Best, CMD (talk) 14:16, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CMD.

There is this edit request in Talk:Turkey#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_4_March_2025, but the IP may be similar to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dudewithafez/Archive, a case you filed.

Is it problematic to change some of the images in line with the edit request? Bogazicili (talk) 13:44, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bogazicili, you're absolutely right, that's the same editor. Do not feel obliged to change the images. However, if you feel that an image change is an improvement, you can do so on your own initiative. That would not be a problem. CMD (talk) 06:03, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, maybe I'll also ask it in WP:AN Bogazicili (talk) 14:24, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Question_about_edit_requests_and_potential_socks Bogazicili (talk) 15:43, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking for editors who may be able to make some input on the terminology and ethnography of sail types used by Austronesians. I have put {{disputed}} on crab claw sail, as explained on the talk page[2].

Are you an editor who either could (a) make some informed comment on the subject, (b) suggest someone else who can (c) recommend a Wikiproject that might help (I have already posted on WP:SAIL and WP:SHIPS)?

My apologies if you are completely the wrong target for this sort of question. ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 23:16, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just posted on WP:Anthro ThoughtIdRetired _TIR 23:30, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chipmunkdavis, I noticed that you recently created the Fisheries in the Philippines article, even reaching it to GA class, congratulations! Because of this, I believe that you may be interested in helping me out with this. I noticed that there is a great lack of "Fishing industry in COUNTRY" articles, and I have embarked on trying to create these articles, as well as improve existing articles. However, there are hundreds of countries to go through, and so I can't do this on my own. Would you be interested in helping with this? Please let me know, thank you! I have a user page that may guide you here: User:SonOfYoutubers/fishing industry articles in country - Wikipedia SonOfYoutubers (talk) 01:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SonOfYoutubers, thanks for reaching out. The Philippine articles are actually in a bit of limbo due to an recent court case fallout. Anyway, I would be happy to look into it as a long-term project. I did gather a few sources for Indonesia while doing the Philippines articles, but I really burnt out at the time. Is it better to talk at User talk:SonOfYoutubers/fishing industry articles in country? Perhaps as an initial recommendation, filter out the landlocked countries? While places like Bolivia will have relevant info, it might help divide the project into smaller chunks. CMD (talk) 02:19, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we may talk over there if you prefer. As for filtering, I can definitely do that, and it probably would help make it easier to find countries with most likely relevant info vs. least likely, thanks for the recommendation! You may begin a topic at the user talk if you want. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 02:43, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Chipmunkdavis! I have a question about this, and you are listed as a GAR Coordinator in Wikipedia:Good article reassessment.

I noticed some major issues in Byzantine Greeks (for example: Talk:Byzantine_Greeks#Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria), its GA nomination was in 2009.

I was thinking about giving a few months to editors in the page to work on those issues, and see if the article still meets GA criteria after then. If not I am planning to nominate it for GAR. Do you think this is reasonable? Any tips for GAR process or nominating the article for GAR? Thanks! Bogazicili (talk) 18:19, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bogazicili, the primary goal of any GAR is to fix the raised issues. If there are already editors working on the issues, then a GAR is not needed. If there is a content dispute, that should go through normal WP:Dispute resolution processes. On the other hand, if editors simply stop working on it due to a lack of interest, and the problems still exist, then if you want to nominate for a GAR please include some details for the reasons behind the GAR in the nomination, perhaps with links to the talkpage discussions. Best, CMD (talk) 01:32, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is about the neutrality of entire article, so it's too much for WP:DR. Given it's comprehensive, that is why I wanted to give few months to see if the issues would be resolved. Bogazicili (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever the size of the issue, DR is the only mechanism to really work through things. I also wouldn't be too harsh on the article, my knowledge on the topic isn't that deep, but as far as I'm aware this is an area of scholarship that has evolved a great deal over the past few decades. CMD (talk) 10:24, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, so there is an outdated POV throughout the article Talk:Byzantine_Greeks#Outdated_or_Greek_nationalist_POV_in_the_article. The article would fail 2nd and 4th GA criteria. I don't have time to fix the article myself. Bogazicili (talk) 10:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: As an editor who has been involved in this discussion for the past few months, I just wanted to remind you that I was positive to update those parts, as I clarified in my latest reply. I haven't made any changes myself, because (apart from the fact that I am currently a bit inactive in general) you said you would first identify some issues yourself, and then let other work on them. That would do for me. Finally, as I had also mentioned before, after those months pass, a delisting from GA status might still be an option too. Piccco (talk) 10:53, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that's still my plan, I was planning to check source text integrity next, but it's very time consuming. I was also planning to let you know when I'm done and still give a few months before GAR if the issues persist. Bogazicili (talk) 11:02, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright Piccco (talk) 11:10, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it about the discussion in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_Somaliland#Arbitrary_break 2600:480A:4A51:9300:A9:A448:EA88:D431 (talk) 16:00, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't remember back that far, but that section does have links to a gbooks version, which might have what you are looking for. CMD (talk) 16:28, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey,

