Talk:Myanmar Photo Archive

Hatnote about possible original research
Hello, on Feb 15, you added a hatnote indicating possible original research to the section MPA archive. I don't understand why, as the text only summarizes the information given on the sourced page of the archive's webpage. This is a primary source, but I am not aware that summarizing a primary source is tantamount to original research. - Further, I have just added source no. 15, that contains a section that IMHO corroborates the text in the paragraph you have flagged: "MPA has an excellent website with a fascinating, albeit slightly random assortment of several hundred digitized images, leaving those not yet digitized in the thousands. The website is open and free to use, and archive accessible to search online. It offers a wonderful glimpse into life in Myanmar between the 1940s and 1990s – the post-war period in Burma, a brief democratic period, and the socialist era, with several military coups in between. The archive is divided into categories such as Buddhism, history, cinema, fashion, female portraits, male portraits, and photo album (personal albums of photographers or families)." - I appreciate your comments about keeping the article up to WP standards and look forward to solving these doubts together. Munfarid1 (talk) 09:19, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, since you already know the article about Lukas Birk, you might be able to help with this question: On Feb 15, AirshipJungleman29 added a hatnote indicating possible original research to the section MPA archive. I have not found any guidance on Wikipedia help pages, how to summarize a webpage, and have not received an answer so far by AirshipJungleman29. - Perhaps you could share your view, if this paragraph contains any sentences of original research, and if so, how I should rewrite it. - The article has just been reviewed for DYK, and I would like to know, what to do, before being able to delete this hatnote. - Thanks, Munfarid1 (talk) 17:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi @Munfarid1, thanks for your note. AirshipJungleman can best answer that question. But just guessing, perhaps it is because that paragraph is not sourced to an independent reliable source? The first source is to the website for the MPA archive itself, and the second source is a blog. An independent reliable source might be better if one can be found that backs up the claims in that subsection. Netherzone (talk) 17:31, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your quick and useful explanation. Unfortunately, AirshipJugleman has not sent any guidance on this, and up to now, I have not found any other independent reliable source for the MPA webpage. - I will wait for anyone who can tell me what to do in this situation. Maybe the user who will prepare the DYK nomination for publishing on the main page will send me some guidance. Cheers, Munfarid1 (talk) 18:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It will make an excellent DYK. Looking forward to seeing it on the main page. Netherzone (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi, I see you have added an independent source, so that tag can be removed. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you, and looking forward to seeing it on DYK soon. - I think people in Myanmar involved or interested in this project deserve some int'l exposure, especially given the deplorable situation of that country. Munfarid1 (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That said, looking at the article again, there are significant issues. There is a huge amount of quoting, going far beyond MOS:QUOTE and WP:NFCCEG, especially in the "History and activities" and "Critical reception" sections. Quite a lot of this is promotion-leaning. See for example the lengthy self-descriptions of the books in the "Photo-books" section; only the last paragraph is cited to a reliable source, so the rest is likely WP:UNDUE and should be cut. There are also issues with close paraphrasing—take the section previously marked with the original research tag:


 * This is textbook WP:CLOP, and needs immediate attention . I will tag the article accordingly. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello, I have just changed the CLOP with the following text. I would appreciate your critical view, if this resolves the isssue and allows me to delete the CLOP tag. "The MPA website is freely accessible with parts of the much larger physical archive allowing online access to single photographs. This provides views of life in the country from the 1940s up to the 1990s. The website can be searched for categories, including Buddhism, the country's modern history, fashion and photo albums of photographers or their clients. Further, the website presents featured articles by Myanmar authors about individual local photographers, old movie posters, hand-painted billboards and musical instruments." Thanks, Munfarid1 (talk) 18:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Munfarid1, this part of the section sounds promotional/advertorial to me: The website can be searched for categories, including Buddhism, the country's modern history, fashion and photo albums of photographers or their clients. Further, the website presents featured articles by Myanmar authors about individual local photographers, old movie posters, hand-painted billboards and musical instruments. Why not just state: "The website is fully searchable for a variety of topics about Myanmar culture, both historical and contemporary"? Netherzone (talk) 22:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for your advice, and even more so for your suggested wording. I have just changed it accordingly. Best, Munfarid1 (talk) 23:47, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, I have deleted or shortened several quotes just now. The few remaining ones seem to me indispensable to convey the critical appreciation MPA has found. - In paraphrasing such quotes, the style and vocabulary used on many WP articles does not really express such critical reception in its original meaning. And IMHO, any positive reception could be judged as "promotion-leaning", while this is not about a commercial product. I could, for example, paraphrase this final quote: "In fact, MPA’s mission changed the way photography was valued, collected, and exhibited in Myanmar, and it will be so for years to come." by saying "MPA was credited for its innovative collection, exhibitions and social value, setting an example for the future." - But this would not express the message of the original. - I guess, this is the reason why we are allowed to use quotes. - As before, thanks again for your guidance and hopefully green light to delete the tag. Munfarid1 (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Following your criticism, I have also considerably shortened the descriptions of the photo-books to avoid what you saw as undue weight. Thinking about readers' interest in these books, I still think that more information than just a short description of their subject-matter is welcome. As it is now, readers will have to open six different primary sources to learn about the specific content of these books, using extra time and download capacity. I assume that many readers are genuinely interested in the photographic history of Myanmar, and these books have covered such information for the first time. - Many other WP articles are replete with detail, and it usually depends on the reader's personal judgement, if this is due or undue. - So I don't really understand why we should not include one or two sentences about each book. But if it helps to remove the hatnotes for the upcoming mention on DYK, I certainly won't insist on this. Munfarid1 (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That is the problem: you still think. You should not be thinking—it should be clearly apparent from reliable sources what is welcome and what is not. It is central Wikipedia policy that "information should not be included in this encyclopedia solely because it is true or useful. A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject." Sure, you could include the page count, the size, and the price in the article, saving readers the "extra time and download capacity" in opening six different primary sources—but that is not what Wikipedia is for.
 * on the contrary, it would express the meaning of the original so closely that it would be considered close paraphrasing. they also seem to be WP:OQ, and so I will re-add the tag. &#126;~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Munfarid1, question regarding this section heading: "Publications edited by Lukas Birk for Myanmar Photo Archive" -- shouldn't it just be called "Publications"? Is Birk the sole editor for all publications, if so it seems promotional (name-dropping). If there are other editors for the publications, it seems UNDUE to just have his listed. Netherzone (talk) 17:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks again for your diligent reading and helpful remark. I have just shortened the caption to "Publications". Munfarid1 (talk) 19:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

