Jump to content

User talk:Paper9oll/Archive 18

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

ℹ️ This is archived talk page

If you wish to contact me, please click here to start a new discussion thread.

Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18



Tech News: 2024-40

MediaWiki message delivery 22:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

‎Reliable source discussion (2)

Thanks for responding on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Korea/Reliable sources. I'll be talking about some prominent sources over there next few weeks, and I'll appreciate if you drop by occasionally. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 07:23, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – October 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2024).

Administrator changes

added
removed

CheckUser changes

readded
removed

Guideline and policy news

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Review and publish for See That?

Hi @Paper9oll, can I trouble you to review (and make any edits if necessary) for Draft:See That?, and then help to publish it to mainspace once it's alright? Thank you! Chyx1095 (🗣️📜) 16:05, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

@Chyx1095  Done Paper9oll (🔔📝) 17:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-41

MediaWiki message delivery 23:39, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-42

MediaWiki message delivery 21:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi! There is a draft for "Love, Money, Fame" that is now ready to move to the mainspace as it's starting to land on some international music charts. There is a redirect in the main space currently, are you able to help review the draft and move it over to the mainspace? Thank you! orangesclub 🍊 21:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

@Orangesclub  Done Paper9oll (🔔📝) 08:02, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 October 2024

Regarding use of Template:Duration in length

Hi @Paper9oll, I don't quite understand what it means in the linked documentation for the use of the duration template "if additional lengths are entered". Like what examples or scenarios would that be used for a song? And just curious, why would it only be used "for the second and subsequent lengths"?

My bad, I thought the template was to be used after seeing a few older singles that used the template. I'll clean those up when I can. Thank you in advance! Chyx1095 (🗣️📜) 13:29, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@Chyx1095 Meaning if the song was released initially in multiple different lengths however in the articles that you changed, those song are only released in a single length. {{Duration}} are also not needed because by default, the |length= parameter is already coded in the source code to use that template hence adding the template would result in rendered code being |length={{Duration|{{Duration|1:23}}}} instead which produces syntax error. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 13:36, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-43

MediaWiki message delivery 20:49, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in a research

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Editing

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


User Paper9oll, I am kindly asking you the reason why you aren’t letting anyone change any articles related to the drama ‘The Judge from Hell’, and the leads ‘Park Shin-Hye’ & ‘Kim Jae-Young’. Please give everyone the freedom to change what they want, you’re stealing out rights at this point which is too offensive. 79.117.245.131 (talk) 18:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Ssch.cb or 79.117.245.131 or 2A0C:5A86:F404:B100:ACF9:380F:245:D6D8 or 2A0C:5A86:F404:B100:E462:7E0B:5497:B116 I would recommended that you go and read up on English Wikipedia policies and guidelines, in particularly on WP:COPYVIO, WP:DISRUPTIVE EDITING, WP:MOS, and WP:NPOV. In addition, using of multiple accounts is not allowed per WP:SOCK and is a blockable offense. As per the various warnings on your talk pages, you will blocked for continuing to edit disruptively on WP:BLP articles hence I would suggest that you stop any of such actions effectively. Ignoring this message and all of the warnings messages posted on all of your accounts (regardless of registered and/or IPs) will be considered as WP:IDHT which is a form of WP:DISRUPTIVE EDITING. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 18:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
I am not sure what you mean by saying ‘multiple accounts’ because i only have one and only used one to edit the articles about the leads of ‘The Judge from Hell’. I cannot bother myself to learn a lot about Wikipedia’s policy, because I already know I did nothing wrong. You can definitely block my account, feel free to do so, but I do know that I did nothing wrong. Changing the picture of an actor and actress, and also changing or adding some words; how is such a small editing, which isn’t a ‘disruptive editing’, considered a form of disruption? As far as I know, there are many pictures of Kim Jae-Young and Park Shin-Hye, so how come I can’t change the pictures? Are you planning on not changing those pics anymore? Will you keep stopping whoever changes them? Isn’t that literally considered stealing rights? I’d like you to tell me; be honest, and change my mind instead of putting policy links on here. Respectfully, thank you. Hope you understand what I’m trying to say. 2A0C:5A86:F404:B100:B5DD:29D:90EC:8AA5 (talk) 13:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
@2A0C:5A86:F404:B100:B5DD:29D:90EC:8AA5 Clearly not "I only have one and only used one to edit" when it is evidenced enough that you (Ssch.cb) has been editing while logged out in order to mislead and avoiding scrutiny as your account has received five warnings to date, try nice with that lie btw as this doesn't work against me whom has been editing for 10 years and accumulated over 100K of editing experience to figured out a WP:DUCK. If you can't "bother [yourself] to learn a lot about Wikipedia's policy" then you're clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia. The rest of your reply including but not limited to "how come I can't change the pictures", clearly and evidently shown that you didn't "bother [yourself] to [read or] learn ... about Wikipedia's policy" including the ones that I had clearly listed out above which already answered your queries hence anything else is simply exhibiting WP:IDHT and/or an excuse. Regardless, you had been told twice on your unacceptable WP:DISRUPTIVE EDITING behaviour hence should you continue to editing disruptively, including but not limited to Kim Jae-young (actor), Park Shin-hye, and The Judge from Hell, it will be evidenced that you're exhibiting WP:IDHT and WP:DISRUPTSIGNS in turn means that you're clearly not being here to build an encyclopedia which falls under a valid blocking policy. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 13:43, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Positions