I noticed you reverted the nomination on the Egypt article, and after a quickfail on the Economy of Egypt nomination, I think that was the right call. I had nominated both for a normal reassessment but was referred to the more specialized assessment processes, but perhaps I was a bit overzealous. That said, I did receive some helpful feedback on the Economy of Egypt article on how to improve it.

I’m still quite interested in seeing the main Egypt article improved and eventually elevated to a higher assessment level. Would you be able to guide me toward the appropriate process for its level, or perhaps a noticeboard, where I can request broader input from other editors to help identify and fix some of the issues? Turnopoems (talk) 10:54, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Turnopoems, both of these articles are very broad-scale articles, and those are always the biggest challenges for Good articles. The larger the concept, the more sources there are to reflect, and the harder it is to curate the articles. The feedback for Economy of Egypt seems like it would apply to Egypt as well. The most obvious issues that stand out are the existing tags and the unsourced text. It is expected that a Good article will be properly and thoroughly sourced. There's no real shortcut to this, it requires going through the whole article carefully. A related issue that might affect this though is length, the Egypt article is quite long, and the longer it is the more there is that needs checking and improving. If it lost 3,000 words the later refinements would be easier. In more depth, another clear issue is the quite disjointed text in a few areas. There are many single sentence paragraphs, and single paragraph subsections, which are often evidence of unintegrated text (see WP:PROSELINE). CMD (talk) 17:03, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is very helpful, thank you! I've worked quite a bit on improving lower-assessed articles to C or B-class, but I don’t yet have much experience with bringing articles beyond that level. I’ve already put some effort into improving the Economy of Egypt article based on the feedback I received this morning and will continue refining it until it becomes a much stronger candidate, at the very least. Once that’s in good shape, I plan to turn my attention back to the main Egypt article, which has been a Good article at some point in the past.

Thanks again for your support, really appreciate the guidance! Turnopoems (talk) 17:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	The Malaysia WikiProject Newsletter
Issue 58 • February 2025 • About the Newsletter
WikiProject Malaysia would like to send all of our members happy Thaipusam 2025. We wish you happy editing in Wikipedia and keep on making WikiProject Malaysia better. Statistics on the WikiProject progress and improvement: Subject namespaces: 37,484, an increase of 2 from last month Articles: 18,742, an increase of 1 from last month Stub-class Malaysia articles: 8,829, a decrease of 2 from last month Place-related articles without geographic coordinate: 983, a decrease of 5 from last month Articles needing infoboxes: 135, a decrease of 2 from last month
WikiProject Malaysia Statistics There are currently about 37,484 subject namespaces attributed to the project, including 18,742 articles. There are 22 featured articles, 95 good articles and 8,829 stub articles. The project currently has 48 active members.
Past Newsletter • Newsroom • Malaysia Noticeboard • Malaysia Portal
Newsletter written by Chongkian. You may opt-out of this monthly newsletter by removing your name here.

