This is an archive of past discussions with User:Kusma. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Hi Kusma. Gog would like to put this one up at TFA on August 23, unless there are objections. If you're interested in writing a blurb for it, just write whatever you want and I'll format it if necessary. If you prefer, I'll try doing the blurb myself. - Dank (push to talk) 02:15, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
The third round of the 2023 WikiCup has come to an end. The 16 users who made it to the fourth round had at least 175 points. Our top scorers in round 3 were:
Iazyges, with 560 points from a high-scoring featured article on Tiberius III.
Contestants achieved 11 featured articles, 2 featured lists, 47 good articles, 72 featured or good article reviews, over 100 DYKs and 40 ITN appearances. As always, any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.
On 11 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Michael Huber (writer), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Michael Huber's translation of Salomon Gessner's works into French made Gessner the best-known German-language poet in Europe before Goethe? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Michael Huber (writer). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Michael Huber (writer)), 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.
No need for thanks, I always enjoy writing about the 18th century, especially when I fill such a wonderful red link :) Hope your time in Sweden was as enjoyable as the photos suggest! —Kusma (talk) 08:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes it was. Great that you enjoy what you do. I do the same, just busy with a tenor who sadly died, and his article was so poor that the ROH wrote a misleading obit. Sad that he won't see the improvements but it's a pleasure to make the article grow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:44, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
is a DYK for the article that I got to GA status and the DYK was fully-approved yesterday but it's not showing up on the Approved page yet. The reviewer is new to DYK reviewing, I'm only around DYK occasionally and I can't quite figure out why it isn't showing up as Approved yet. Could you please take a look and fix any issues? I think it's not showing up on the Approved page yet because one of the parameters still has an no-longer-valid Red mark against it - sourcing. Sourcing had a few issues but they have all been fixed/approved. Thanks in advance, Shearonink (talk) 14:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Oh thank you for weighing in! Neither the reviewer - voorts an editor new to DYK who I think did a great job - nor myself (an experienced editor who's pretty much just an occasional DYK'er) - were sure if everything had been done correctly. Thanks again & cheers, Shearonink (talk) 16:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
(Belated) Thanks for the welcome!
Hello Kusma! I wanted to thank you, in a very belated manner, for leaving me the welcome message with helpful links when we crossed paths almost a year ago.
I was just starting to explore copyediting here, took an initial run at a CE you had requested from the Guild page, and unfortunately encountered some serious health issues which kept me off Wikipedia for most of this year. Luckily my health is improved, and now that I'm planning to try my hand at contributing again, those introductory links have been a great anchor point.
Hope all is well for you, and that I was able to at least provide some entry points for another editor to continue improving the article in question- feel free to ping me if you have any other pressing articles for CE this summer ☺️ Cheers! Chiselinccc (talk) 20:14, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Glad you are better now. The Ulf Merbold article in the meantime did get promoted to Featured Article. I will remember your kind offer when I have some further things to copyedit. —Kusma (talk) 10:16, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
On 17 July 2023, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Palmire Dumont, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Palmire Dumont, a pioneer of LGBT nightlife in "Gay Paree", was among the first members of the French Bulldog-Owners Club (her dog pictured) and met other bulldog owners in her lesbian bar? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Palmire Dumont. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Palmire Dumont), 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.
Given in gratitude for your review of Zheng Manuo. Kusma, you are a great reviewer who is careful, and I really appreciate that you take time out of your life for this article. I hope to be a reviewer like you. TheLonelyPather (talk) 21:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! It was a pleasure working with you and to learn more about 17th century Jesuits and their dealings with China. —Kusma (talk) 22:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
In appreciation
The Reviewers Award
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! Unfortunately I've been quite busy recently and so didn't get to review as much as I'd like (and I'm still trying to do some writing). Hoping that August will be a better month ... —Kusma (talk) 08:32, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
August 2023 Good Article Nominations backlog drive
The article Eliza Stephens you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Eliza Stephens for comments about the article, and Talk:Eliza Stephens/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of UndercoverClassicist -- UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:24, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
i noticed that the blurb mentions that huber was a publicist in switzerland, and that the article lead specifically states that he worked as one while he was in bôle. however, i appear to be unable to find anything in the section on huber's time in switzerland that mentions work that would normally be considered a specialty of a publicist, as defined in our article on the profession. is it possible that you are thinking of political journalists, who are also known as "Publizisten" in german? admittedly, i had to look "publicist" up in a dictionary to learn that it could also mean "political journalist" in english. i am guessing that this sense of the word is not well known; cambridge's definition doesn't mention it at all. what would you think about replacing "a publicist and reviewer" in the blurb with "a reviewer and political journalist"? note that i changed the order of the professions, as "a political journalist and reviewer" may suggest that huber was also considered a political reviewer.
personally, i feel that stating "Huber returned to Germany as editor for [cotta's] newspaper" without any qualifications may suggest that, at the time of huber's return (or almost immediately afterward), he was the main editor, or editor-in-chief, of the newspaper. however, the article body states that huber was initially offered the position of assistant editor, and only became editor-in-chief months after returning to germany. would it be more appropriate to qualify the statement by adding the article "an" before "editor", so that the blurb states that "Huber returned to Germany as an editor for [cotta's] newspaper"?
if both of the above changes are implemented, this would bump the blurb up to a length of 1036 characters. i think replacing "He and Therese later married after they escaped" with "The two later married after escaping" would bring the length back down to 1025. would this rewording also work for you?