Do have a happen to have a link handy to where a past discussion of including "positions" in the "Members" section of groups occurred? I was pretty sure it was decided to avoid including positions in that section but I'm not sure when or where RachelTensions (talk) 00:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

@RachelTensions It should be at WT:KO archives. As per consensus, inclusion is permitted if it's verifiable. However, inclusion also shouldn't includes main/lead/sub, maknae, visual, face, etc. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 02:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-44

MediaWiki message delivery 20:53, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Nayeon

"Upright is based on your Wikipedia's settings that you have set"

Can you clarify? Template:Infobox person says the parameter "scales the image thumbnail from its default size by the given factor" - is there a reason for scaling up Nayeon's infobox picture up 15% over the template's default? RachelTensions (talk) 07:12, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@RachelTensions Hi, the upright value would be big or small depending on the value that you set in your Wikipedia's settings. Before the introduction of |image_upright=, the predecessor is |image_size= in which the observed practice across various article is to have the value at 250px, provided the image is in portrait. Back to the value in |image_upright=, 1.15 is the equivalent of 250px by taking 250/220 and round up to the nearest half number. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 07:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
I thought infobox image size would've been standardized at the template level but if that's what we're doing then great.
Anyway, this made me laugh:
"In particular, Paper9oll You left Nayeon's malicious picture of teeth for more than half a year"
apparently that editor isn't a fan of the veneers RachelTensions (talk) 07:24, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
@RachelTensions Oh, so that's what they're saying ... I don't even see it. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 07:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
I think they're referring to this image which was her long-standing infobox picture up until a few days ago RachelTensions (talk) 07:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
@RachelTensions You think if we should restore that long-standing infobox picture instead? I have no preferences on which as both quality are equal and not a step back. I can see that another editor that step in to handle the vandalism has removed the "controversial" (is it?) image due to what is seemingly due to veneers which isn't even obvious to tell apart from. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 07:34, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
@RachelTensions Nvrmind I see that you have BOLD ahead to restore the long-standing infobox picture already. I have proceeded to revert that vandal editor with their ridiculous claim which was already communicated to them at their talk page on why their upload is unacceptable but sadly they refused to WP:LISTEN nor read through the WP:Image use policy hence their absurd editing summary blaming this and that. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 07:39, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
tbh it's a better picture anyway, I'm so tired of seeing perfectly good photos being replaced with crunchy potato quality screenshots or AI-upscaled images that barely even look human anymore just because they're "newer" RachelTensions (talk) 07:39, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
@RachelTensions Yup, never been a fan of those AI-enhanced images Paper9oll (🔔📝) 07:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
On that subject have you seen the absolute state of Jeongyeon's photo? It's so AI'd it looks like a painting.
The only situation where an AI'd photo is marginally acceptable to use, IMO, is when there are no alternatives available, such as what Riize was stuck with for a long time because there were no other free photos available to show all 7 members in the infobox... and even that's debatable. It's almost better to have a blurry, bad photo versus an AI'd version of the same photo that doesn't even look like them anymore. RachelTensions (talk) 10:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
@RachelTensions Ya, this is definitely AI-enhanced and if you look at the File history, the uploader magically "improved resolution" hence I think we can just proceed to replace with this 2024 image which better defined her current image or the previous 2023 long-standing image which I believed has AI-enhancement performed to it as the uploader has history of doing so and been warned by me various times already. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 10:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the 2023 image, if it's been AI'd it was very subtle (a lot more subtle than that uploader's usual history).
For what it's worth the 2024 image is AI'd too (it's captured from 25 seconds into the source video, which is nowhere near as clear) but I guess if you can't tell it doesn't really matter RachelTensions (talk) 10:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
@RachelTensions Agreed, if both are AI-enhanced. IMO, I would go for the 2024 image as it's less obvious. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 11:20, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Hey, if you're interested, can you have a look at Draft:Seunghan and make adjustments as you see fit? I know it's probably got POV issues and I've been debating on how the sections should be structured. Thanks! RachelTensions (talk) 02:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