	The Malaysia WikiProject Newsletter
Issue 59 • March 2025 • About the Newsletter
WikiProject Malaysia would like to send all of our members happy Ramadan and Eid al-Fitr 2025. We wish you happy editing in Wikipedia and keep on making WikiProject Malaysia better. Congratulations for Pengkalan Kempas which was featured in DYK (on 1 March 2025). Statistics on the WikiProject progress and improvement: Subject namespaces: 37,726, an increase of 242 from last month Articles: 18,863, an increase of 121 from last month Stub-class Malaysia articles: 8,827, a decrease of 2 from last month Place-related articles without geographic coordinate: 976, a decrease of 7 from last month Active members: 49, an increase of 1 from last month Articles needing infoboxes: 131, a decrease of 4 from last month
WikiProject Malaysia Statistics There are currently about 37,726 subject namespaces attributed to the project, including 18,863 articles. There are 22 featured articles, 95 good articles and 8,827 stub articles. The project currently has 49 active members.
Past Newsletter • Newsroom • Malaysia Noticeboard • Malaysia Portal
Newsletter written by Chongkian. You may opt-out of this monthly newsletter by removing your name here.

This RfA is now closed so I am replying to your question here. As it turned out, I think the crat chat was useful but I think I should not have used a support vote here to try to keep the matter in the cratchat zone. It was no doubt the wrong venue and had more to do with the old question of unbundling some of the tools. It is true that we really cannot judge or be sure whether candidates will limit their actions if they are approved for RfA. I am fine with the result as it turned out. As an experienced user, I should not have made a not fully thought out and spur of the moment comment. I should have realized that I was neutral at best, and again, at the wrote venue. The crats were not going to decide the matter on the grounds of de facto unbundling. And the candidate, no matter how sincere, could not be held to a promise to do so. I think the crat chat was likely anyway and my one vote/nonvote did not push the matter over. At least I hope it didn't since I was on the fence and ok with result. Donner60 (talk) 02:35, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer Donner60, it's very much appreciated. To clarify, I was not trying to criticise the decision between support and neutral, but to try and better understand where some of the supports were coming from in what seemed a very unusual RfA. Best, CMD (talk) 07:50, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You gotta stop including Brunch into external link in Historic Site of Anti-Mongolian Struggle when I explained through edit summary this is a personal blog website that falls into WP:UGC. Per WP:ONUS, when you can't provide grounds for the disputed content, it defaults to exclusion. I suggest you to self-revert. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 14:37, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have explained why it is included. As I noted, if you have a better collection of relevant images, please provide it. CMD (talk) 14:42, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I already said blogs should be avoided per WP:ELNO, and no, I'm not obliged to provide anything. That's what WP:ONUS is. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 14:52, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You are misunderstanding ONUS, which is for article content. ELNO is explicitly not strict, as there are many cases where external links may help. CMD (talk) 14:58, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELNO clearly lists personal blogs as something to avoid. The blog is by subject expert either. Whether you find it useful is not pertinent. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 14:07, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the policy again. It specifically states that links can be used for "information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright". You also again are ignoring the clear caveats in ELNO. Meanwhile, how does removing that link help the reader? CMD (talk) 14:46, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore what? I'm repeating the same thing again and again. WP:ELNO has: Blogs, personal web pages, and most fansites (negative ones included), except those written by a recognized authority. The link is a personal blog, not written by recognized authorities. Doesn't matter what the lead says or if it helps the reader, this guideline forbids it. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 11:54, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And I reply as I have before, and sorry to add emphasis, but the guideline explicitly does not forbid it. "Links normally to be avoided", "one should generally". Furthermore, guidelines do not forbid. They are explicitly not policies. CMD (talk) 12:01, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm yet to hear why this should be an exception to the policy given that this is WP:UGC without affiliation. Can you describe who is the author of this blog? Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 12:12, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have heard the reasons, in the edit summary and above. Again, ELNO is not part of a policy. Also again, this is not article text, and it is also not being used as a source, so WP:UGC is not relevant. I will have to ask you to please stop shifting to ever new acronyms without understanding what they are and why they help improve the encyclopaedia. If you do not actually think you are helping a reader, do not make the change. CMD (talk) 12:16, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you recently commented on a discussion at WP:Village Pump (misc) on changing the way information about Wikidata edits is shown on a Wikipedia Watchlist / Recent Changes list.