Thank you dying for checking this in detail! I am not sure I like to put extra emphasis on "political" journalist; that narrows his work down more than I feel comfortable with. He wrote literary reviews and edited some journals that were political because these were politically interesting times. Maybe just "journalist", I don't know. For your second point, I don't think the couple of months before he became editor-in-chief are that important, but I don't mind if you think it reads better with an indefinite article. The shaving of a few characters you suggest seems fine for me. —Kusma (talk) 07:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
sounds good. i have updated the blurb, replacing "publicist" with "journalist" and adding "an" before "editor". since this only increased the blurb's length to 1026 characters, i ended up replacing "they escaped" with "escaping", while leaving "He and Therese" as is. please feel free to edit the blurb further if anything is not to your liking. thanks for addressing these issues! dying (talk) 14:17, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
The article Anna Blackburne you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Anna Blackburne for comments about the article, and Talk:Anna Blackburne/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Etriusus -- Etriusus (talk) 02:20, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you today for Ludwig Ferdinand Huber, "about "either a very minor or a relatively minor character in the constellation of 18th century German events", as Goethe scholar Thomas P. Saine put it. Minor or not, he did have some influence and interacted with many great writers of his era: close friend of Friedrich Schiller and Isabelle de Charrière, reviewer of works by Johann Wolfgang Goethe and Marquis de Sade, lover and eventual husband of Georg Forster's wife Therese Huber, and overall I found him a fascinating character."! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your help with Lindholm, - I'd agree that the "first" for Moscow is not supported enough, but I think it's an interesting fact even if not first. The nom is open, and "damn primary teacher" was approved. Input welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:48, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
This too shall pass. - Ten years ago on 28 August, I heard a symphony, with a heavy heart because of the pending decision in WP:ARBINFOBOX, and not worried about my future here but Andy's. - It passed, and I could write the DYK about calling to dance, not battle, and Andy could write the DYK mentioning about peace and reconciliation, - look. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:23, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
Proposed decision posted for the SmallCat dispute case
I believe your deletion of John Rolph (disambiguation) was not within the terms of G14 (specifically that it must "disambiguate only one extant Wikipedia page"), since it included the primary topic and one other topic. (The user who tagged it disagrees with my interpretation.)
Respected Sir/Ma'am,
I, Anish Ramchandra Narale,want to request you to nominate my name for administrator ship . If I am made an administratorship, I will try the best to keep the dignity of the post. So, If you think I am worthy of being an administrator, please nominate me for the same.
Thank you Anish Narale (talk) 13:21, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
Following an RfC, TFAs will be automatically semi-protected the day before it is on the main page and through the day after.
A discussion at WP:VPP about revision deletion and oversight for dead names found that [s]ysops can choose to use revdel if, in their view, it's the right tool for this situation, and they need not default to oversight. But oversight could well be right where there's a particularly high risk to the person. Use your judgment.
The SmallCat dispute case has closed. As part of the final decision, editors participating in XfD have been reminded to be careful about forming local consensus which may or may not reflect the broader community consensus. Regular closers of XfD forums were also encouraged to note when broader community discussion, or changes to policies and guidelines, would be helpful.
Miscellaneous
Tech tip: The "Browse history interactively" banner shown at the top of Special:Diff can be used to easily look through a history, assemble composite diffs, or find out what archive something wound up in.
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with anyone scoring less than 673 points being eliminated. It was a high scoring round with all but one of the contestants who progressed to the final having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were
Epicgenius, with 2173 points topping the scores, gained mainly from a featured article, 38 good articles and 9 DYKs. He was followed by
Sammi Brie, with 1575 points, gained mainly from a featured article, 28 good articles and 50 good article reviews. Close behind was
Thebiguglyalien, with 1535 points mainly gained from a featured article, 15 good articles, 26 good article reviews and lots of bonus points.
Between them during round 4, contestants achieved 12 featured articles, 3 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 126 good articles, 46 DYK entries, 14 ITN entries, 67 featured article candidate reviews and 147 good article reviews. Congratulations to our eight finalists and all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them and within 24 hours of the end of the final. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
I will be standing down as a judge after the end of the contest. I think the Cup encourages productive editors to improve their contributions to Wikipedia and I hope that someone else will step up to take over the running of the Cup. Sturmvogel 66 (talk), and Cwmhiraeth (talk)
Thank you for participating in the August 2023 GAN backlog drive
The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
We really appreciate that you reviewed several GANs during the drive. Due in part to your efforts, the backlog of unreviewed nominations was reduced by 440 articles, an astonishing 69 percent.
