User talk:Donald Trung/Archive 95

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Tech News: 2022-34

00:10, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing news 2022 #2

Read this in another languageSubscription list for this multilingual newsletter

Graph showing 90-minute response time without the new tool and 39-minute response time with the tool
The [subscribe] button shortens response times.

The new [subscribe] button notifies people when someone replies to their comments. It helps newcomers get answers to their questions. People reply sooner. You can read the report. The Editing team is turning this tool on for everyone. You will be able to turn it off in your preferences.

Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia translation of the week: 2022-35

Wikidata weekly summary #535

Tech News: 2022-35

23:03, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Tribhuvanadevi moved to draftspace

This is copied from: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Laska666&oldid=1107789007 - because the user whose talkpage it is is known for blanking it and I'm preserving it here to easily access it for the record.

An article you recently created, Tribhuvanadevi, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Mccapra (talk) 22:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mccapra:, are you sure that these articles aren't ready for mainspace? They look like typical stubs and their notability can honestly quite easily be established by the fact that they're Cham royalty about which plenty is written in both Vietnamese and French, the issue is that the creator tends to prioritise English-language sources (see also the AfD for the "Kingdom of Vietnam" article where they dismissed multiple reliable sources for being written in Vietnamese). I'm not sure if moving them to draftspace really benefits anyone as these articles are now "invisible" to anyone and it's highly unlikely that the people working in draftspace will actually improve them there. A simple Ecosia search will find a number of sources that mention her mostly in Vietnamese, though I assume that most sources are offline.
My main argument above being that stubs aren't supposed to be assumed to not be notable unless notability cannot be established. While I personally don't write stubs I commonly find stubs that have a lot of information about them that can be expanded, simply deleting stubs because of the fact that they're stubs seems counterproductive to me. --Donald Trung (talk) 09:25, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
@Donald Trung: hi the issue is primarily that they have a single source, unfortunately offline, so don’t meet our requirements. In addition the article creator has been blocked for creating hoax articles. If the draftified articles can show notability through additional referencing I’m happy to move them back to mainspace, but for the time being the suspicion is that they’re hoaxes. Mccapra (talk) 21:17, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
@Mccapra:, other than "Royal Vietnamese army" I don't think that user "Laska666" has ever created an actual hoax, most of their edits seem to revolve around POV-pushing, though this seems largely limited to "Kinh history" (the history of Vietnam outside of ethnic minority history). If you want to explore what kind of hoaxes they push I'd say seeing Đại Việt as a continuous state until 1802 (not 1804 for whatever reason) and including all names prior to the Nguyễn into this category and seeing it afterwards as the "Kingdom of Vietnam", they also spread the idea that all institutions of the Nguyễn were abolished in 1885... Alright, I can see now why they're accused of being a Hoaxer, but I haven't seen them do the same with the history of Champa, in fact they've been doing largely well in the last half year or so.
That aside, people aren't really able to expand the article and add additional sources of the article is in draftspace. At least if an article is nominated for deletion people will try to improve it and look for additional sources, when an article is draftified it gets ignored and then quietly deleted by a bot. So I'd say that nominating these articles for deletion might even be a better alternative because there will be at least some eyeballs on them by people willing to investigate and verify these articles. --Donald Trung (talk) 21:41, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
@Donald Trung: Well there’s nothing stopping you nominating it for deletion if you think that’s a better course of actions. Mccapra (talk) 22:14, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Mccapra, I'm not allowed to. First of all it's in draftspace which I'm not allowed to edit, second of all it wouldn't go through AfD (which I am allowed to edit) but MfD. So I can't do anything with it, there also isn't a "nominate for deletion" button here like there is at the Wikimedia Commons. -- — Donald Trung (talk) 22:18, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 August 2022

Wikipedia translation of the week: 2022-36

The Signpost: 31 August 2022

News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia
















Wikidata weekly summary #536

Tech News: 2022-36

23:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

This Month in Education: August 2022