We'd like to invite you to a 45 minute ~ 1-hour interview with our UX researcher. The interview will be conducted in English and compensation is available. If you would like to participate, please register your interest as a reply to this post. Thank you, - Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 08:35, 5 May 2025 (UTC) Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 08:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Danny Benjafield, I'm always happy to try and help, but could you clarify when this would be held? I would need time to refresh on my thoughts for it to be productive. CMD (talk) 10:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful to hear! If possible, we would try to make it happen this week or next, but if you agree then I would forward your Username to our UX researcher who will use the email this user function with more details. This will include a link to the meeting platform we use and it will contain the available timeslots of which you can choose from (or not if nothing is suitable for you). - Danny Benjafield (WMDE) (talk) 10:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I think I can find some time then. Best, CMD (talk) 10:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm not sure if you've had a look at this article, created in March? I'm a bit wary of a new user creating an article on the same topic as another recent problem new user, as we previously discussed, but I'm not really seeing any identical contribution patterns, specifically the AI use or copy/pasting from other articles. There is some questionable sourcing, though, with citations (likely copy/pasted from elsewhere) that don't support the content. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Paul_012, I hadn't seen it. If it's AI it's a weird use, as I would expect the writing to be better. The copy pasting from elsewhere though is likely, half of the bibliography is unused, and on my first spotcheck [3] has its sentence on being a Ming vassal directly copied. The date of the first invasion is different from the date given at Malacca Sultanate. The citation to the Malay Annals is firstly a poor idea, secondly citing a page that doesn't exist at that source... CMD (talk) 12:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, at least there was some attempt at paraphrasing when copying from the sources. The questionable citations are an issue, as is the irrelevant structuring, but on the whole I guess it's not so actively harmful with hallucinated content that it can't be fixed? I haven't identified behavioural patterns that would warrant an SPI, so it doesn't seem admin attention is yet needed. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:55, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is clearly a topic here. How much the current content fits is a more difficult question. On quite broad question is structure, why are two invasions in Siamese invasions of Malacca and a third one in Siamese invasion of Malacca (1500)? I don't think admin attention is needed, fixing this is a content question (and unfortunately I don't personally have enough time to really dig into it, but the need for improvement is clear). CMD (talk) 04:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

You signed-up to participate to the evaluation. Thank you for volunteering!

The feedback you share will help us assess and improve the performance of the Tone Check AI model.

The model is now ready to be tested, at this address: https://annotool.toolforge.org/projects/13

Annotool is the tool used by the Machine Learning team. You may be asked to log-in in order to start the evaluation.

Please read the instructions displayed on Annotool before beginning the evaluation.

If you have any question regarding the evaluation, please leave us a message on the project's talk page.

The evaluation will end on May 30. We really hope that you will enjoy working on evaluating the model!

Thank you again, Trizek_(WMF) 17:48, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for volunteering for this evaluation. We are leaving this message to let you know that the evaluation will end today, 30 May -- with a short extension over the weekend if you have not finished. --Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 May 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hwanhaejangseong, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 700-year-old fortification in present-day South Korea was mostly destroyed during the construction of a coastal road? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hwanhaejangseong. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Hwanhaejangseong), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

1=Launchballer 12:03, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 May 2025, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Historic Site of Anti-Mongolian Struggle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a rebellion against a peace treaty with the Yuan dynasty operated out of the Historic Site of Anti-Mongolian Struggle on Jeju Island? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Historic Site of Anti-Mongolian Struggle. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Historic Site of Anti-Mongolian Struggle), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