An RfC is open regarding amending the paid-contribution disclosure policy to add the following text: Any administrator soliciting clients for paid Wikipedia-related consulting or advising services not covered by other paid-contribution rules must disclose all clients on their userpage.
Technical news
Administrators can now choose to add the user's user page to their watchlist when changing the usergroups for a user. This works both via Special:UserRights and via the API. (T272294)
I need help and I need your research skills, even if I think you probably don't speak Japanese (no surprise, me either). I am looking for ref 4 given on this link. So frustrating that no ISBN or OCLC links are given and even the name doesn't work in a google search, but I am fairly sure I found it here if that 1980.5 on #28 is the same as the indication on the article that says 1980-05. Of course the problem is I cannot figure out how to access it, thus cannot confirm that it is correct to even try to order it from the RX. Suggestions?
The other problem is that my lady, Yoko Matsuoka (1916-1979) is often confused with Yoko Matsuoka McClain (1924-2011). My Matsuoka was definitely a translator and interpreter, the other one I am not sure about. For example this book on p 320 says it was McClain whose translation of Hiroshima was rejected, but if you read the bit about it on p 146, it sounds more like my Matsuoka, who the allied forces kept a dossier on and who was a friend and interpreter for "an unidentified colleague called Berry", i.e. Darrell Berrigan. She was also a professional writer, had been educated at Swarthmore, spoke English well and worked with foreign journalists. McClain, on the other hand per her own statement translated for US service personnel and although her English was not good, she "corrected their spelling at least". That certainly doesn't sound to me as if she could have translated a book for publication. This book also notes confusion about the two women. I don't think I have sources to confirm my Matsuoka was the translator of Hersey, but perhaps you can find something I cannot? SusunW (talk) 19:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi @SusunW, while I don't speak Japanese, I can read Chinese, so I can decipher kanji, which helps quite a bit :) Your reference is the same as this one on WorldCat. Searching on Hathitrust confirms you want pages 349 and possibly 498, 503, 509 (these might be footnotes and/or index).
I will try later to look more into the two Yoko Matsuokas, but I'd just like to note that people who write in Japanese would not likely confuse them, as their names are spelled with different kanji: yours is 松岡洋子, the other is 松岡陽子. Yoko (name) has many different ways to write it, so Japanese are going to be aware and would check which version it is, and will remember whether it is 洋 (ocean) or 陽 (sun) in the name. —Kusma (talk) 20:44, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
My instincts were correct! Somehow I knew you could help me solve this puzzle. I truly, truly appreciate you help. If you can find anything about my Matsuoka that'd be great. (I had no clue about the sun and ocean, but seem to recall she said her name means ocean in her autobiography). Perhaps you could figure out her mom's maiden name. There is a ton of biographical detail in the autobiography, but she did not give either her mother or father's names. It was a struggle, but I finally found sources for each of their names, but only the mother's first name. It's not critical, but would be lovely to have. You are a true jewel and I am so thankful for your help. SusunW (talk) 21:11, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
@SusunW, not easy... My current assumption is that the mother's Japanese (married) name is 松岡久子, which may or may not help with further research depending on whether it is correct. I only learned today that Japanese women (usually) change their last name upon marriage (Chinese women do not). —Kusma (talk) 10:48, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
I know that Japanese women were legally required to take their husband's name (except in the case of the wife's line having no heirs) until the latter half of the 20th century. Now they must legally have the same surname, but it can be either. Silly, silly law, IMO. I strongly suspect that the mom is a notable activist, but it's hard to judge without a name. Lots of indicators she was very involved in women's activism but without access to newspapers.com or her name, hard to figure it out. I may spend more time on searching for her, if I ever finish Yoko. I appreciate your help. SusunW (talk) 13:54, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
New user edits
Hi! I noticed a new user, Vealkickin with hundreds of testing edits (adding diacritics to Vietnam-related articles), which may also be considered spamming. I’m not experienced with writing warning notifications, so I would kindly ask for your help on this. Thank you very much! Đại Việt quốc (talk) 15:50, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
@Đại Việt quốc, thank you for your notification. At first glance, the edits seem to add correct diacritics. I am not well versed in our Vietnam-related style guidelines, so I don't know whether this should be welcomed or not. It would be nice if the user could accomplish this task in fewer edits, but that isn't something we should give a beginner a hard time about. —Kusma (talk) 16:00, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
I totally understand. Still, I think it's best to leave a notification on their talk page to let them know that what they were doing was not ideal (in many case... annoying). The goal is to help them improve. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 17:16, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
The user turned out to be a sock (now blocked), so your instincts that something might be wrong were correct! —Kusma (talk) 21:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
I am completely at a loss as to what to call this article, which I want to move to mainspace. Most sources refer to her by her husband's name, flat out. Those that recognize that Ngô Bá Thành was her husband's name call her Madame Ngo Ba Thanh. I absolutely hate the idea of obscuring who she was and also recognize that if an article is written about her husband it will be really, really confusing. Suggestions? SusunW (talk) 19:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
@SusunW, wow, that is confusing (and I feel something between honoured and worried about the difficulty level of the questions you ask me). As there are so many sources using "Ngô Bá Thành", I would probably go with Madame Ngô Bá Thành (with lots of redirects). Her birth name seems just a side remark in sources like this obituary. She seems a lot more famous than her husband, so I'm not sure we need to worry about having an article for him. The only worry I have with this convention is that I'm not sure whether you'd need to call her "Thanh" or something when referring to her according to Vietnamese naming customs. In this source, they do actually use her given name sometimes, and refer to her as "Thanh Van" when they do, not "Van". Unfortunately I know far too little about Vietnamese (and knowing Chinese does not help much). In any case, I think you should not have the hatnote saying you should use Van and then use Ngo instead.