@RachelTensions I look through the draft, written well enough. Which portion that you felt has POV issues or require restructuring? As for suitability in mainspace, subject meet WP:GNG only with WP:SIGCOV mainly due to WP:RECENTISM. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 04:47, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
I was worried about POV issues regarding reactions within South Korea versus internationally. Coverage from South Korean sources is lacking nuance, they mostly stick to the official SM Entertainment line and don't mention much regarding fan reaction, protests, etc. so I worry it has a bit of a slant towards an international POV.
Regarding structure I was going back and forth on whether to structure the hiatus + withdrawal in one section, or include the hiatus under the Riize section (as it is now). RachelTensions (talk) 04:58, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
IMO the draft already has a balanced WP:WEIGHT covering both side of the spectrum hence I don't see POV issues in terms of content. As for sourcing, there might be censorship with South Korean news coverage but that's of course just assumption however given that the citations used to sourced the contents are from reputable news media, IMO it wouldn't an issue. IMO, the current structuring is good enough since the preceding section is talking about his hiatus and combining both together would make the section very long. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 05:36, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – November 2024

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2024).

Administrator changes

readded
removed

CheckUser changes

removed Maxim

Oversighter changes

removed Maxim

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • Mass deletions done with the Nuke tool now have the 'Nuke' tag. This change will make reviewing and analyzing deletions performed with the tool easier. T366068

Arbitration

Miscellaneous


Twelve articles

Could you take a look at a discussion in my talk page and give feedback? 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 13:59, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

@Windborne Rider  Done redirected Twelve (2025 TV series) to Twelve (TV series) based on the latter being created in redirect form and also created in article form first. Should you wish to "merge" aka copy any missing content, please do so using WP:COPYWITHIN attribution method instead as the history is too different for page merging hence I didn't tagged it for that route. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 14:41, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-45

MediaWiki message delivery 20:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 November 2024

Hanja names in infobox

Hey, I wanted to reach out regarding the inclusion of Hanja in the infoboxes of BLPs in Korea-related articles. Specifically, I’m a bit unsure about whether we should consider removing unsourced Hanja from these articles. I wanted to reach out to you as you seem to have more experience in this area. RDWolfgang (talk) 15:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi RDWolfgang, it's unclear what clarification that you needed from my personal thoughts since MOS:HANJA is already pretty clear, quote "In contemporary North and South Korea, Hanja is rarely used ... For concepts mostly significant after the division [of Korea in 1945] ... Hanja tends to be less important after that time". In fact, the values found in hanja= on the majority of Korea-related BLP article are basically Chinese characters which MOS:HANJAHANZI forbids against, and if sourced are using Chinese-language (regardless of Traditional Chinese or Simplified Chinese) sources which basically still going against MOS:HANJAHANZI even though it's probably to ensure it meets WP:VERIFY however it's literally VERIFYing Chinese characters. Back to your question on removal, IMO I would do so on the basis that it's hard to VERIFY the authenticity and also not much significancy as stated by HANJA. As for mass removal, you may want to discuss at WT:KO#Unsourced hanja epidemic even though on the surface, there seem to be consensus towards such direction. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 16:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
I didn't realize that this had already been discussed at WT:KO#Unsourced hanja epidemic. I just wanted to reach out to clear up my confusion after your reply on Hyunjin's talk page (I did not notice that you've already mention it there). I also wanted to make sure I fully understand before adding any further Hanja to this or any other articles, as the majority of articles have uncited Hanja, which made me more confused. RDWolfgang (talk) 16:49, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
@RDWolfgang I would say not to add any further Hanja to any articles where the BLP subject are born in 1945 and onwards as I don't see what's the value, it would actually adds to the article. As for "majority of articles have uncited Hanja" is why that discussion was started as clueless editors have currently and/or previously been adding so-called Hanja characters i.e. Chinese characters and/or doing vague translation word-by-word by matching each Hangul word to Hanja word using {{linktext}} despite being clueless that each Hangul word may have various Hanja counterpart hence I don't expect it to be accurate to even being with. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 17:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Okay, understood. Thank ya! RDWolfgang (talk) 17:13, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Tech News: 2024-46

MediaWiki message delivery 00:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Fixed

[38]

Thanks for this fix, I just adjusted my code to fix this issue going forward. seefooddiet (talk) 07:23, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

@Seefooddiet Noted, thanks! Paper9oll (🔔📝) 07:25, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Revert at Up (Aespa song)

Hi! Can I ask why you reverted my edits at the "Up" article? I've looked through WP:CHARTMATH and it's pretty clear that the article doesn't need to list every single component chart the song appeared on, nor does it make sense to write out every single national chart the song appeared on when there's a table below. At this point the "commercial performance" section is just rehashing the charts section with less notable information. orangesclub 🍊 03:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Consistency. And also, I don't see why CHARTMATH applies here nor writing in prose form, in addition to table form (which is mandatory), being unnecessary. Paper9oll (🔔📝) 05:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)