RoySmith (talk) 00:03, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Culture of Papua New Guinea

added a link pointing to Bamboo band

Papua New Guinea

added a link pointing to Bamboo band

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:53, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. You're invited to participate in The World Destubathon. We're aiming to destub a lot of articles and also improve longer stale articles. It will be held from Monday June 16 - Sunday July 13. There is $3338 going into it, with $500 the top prize. If you are interested in winning something to help you buy books for future content, or just see it as a good editathon opportunity to see a lot of articles improved for your country/region, sign up on the page in the participants section if interested.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:49, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Core Contest has now ended! Thank you for your interest and efforts. Make sure that you include both a "start" and "improvement diff" on the entries page. The judges will begin delibertaing shortly and annouce the winners within the next few weeks. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. – Aza24 (talk) 02:53, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.

Hello,

You are receiving this message because your name was listed at one or more of the following locations: Wikipedia:WikiProject Singapore/Members#Active members, Wikipedia:Meetup/Singapore#Interested participants, or meta:Wikimedians of Singapore User Group#Members. As part of an effort to foster closer collaboration and community engagement, your username has been consolidated into a general mailing list for future updates, such as local meetup announcements and occasional newsletters. You can expect no more than 1–2 messages per month.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

In case you haven’t heard, Wikimedians of Singapore User Group has been formed to support Singaporean or Singapore-based editors like yourself. You’re warmly invited to join us and learn more about our goals at metawiki, or feel free to reach out to me directly if you have questions or would like to get involved.

We’re also excited to share that our next meetup is taking place at Starbucks, Punggol Coast Mall on 13 June 2025, 6:00PM - 8.30PM. Full details and the registration form can be found at Event:Singapore Meetup June 2025. We’d love to see you there!

Warm regards,

– robertsky (talk) 02:46, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Malay is used in Malaysia, Brunei and Singapore officially. In southern Thailand it is used by a minority group. Standard Malay is also understood by the Malay ethnic group in Southeast Asia. Standard Malay is a continuation of Classical Malay during the time of the Malacca sultanate to the Johor sultanate. It was renamed twice, namely Classical Malay, Johor-Riau language, then Standard Malay.Bahasa Malaysia cannot be mixed in Standard Malay because. Bahasa Malaysia uses the words kita orang / dia orang, this word cannot be written in Standard Malay it is a grammatical error! Although the Malaysian government once changed the name of Standard Malay to Bahasa Malaysia but it has been changed back to Standard Malay because it contradicts ideology & language. Ahmad Shazlan (talk) 02:04, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source for the separate Bahasa Malaysia (the one that uses kita orang) that is different to what was previously called Bahasa Malaysia? CMD (talk) 02:06, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Before it gets confusing, let me explain the origin of Standard Malay. Standard Malay began during the Sultanate of Malacca, it was a literary language/grammar form called Classical Malay using Jawi script.

After the fall of the Sultanate of Malacca, it shifted to the Sultanate of Johor-Riau/old Sultanate of Johor, Classical Malay was renamed Johor-Riau language, also using Jawi script. During this period, the Johor-Riau area produced various dialects, namely Johor-Riau dialects, which were not literary languages, for example, the areas of Perak, Pahang, Melaka, Johor, Singapore, Riau, Riau Islands, Daik Lingga Islands and Bangka Belitung Islands. Johor-Riau language = Standard Language. Used in Southeast Asia/Malay World. Johor-Riau dialects = dialects of each area of Johor-Riau.

After the British and the Dutch drew the border. The Malayan area still used Johor-Riau language as literature.But after the fall of the Johor-Riau Sultanate, it was replaced by the Modern Johor Sultanate. At this time, the Roman script was introduced and the Jawi script was still used.

Meanwhile, in the Dutch colony, they restricted the language and the arrival of the Javanese. The area in the Riau Islands adopted the Riau dialect as the Standard Language, for example Raja Ali Haji Fisabilillah.