I would suggest to definitely talk to a Vietnamese speaker or expert. Unfortunately my go-to person has long since left Wikipedia (User:YellowMonkey, who nominated me for adminship 17.5 years ago). —Kusma (talk) 21:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
you should feel honored, as I trust your input and am very appreciative of your always helpful advice. But yes, it's a conundrum and that's why I put the first note explaining I didn't use her first name, only surnames. I looked at Wikiproject Vietnam and other than unanswered queries, there doesn't appear to have been any activity on it for a couple of years. The last active editor has no contributions after 2022. I tried to take out the first name parameter from the hatnote and it just says refer to them by the given name, which I already explained why I did not in the footnote. So, I am left with either leaving the hatnote out entirely or having even more confusion about her name. So difficult. I'll think on it a bit more. I wanted to take her live, but I have an appointment and may not make it back to this today. SusunW (talk) 21:28, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
@Đại Việt quốc, I couldn't help you much when you asked me above, but maybe you can help us out here. Do you have a suggestion what would be the best name to refer to this person in the article? Is it one of Thanh Vân, Vân or Thành? Or is it something else? And what would be the best article title? @SusunW and myself both lack the relevant experience with Vietnamese names, and would value other opinions. —Kusma (talk) 21:52, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
Well, for the article name, I would suggest it be Mrs. Ngo Ba Thanh (with or without diacritics, your choice), as it was used by both the U.S. and the communist (after 1975, like this one). While "Madame Ngo Ba Thanh" was used solely by the U.S. Within the article, I think you can be flexible about how to refer to her, either Thanh Van, Vân or Mrs. Ngo Ba Thanh, Mrs. Thanh. Try avoiding using "Ngo Ba Thanh" or "Thanh" stand-alone, that should be fine. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 22:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
I am working on Women's International Democratic Federation because when I stumbled across it, it looked like Special:PermanentLink/1169781840. I've asked Ser Amantio di Nicolao to make a category for members and I think I need help making (red)lists for the executive council members, but my immediate question for you is about a Chinese woman. The reports of WIDF list her as either Tsai Tchang, or Tsai Chang. I think she is on WP as Cai Chang, mainly because there is a redirect to that, but what I don't know is what it should be and since there are hundreds of documents about the WIDF that call her with the Tsai spelling, if our article should actually be that. Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated. SusunW (talk) 18:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Hi @SusunW. Yes, that is definitely the same person, just with the name written in different romanisations of Chinese. Cai Chang or properly Cài Chàng is Hanyu pinyin or simply Pinyin, Ts'ai Tch'ang is EFEO Chinese transcription, the French standard of the time, and Tsʻai Chʻang is Wade–Giles, the most widespread romanisation in English (at least in the scholarly literature; language learners also commonly used the Yale system) until Pinyin became dominant. The apostrophes or asper signs are often dropped, especially outside of specialised scholarly literature, so "Tsai Tchang" and "Tsai Chang" will also be common.