After independence. Malaysia changed the name of the Johor-Riau language to Standard Malay. This language is also used in Singapore and Brunei. Meanwhile in Indonesia, after the arrival of the Javanese in each Indonesian archipelago, the Riau language was processed into Indonesian language. The story goes back to the creation of Bahasa Malaysia. Bahasa Malaysia was created after independence. This language is a fragment of the Johor-Riau dialects in Malaya. The words "kita orang/dia orang/korang" come from Malaysia . The words kita orang (we all), dia orang/korang (you guys) are only used in Malaya, Singapore and the Riau Islands. Singapore and Riau Islands are close to Malaya. Bahasa Malaysia is very famous in the Upin-Ipin animation. English = We. Standard Malay = Kami/Kita. Malaysian = Kami/Kita English = We all. Standard Malay = Kami semua/Kita semua. Malaysian = Kita orang.

If you want to write about Bahasa Malaysia, you have to do it on another page. This page is about Standard Malay, which is the ZSM code. Bahasa Malaysia must have its own code and cannot be mixed. Ahmad Shazlan (talk) 03:22, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Codes are a useful standard, given these can have multiple names and there are many Malay vernaculars. We have a page about ZSM. What code do you mean when you say "Bahasa Malaysia"? CMD (talk) 03:25, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The ZSM code is written with the name Standard Malay. Bahasa Malaysia should be made on another page, not on this page. Bahasa Malaysia does not yet have a code. I want this page to only contain Standard Malay! Remove the name Bahasa Malaysia/Malaysian Malay Ahmad Shazlan (talk) 03:48, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You will have to do a formal WP:RM for that, and provide sources to describe what you refer to when you say "Bahasa Malaysia". CMD (talk) 04:07, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is Claude's feedback for five of your recent articles: User:Polygnotus/CMD1. It is difficult to estimate how much this costs me (because they have some weird system with tokens, and longer texts cost more), but it is a fraction of an American dollar cent. https://www.anthropic.com/pricing#api Polygnotus (talk) 13:29, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Now you look here Claude, "Inconsistent romanization throughout the article", it was one time! Polygnotus, I appreciate the fraction of an American cent. Interestingly, some of these I had run through ChatGPT as a test a few times myself, as I was experimenting at the time. One example I do remember is Forbidden City cats, and ChatGPT clearly caught all the relevant spelling issues. The grammar suggestions for both are a mix, some don't feel right to me, others feel okay. I found that ChatGPT's grammar suggestions were helpful roughly half the time, and that seems similar here, although all the "subject-verb disagreement"s it found are absolutely correct, a result I assume of my rewriting of sentences quite a bit as I go. However, I have to say that I think almost all of the "Factual Inconsistencies" of the first two (Historic Site and Forbidden City Cats, have not looked at the others yet) are wrong or misplaced concern, except for "The cost figure shows an inconsistency: "¥118,410 was spent neutering 181 cats" but earlier text mentions "¥18410" in a Chinese source title, suggesting a possible transcription error" which was actually a transcription error I presumably made. Curiously, it referenced another title rather than the source used there, which did have it correct. CMD (talk) 13:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you object more to the fact that it uses a "Factual inconsistencies" header to list things it thinks someone should have a look at.