Our article should be at Cai Chang. WP:ZHNAME tells us to use Hanyu pinyin and Chinese name ordering by default, and for a Mainland Chinese woman who lived until 1990, I don't think we should deviate from this default. Older scholarship will use other romanisations, as Pinyin was introduced in the PRC at the end of the 1950s and only became dominant in Western literature about China in the early 1980s, but I expect that virtually all modern scholarship will use the Pinyin spelling, just like people stopped writing "Mao Tse-tung" for Mao Zedong. Would you like me to add a {{Infobox Chinese}} to her article to incorporate all of the different romanisations? For biographies, it is usually part of the main infobox, see the bottom of the infobox at Ma Ying-jeou for an example. —Kusma (talk) 21:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I do think it would be really helpful, especially since there are so many references with different spellings. Should we also make a redirect for Tsai Tchang? I haven't even begun to try to figure out the correct spellings of the names of the women who served on the executive council of this organization, but I am pretty sure there will be lots of spelling variations. I've decided to limit the main article to the Executive Board simply because there are like 30-50 members of the council every 3 years. SusunW (talk) 22:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
@SusunW: Added the Chinese name to the infobox. Use of the EFEO system in the English Wikipedia seems vanishingly rare, so we don't even have a templated way to do it, but I've added it to the lead, assuming there are enough English sources using this variant (if not, perhaps it would be better to remove). Redirects for Ts'ai Tch'ang and Tsai Tchang would make sense if you keep this bit in the article. —Kusma (talk) 10:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. Not exactly sure how to best do it. Perhaps list it as Cai Chang but note that in the materials she is often called the other two or call her Tsai Tchang/Chang as the French documents do and have a redirect? I think it is necessary to note it or people like me will be confused. I also am not sure if it should be in Asian name order in the WIDF article, since all of the other names are in western style (even the Hungarians). Usually I flip them, but would be interested in your thoughts. SusunW (talk) 13:02, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
@SusunW, personally I'd go for Chinese name order, so "Cai Chang" unless the sources overwhelmingly use Western order (compare Mao Zedong versus Fanghua Lin). In this case, I would suggest to additionally use a footnote to mention name order and the other romanisation systems, especially if you use pre-1980 sources. —Kusma (talk) 13:30, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
You are the best! Thanks. Now if you could just tell me where to find a magic wand to check all those names of the executive council... SusunW (talk) 13:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Another query if I may. I am guessing that Liu Chin-yan shown here on p 46 is the same as Liu Tsin-yan and Liu Ching Yang? The Chinese version here shows 刘清扬 on p 53, which Google translate gives as Liu Qingyang. I have zero clue which is right, nor do I know if she is zh:刘清扬. Can you help? SusunW (talk) 18:22, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Liu Qingyang is the correct modern way of writing her name, and all of these people seem to be the same, simplified Chinese: 刘清扬; traditional Chinese: 劉清揚; pinyin: Liú Qīngyáng; Wade–Giles: Liu2 Chʻing1-yang2. "Liu Ching-yang" is likely the most common romanisation pre-1960, and "Liu Ching Yang" is an OK way to write this. "Liu Tsing-yang" or "Liu Tsin-yan" are some bastardised transcriptions influenced by Chinese postal romanization. Very nice that you have the archive.org source about the Korean war both in English and in Traditional Chinese. —Kusma (talk) 19:32, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Your help is absolutely invaluable and I genuinely appreciate you and your patience with my many question. And yes, I thought it would help to have the Chinese spelling from a Chinese source. I didn't link the Chinese version in the article, but perhaps I should? I'll use the modern spelling and add a note. SusunW (talk) 19:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
"Lu Chiang Shu Huan, Coopérative Industrielle des Femmes Chinoises" is she 陆江淑环 (Lu Jiang Shuhuan) and perhaps the wife of Lu Guangmian, discussed here? SusunW (talk) 16:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Possibly? But it should just be 江淑环 Jiang Shuhuan without the husband's name. What gives me pause is that Lu Guangmian's Lu is 卢, not 陆, see zh:卢广绵. At the same time, Google says "Your search - 卢广绵 江淑环 - did not match any book results." Where did you get her name in characters from? It may be that the 陆 has some other meaning here. Happy to look at it in context. —Kusma (talk) 23:04, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
The transliteration is the result of Google, Yandex and Bing translation software. The name is given in Alexander Street Press (Wiki Library) WIDF report from 1945. I'm going to lose my computer for a few days. Hard drive issue. Probably will have access 9 November, but not after for a couple of days. SusunW (talk) 06:24, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Looks like a very interesting life story. It seems they were Christian like many or most people at Yenching University All the women's representative work is under China's Nationalist government, and of course they were accused of corruption in the 1950s after the Communists had taken over. No time to work on this properly though :( —Kusma (talk) 10:36, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Well before I had you to ask, it was the only way I could even try to work out names. I never search a name in isolation, almost always with another person and/or job, organization, etc. One has to layer the search to make sure the context is correct. But, now I have you. (Aren't you lucky ;) so I can just ask, repeatedly.) I'm sure she'll be there waiting for you. So many names discovered while writing this article. I appreciate you. SusunW (talk) 13:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
So many interesting stories (there is published correspondence between Jiang Shuhuan and Y. T. Wu in the early 1930s), so little time. Please continue to ask me these little questions, I am happy to help where I can. —Kusma (talk) 16:24, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
You are very gracious. I pinged you in on the WiR page discussion about a query on 2 of the names on the 1948 list. And yes, so little time... SusunW (talk) 16:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
WikiCup 2023 November newsletter
The WikiCup is a marathon rather than a sprint and all those reaching the final round have been involved in the competition for the last ten months, improving Wikipedia vastly during the process. After all this hard work, BeanieFan11 has emerged as the 2023 winner and the WikiCup Champion. The finalists this year were:-
Congratulations to everyone who participated in this year's WikiCup, whether they made it to the final round or not, and particular congratulations to the newcomers to the competition, some of whom did very well. Wikipedia has benefitted greatly from the quality creations, expansions and improvements made, and the numerous reviews performed. All those who reached the final round will win awards. The following special awards will be made based on high performance in particular areas of content creation and review. Awards will be handed out in the next few days.
Unlimitedlead wins the featured article prize, for 7 FAs in total including 3 in round 2.
MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in total.
Lee Vilenski wins the featured topic prize, for a 6-article featured topic in round 4.
MyCatIsAChonk wins the featured picture prize, for 6 FPs in total.
BeanieFan11 wins the good article prize, for 75 GAs in total, including 61 in the final round.
Epicgenius wins the good topic prize, for a 41-article good topic in the final round.
LunaEatsTuna wins the GA reviewer prize, for 70 GA reviews in round 1.
MyCatIsAChonk wins the FA reviewer prize, for 66 FA reviews in the final round.
Epicgenius wins the DYK prize, for 49 did you know articles in total.
Muboshgu wins the ITN prize, for 46 in the news articles in total.
The WikiCup has run every year since 2007. With the 2023 contest now concluded, I will be standing down as a judge due to real life commitments, so I hope that another editor will take over running the competition. Please get in touch if you are interested. Next year's competition will hopefully begin on 1 January 2024. You are invited to sign up to participate in the contest; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors. It only remains to congratulate our worthy winners once again and thank all participants for their involvement! (If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.) Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Following a motion, the contentious topic designation of Prem Rawat has been struck. Actions previously taken using this contentious topic designation are still in force.
Following several motions, multiple topic areas are no longer designated as a contentious topic. These contentious topic designations were from the Editor conduct in e-cigs articles, Liancourt Rocks, Longevity, Medicine, September 11 conspiracy theories, and Shakespeare authorship question cases.
Following a motion, remedies 3.1 (All related articles under 1RR whenever the dispute over naming is concerned), 6 (Stalemate resolution) and 30 (Administrative supervision) of the Macedonia 2 case have been rescinded.
Following a motion, remedy 6 (One-revert rule) of the The Troubles case has been amended.
An arbitration case named Industrial agriculture has been opened. Evidence submissions in this case close 8 November.
Miscellaneous
The Articles for Creation backlog drive is happening in November 2023, with 700+ drafts pending reviews for in the last 4 months or so. In addition to the AfC participants, all administrators and New Page Patrollers can conduct reviews using the helper script, Yet Another AFC Helper Script, which can be enabled in the Gadgets settings. Sign up here to participate!
Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Thank you today for Ulf Merbold, introduced: "This article is about my childhood hero: West Germany's first astronaut. After the article passed GA in April, it has seen further extension and a thorough GOCE copyedit followed by another extension round that hopefully hasn't messed too much with the copyeditor's good work. The article isn't super long but I still believe it to be reasonably comprehensive (and more details about each of the space flights should probably be added to articles about those, not to biographies of the participants). Sadly, I am nominating this too late for the page's original author (Ahoerstemeier) to participate." -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Following a talk page discussion, the Administrators' accountability policy has been updated to note that while it is considered best practice for administrators to have notifications (pings) enabled, this is not mandatory. Administrators who do not use notifications are now strongly encouraged to indicate this on their user page.
Arbitration
Following a motion, the Extended Confirmed Restriction has been amended, removing the allowance for non-extended-confirmed editors to post constructive comments on the "Talk:" namespace. Now, non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace solely to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided that their actions are not disruptive.
The Arbitration Committee has announced a call for Checkusers and Oversighters, stating that it will currently be accepting applications for CheckUser and/or Oversight permissions at any point in the year.
Merry Christmas, Kusma! Wishing you Season's Greetings and a Happy Winter Solstice! As the year comes to a close, I want to express my appreciation for your dedicated efforts on Wikipedia and extend heartfelt thanks for your assistance throughout the years. May the holiday season bring you and your loved ones abundant joy, good health, and prosperity.
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The 2024 competition has just begun and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. Even if you are a novice editor you should be able to advance to at least the second round, improving your editing skills as you go. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page ready for you to take part. Any questions on the scoring, rules or anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close on 31 January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. The judges for the WikiCup this year are: Cwmhiraeth (talk·contribs·email), Epicgenius (talk·contribs·email), and Frostly (talk·contribs·email). Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee rescinded the restrictions on the page name move discussions for the two Ireland pages that were enacted in June 2009.