the discrepancy should be better explained / the main text states "around 110 ha" without acknowledging this discrepancy. / should be clarified / should be reconciled. If you ignore the header it doesn't really say those things are wrong. And the fact that it uses a "Factual inconsistencies" header is because of the prompt. Polygnotus (talk) 13:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, although not all need looking at. For the around 100 ha example, the wording "around 110 ha" matches both of the very specific figures which differ from each other by less than 0.3%. There's also obvious lack of understanding as shown in the "Elevation inconsistency" comment, including the "160 m to 165 m above sea level" for the inner fortress" and not realising that "the inner fortress" is the explanation. CMD (talk) 14:01, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah if you use it for a while you'll see stuff that is just plain wrong once in a while, and stuff it just didn't interpret correctly. Like humans, AI is fallible. And we are intentionally giving it a difficult task (well-written articles that have been triple-checked by both human and AI); there are plenty of articles on Wikipedia that are, to put it politely, shit. Polygnotus (talk) 14:05, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"following the 2018 Japan floods" - should be "following the 2018 Japan floods" (remove extra brackets around the link), is that Claude not understanding wikilinks? But why only in one specific instance? CMD (talk) 14:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I need to finetune the prompts to deal with that, for example when the link is something like an [[United States|American then it thinks it should be "a United" instead of "an United" and it doesn't understand that this is displayed as "an American". Polygnotus (talk) 14:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What's odd is that this link isn't even a pipe, it's just a plain [[ ]]. CMD (talk) 14:28, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I have thought about processing the article in advance to simplify some wikicode (e.g. change [[x|y]] to [[y]]). I'd have to implement and test that before I know if it really helps the AI. Polygnotus (talk) 07:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

""reading" should be "calling" in the book reference: "話題を読んでいます" appears to be a translation error", another one I can't figure out. "reading" isn't used in the article. CMD (talk) 14:06, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. But I may strip out the reference sections before sending the API call, haven't decided yet. Sometimes it has good ideas and sometimes it just gets confused by them. Polygnotus (talk) 14:10, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Kasuhiro Miyamoto" - Should be "Katsuhiro Miyamoto" (missing 't' in first name) is an interesting one, "Katsuhiro" does seem to be a common spelling for some people, but "Kasuhiro" is the one in the source, repeated in some other newspapers like [4].

The article mentions conflicting estimates about when cat ownership surpassed dog ownership (2014 vs "a couple of years later"), which should be clarified or acknowledged as disputed. That's a particularly odd one, as it's literally pulling from a sentence noting these were conflicting estimates. It's somehow extracted them from that context and then recreated the need for the context.

I didn't know Claude was against the singular they. Anyway, I've made some tweaks to the article reflecting suggestions. The identifying of the vaccination cost typo was a standout find, but I didn't find the others helpful. I do find this is a limitation in LLM tests I've run too, whether an article is "shit" or not, I find the LLM always likes to give about 4-5 suggestions, no less if it's fine, and no more if more are needed. CMD (talk) 14:28, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That has to do with the fact that when I do the API call I say "this is your budget in tokens". And you buy tokens with money. It tries to make its output fit the requirements; it can't output an entire novel when we feed it complete garbage. Polygnotus (talk) 14:33, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense for hitting the higher limit, but it doesn't help much with the minimum. At least it manages to find zero typos. CMD (talk) 14:41, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.kmaa.jp/profile_en His website calls him Katsuhiro so I would assume that is the preferred spelling. Polygnotus (talk) 14:44, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The correct transliteration is **Katsuhiro** because:

• Phonetic accuracy**: The Japanese pronunciation uses the "tsu" sound (つ), which is a single consonant cluster in Japanese. "Katsuhiro" accurately represents this sound, while "Kasuhiro" would suggest a different pronunciation that doesn't exist in Japanese.

• Standard romanization**: Under both the Hepburn and Kunrei-shiki romanization systems (the two main methods for writing Japanese in Latin letters), the つ sound is consistently written as "tsu," not "su."

• Common usage**: You'll find "Katsuhiro" is the standard spelling in official documents, academic works, and by Japanese people themselves when writing their names in English.

• Examples**: Well-known people with this name use "Katsuhiro" - like anime director Katsuhiro Otomo (Akira, Steamboy).

The "tsu" represents a specific sound in Japanese that's crucial to preserve in transliteration to maintain both accuracy and respect for the original pronunciation. Using "Kasuhiro" would be like changing someone's name entirely. -- Claude.