First, I hope that you had a wonderful holiday season and wish you all the best in the coming year. Second, I need help, of course. I was searching for information about Ruth Neto's (sister of Angola's first president) education and as you can see from this google search, there is a 2019 dissertation which discusses her schooling. The problem is that I cannot access it and don't know if it is that "Mexico is blocked" thingy. I went to the site for the Universidade de Évora, which eventually led me to this site and by searching the google title "departamento de pedagogia e educação igreja metodista" resulted in this listing which shows that the name is "Igreja metodista: um laboratório de ensino e formação libertadora:das origens inglesas à experiência angolana e aos desafios contemporâneos". It says it is open access and gives multiple urls but I cannot access any of them. I also looked on Proquest and worldcat, without result and tried each of the urls in wayback. Any ideas how I might acquire this or figure out what it says about Ruth's education? SusunW (talk) 16:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Okay so woo hoo, I found it on Scribd, but even though I have a paid subscription I cannot download it? And the search doesn't work. I hate technology. SusunW (talk) 18:39, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi @SusunW, happy new year! I didn't have a lot of success either: I only get timeouts from hdl, which redirects to [3]. A curious source -- the MSc dissertation of a Methodist bishop, written at the age of 58, and 300 pages is quite long ... —Kusma (talk) 19:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
I appreciate you trying and now at least know it isn't a Mexico thing. Slow going reading through it, but there are some pertinent facts that clarify her early life stuff. African bios are hard! SusunW (talk) 19:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your comments at the Hö'elün FAC. As I mentioned there, I've recently rewritten Genghis Khan and taken it to GA status. I intend to submit it at FAC in the near future, and to facilitate that I've opened a peer review. Your comments would be most welcome, if you have the time. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you very much for reading the source on Louis Zhang Jiashu and pointing out it's Runcie, not Ramsey. We know that the romanisation of Chinese is hard, one can only imagine the sinicisation of English words into Chinese characters is even worse and very badly regulated ... Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 21:41, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
@TheLonelyPather, it was a pleasure. Always happy to find an application for my little bit of Chinese skills. On the topic of transliteration into Chinese, 伦西 appears not to be the only transliteration of Runcie; zh:坎特伯雷大主教列表 uses 朗西, but they might have just made that up... —Kusma (talk) 22:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.
Technical news
Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)
Arbitration
Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.
A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
Hello, Kusma! I saw that you promoted the articles about the Planta family to GA, and I remembered you had asked me about them in 2022. Congratulations on your accomplishments; it is wonderful to see more quality content from you. Best wishes, Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Unlimitedlead, thank you very much for the kind message! It is great to hear from you and to see you are back (let me know if you want me to look at your pope GA again). Too much of my (too little) wikitime these days is spent trying to keep DYK from collapsing, so I haven't done much content work of my own recently. But you are right, I should go back to the Plantas and get Joseph Planta (librarian) to GA next :) —Kusma (talk) 20:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
In appreciation
The DYK Barnstar
For your reliability in getting prep sets promoted to queue during this 12-hour-rotation period. I think that if we get up to five filled queues on the 8th or 9th we might be able to switch back to 24 hours. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 01:38, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Thank you, and thank you also for your massive prep building efforts! I think we have made quite some difference to the backlog already, so it should be fine to switch back in a few days, either because we dip below 60 or because we run out of preps/queues. Maybe I can finally get back to reviewing or even writing :) —Kusma (talk) 09:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
The 2024 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with 135 participants. This is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2017.
Our current leader is newcomer Generalissima (submissions), who has one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher) and 10 GAs and 12 DYKs mostly on New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:
As a reminder, competitors may submit work for the first round until 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February, and the second round starts 1 March. Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round; currently, competitors need at least 15 points to progress. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges (Cwmhiraeth (talk·contribs), Epicgenius (talk·contribs), and Frostly (talk·contribs)) are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Help? I am in a rabbit hole...
I am writing an article about Anne Shongwe (and all sorts of variations of Anne Muthoni Githuku-Shongwe). This said she wrote chapters in 2 books. I was able to access one of them here. The other is given as Kenya@50, but that produces no results at all. When I tried for "Kenya at 50, Anne Shongwe" I find nada in Books or worldcat, but a result for Anyango Odhiambo "KENYA AT 50: WHAT CAN ONE SAY" held by the Library of Congress. When you press that link, it goes to a table of content, which clearly shows her contribution, but to what?, published when?, where? isbn? I searched Anyango Odhiiambo and get the same LOC result. And while we're on the subject, I find a truckload of sources that say Shongwe received the Order of the Grand Warrior from Kenya, but for the life of me, I cannot find that in a Gazette. I swear I end up in so many rabbit holes. Can you dig me out? SusunW (talk) 20:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
@SusunW, I'm not surprised you're in a rabbit hole :) I am unfortunately travelling (for not entirely pleasant reasons) and can't do much right now. I came across this (interview with her, also mentions the OotGW). I can't find her in the Gazette either, very mysterious. I tried the Kenya National Library for your other book, didn't find it either. Maybe I can do more after Wednesday, maybe not. —Kusma (talk) 22:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Sorry about the not entirely pleasant reasons trip. Hope it works out okay. I won't be out of the hole by Wednesday, I am certain. Thanks for trying; Appreciate the source. I'll keep looking and let you know if I find anything so you don't waste time. SusunW (talk) 22:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
@SusunW, good morning from London City Airport wifi! I found your book at the LOC, [4]: "50 years since independence : where is Kenya? / editor-in-chief, Susan Wakhungu-Githuku. Nairobi, Kenya : Footprints Press, [2013]" The trick was to look at the URL and then search for the number 2013441529, which turned out to be the LCCN. —Kusma (talk) 06:04, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
You are amazing. Don't know how you figured out about the number, but I tend to think it was magic. Thank you so much. I'm still torn about including the Order of the Grand Warrior without finding the Gazette entry, but I probably will because there are so many sources that give it. Safe travels. SusunW (talk) 14:41, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
In trying to add the ISNI entry to Susan Wakhungu-Githuku's widkidata entry which I just created, I got this message: "Could not save due to an error. The save has failed. This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Inappropriate ISNI (P213) change". So I am informing an administrator and asking what the heck? SusunW (talk) 15:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! and yes, exactly. No clue who might be a Wikidata administrator. As it didn't say a Wikidata admin, I notified "an administrator" as instructed. I appreciate you. SusunW (talk) 15:48, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
The first round of the 2024 WikiCup ended at 23:59 (UTC) on 27 February. Everyone with at least 30 points moved on to Round 2, the highest number of points required to advance to the second round since 2014. Due to a six-way tie for the 64th-place spot, 67 contestants have qualified for Round 2.
The following scorers in Round 1 all scored more than 300 points:
Generalissima (submissions), who has 916 points mostly from one FA on John Littlejohn (preacher), 15 GAs, and 16 DYKs on a variety of topics including New Zealand coinage and Inuit figures, in addition to seven reviews
In this newsletter, the judges would like to pay a special tribute to Vami_IV (submissions), who unfortunately passed away this February. At the time of his death, he was the second-highest-scoring competitor. Outside the WikiCup, he had eight other featured articles, five A-class articles, eight other good articles, and two Four Awards. Vami also wrote an essay on completionism, a philosophy in which he deeply believed. If you can, please join us in honoring his memory by improving one of the articles on his to-do list.
Remember that any content promoted after 27 February but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
Anything other than your contributions is not publicly visible and will be deleted after a few months. Accounts cannot be deleted. —Kusma (talk) 17:37, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
Attribution and copyright reasons, mostly. We will delete all of your private data after you have stopped editing. —Kusma (talk) 18:32, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
RFA2024 update: no longer accepting new proposals in phase I
Hey there! This is to let you know that phase I of the 2024 requests for adminship (RfA) review is now no longer accepting new proposals. Lots of proposals remain open for discussion, and the current round of review looks to be on a good track towards making significant progress towards improving RfA's structure and environment. I'd like to give my heartfelt thanks to everyone who has given us their idea for change to make RfA better, and the same to everyone who has given the necessary feedback to improve those ideas. The following proposals remain open for discussion:
Proposals 3 and 3b, initiated by Barkeep49 and Usedtobecool, respectively, provide for trials of discussion-only periods at RfA. The first would add three extra discussion-only days to the beginning, while the second would convert the first two days to discussion-only.
Proposal 5, initiated by SilkTork, provides for a trial of RfAs without threaded discussion in the voting sections.
Proposals 6c and 6d, initiated by BilledMammal, provide for allowing users to be selected as provisional admins for a limited time through various concrete selection criteria and smaller-scale vetting.
Proposal 7, initiated by Lee Vilenski, provides for the "General discussion" section being broken up with section headings.
Proposal 9b, initiated by Reaper Eternal, provides for the requirement that allegations of policy violation be substantiated with appropriate links to where the alleged misconduct occured.
Proposals 12c, 21, and 21b, initiated by City of Silver, Ritchie333, and HouseBlaster, respectively, provide for reducing the discretionary zone, which currently extends from 65% to 75%. The first would reduce it 65%–70%, the second would reduce it to 50%–66%, and the third would reduce it to 60%–70%.
Proposal 13, initiated by Novem Lingaue, provides for periodic, privately balloted admin elections.
Proposal 14, initiated by Kusma, provides for the creation of some minimum suffrage requirements to cast a vote.
Proposals 16 and 16c, initiated by Thebiguglyalien and Soni, respectively, provide for community-based admin desysop procedures. 16 would desysop where consensus is established in favor at the administrators' noticeboard; 16c would allow a petition to force reconfirmation.
Proposal 16e, initiated by BilledMammal, would extend the recall procedures of 16 to bureaucrats.
Proposal 17, initiated by SchroCat, provides for "on-call" admins and 'crats to monitor RfAs for decorum.
Proposal 25, initiated by Femke, provides for the requirement that nominees be extended-confirmed in addition to their nominators.
Proposal 27, initiated by WereSpielChequers, provides for the creation of a training course for admin hopefuls, as well as periodic retraining to keep admins from drifting out of sync with community norms.
To read proposals that were closed as unsuccessful, please see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/2024 review/Phase I/Closed proposals. You are cordially invited once again to participate in the open discussions; when phase I ends, phase II will review the outcomes of trial proposals and refine the implementation details of other proposals. Another notification will be sent out when this phase begins, likely with the first successful close of a major proposal. Happy editing! theleekycauldron (talk • she/her), via:
The Core Contest—Wikipedia's most exciting contest—returns again this year from April 15 to May 31. The goal: to improve vital or other core articles, with a focus on those in the worst state of disrepair. Editing can be done individually, but in the past groups have also successfully competed. There is £300 of prize money divided among editors who provide the "best additive encyclopedic value". Signups are open now. Cheers from the judges, Femke, Casliber, Aza24. – Aza24 (talk)02:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
If you wish to start or stop receiving news about The Core Contest, please add or remove yourself from the delivery list.
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_cropped.jpg)
.jpg)