Polygnotus (talk) 14:52, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the linked profile is a different Ka(t)suhiro Miyamoto. I had another look at the sources and [5] uses Katsuhiro. It's also the spelling in other sources such as [6] not about Nekonomics, which lends credence to Claude's claim. I also found "Miyamoto Katsuhiro" on page 18 of a graduation ceremony document, so assuming Kansai University doesn't have two staff of that name I am leaning towards this change now. Claude is also right about つ, I remember learning that letter. CMD (talk) 14:53, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kunrei-shiki_romanization#Kunrei-shiki_spellings_of_kana & Hepburn_romanization#Romanization_charts. I don't have access to [7]. So yeah I think Claude is correct. Polygnotus (talk) 15:04, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On a more normal article it looks like this and Talk:Intervention_Police_(Hungary) based on this:

   "principle tactical unit" → "principal tactical unit"    "principle gendarmerie force" → "principal gendarmerie force"    "Interior Troops Division of the Interior Ministry" has redundant "Interior"    "reorganizaed" → "reorganized"    "Further more" → "Furthermore"    "a it could be supplemented" → "it could be supplemented" 

   "The modern Intervention Police units traces their origin" → "The modern Intervention Police units trace their origin" (subject-verb disagreement)    "The first From the police police units and recruited professional personnel" - This sentence is incomplete and contains garbled text    "which were first 1949 as part of" - Missing verb and incomplete phrasing    "on October 21, 1954, the Minister of the Interior ordered" → "On October 21, 1954, the Minister of the Interior ordered" (capitalize sentence beginning)    Multiple instances of inconsistent spacing around dates and numbers    "On 30th of October 1956" → "On October 30, 1956" or "On the 30th of October 1956"    "Emergency Police are used" → "Emergency Police is used" (treating organization as singular entity)    "The task of the Emergency Police is to protect... and remove persons" - Run-on sentence that should be broken up 

   The article states the unit was awarded the Order of the Red Star "on the fifteenth anniversary of its existence" in 1986, but earlier states it was formed in 1973, which would be 13 years, not 15    The infobox shows formation year as 1948, but the text describes formation in 1949-1950    Reference to "Revolutionary Reaction Police" in 1981 but then mentions "Revolutionary Intervention Police Regiment" in 1986 without clarifying if these are the same unit or different names 

   Inconsistent transliteration and formatting of Hungarian terms    The phrase "i g énybevételének" in one of the references appears to have spacing errors    Several incomplete or malformed sentences, particularly in the early history section    Inconsistent capitalization of "Emergency Police" vs "emergency police" throughout the article 

Polygnotus (talk) 15:22, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I think that Factual Inconsistencies 1 and 3 are actually the same base issue. Factual Inconsistency 2 seems to be an accurate observation as well. CMD (talk) 15:26, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Related to this comment: Would you take a look at WP:REVIVE, with a thought towards what might actually be feasible if someone (specifically, someone with less experience than you) attempted to revive one of those long-dead groups? WP:Be bold if you've got ideas that might help someone. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:04, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a signpost WikiProject desk??? CMD (talk) 03:39, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't kept up with The Signpost, but they used to run a regular profile article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:06, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Chipmunkdavis, the Developing Countries WikiContest will be returning for a second year, and sign-ups are now open! The contest will run from 1 July to 30 September, and the objective remains the same: improve as many articles relating to developing countries as you can to help fight systemic bias on Wikipedia.

In other news, we have a new face on the coordinator team this year: last year's sixth-place finisher, Arconning (talk · contribs)! The coordinators would like to extend a sincere thanks to Ixtal (talk · contribs), who is leaving the team, without whom the contest would not exist. After feedback from contestants last year, the scoring rules are undergoing some modifications; the new rules and a summary of the changes made will be posted to the contest talk page shortly.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the contest talk page or contact one of the coordinators: Arconning (talk · contribs), sawyer777 (talk · contribs), or TechnoSquirrel69 (talk · contribs). (To unsubscribe from these updates, remove yourself from this list.) Sent via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 09:33, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]