More cleaning up and better hooks
Hello, Drmies, since meanwhile you have contributed by improving several issues after your comments on the nomination page, and I have also changed the date formats as you advised, I don't know, which issues might still stand in the way for this DYK nomination to be published. (I must confess that sometimes, it is difficult to spot necessary improvements in a text I have read over and over again, and this is why comments from other users are so useful.) - Thanks to all of your and the other users' comments on this Talk page, I have improved my understanding about how to avoid promotional language and close paraphrasing. Also, I did not even know there is a special template for news, as I usually don't edit in source mode. There's one question though: You deleted the entire short paragraph about the MPA webpage, saying the primary source for this is not acceptable for DYK. - Are there such special rules regarding primary sources for DYK? Because from my understanding, primary sources are acceptable to a limited degree in comparison with secondary or even tertiary sources. - Anyway, the MPA webpage is in the External links, only readers will not know about its contents, especially the short features by Myanmar authors that I considered notable and in accordance with WP rules. If the article should still need any specific changes, please let me know, where. - Finally, I have just added new hooks ALT3 and ALT4 and hope one of these will catch the readers' attention. Thanks, Munfarid1 (talk) 12:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)


 * I think that section in an organization’s website is not of encyclopedic value if it’s sourced only to the organization’s website. Drmies (talk) 17:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Suggestion re: promotional tone
, The lead paragraph will read less promotionally if it's toned-down a bit. Here is a suggestion for a revised lead:

Myanmar Photo Archive (MPA) is both a physical archive of photographs taken between 1890 and 1995 in Myanmar and the country's former period of British Burma, and a public awareness project of the country's visual culture. The MPA presents exhibitions, online resources, public events, and publishes books on the history of photography in Myanmar and former Burma. The collection holds more than 30,000 images and other related materials, and is the largest archive for Myanmar's photographic history.

I don't want to step on your toes since you have spent a lot of time on this article, but if you trust me to do some tone clean up in the body of the article, I'm happy to help out. Netherzone (talk) 18:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks again, : I have just replaced the lead with your suggested wording, and yes, I would appreciate it very much, if you would do some tone clean up in the body of the article, too. As I said before, I sometimes find it difficult to spot necessary improvements in a text I have read over and over again, and this is why comments from other users are so useful. - After all, this is one of the basic ideas of WP: To improve articles through collaboration. You already have spent quite some time on the article and certainly understand the subject well enough, so please go ahead. Our common aim is the quality of the article and getting it published on DYK soon. Best, Munfarid1 (talk) 21:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Munfarid1, what year did Birk actually found the archive. This will help me to improve the history section. Netherzone (talk) 23:21, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Netherzone, in 2013. I just added this date and a link to the second sentence in the History paragraph: "The same year, he founded the first public photographic archive focusing on images taken by local photographic professionals and amateurs, including Sino-Burmese professionals, the Myanmar Photo Archive (MPA)." - Of course, you can change this, if you want to. Munfarid1 (talk) 12:52, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Another idea: As far as I understand the article on vernacular photography, the MPA is a clear example of this type of photography. - Do you think, we can include this label without a source calling it like this? If not, we can always add it to /See also/. Munfarid1 (talk) 13:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi @Munfarid1, it would seem that a lot of the images in the would fall into the category of vernacular photography, altho some were studio shots taken by professionals, as well, so there is a range. You might want to ask the editor  who writes extensively on photography and photographic subjects (including several photo archives); I bet they will know for certain. Netherzone (talk) 14:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, given your impressive experience with articles about all kinds of photography, I would like to draw your attention to the Myanmar Photo Archive, composed of both studio and amateur photographers in Myanmar. Further, I want to ask you, if we can call this archive without a specific source an "example of vernacular photography"? Thanks, Munfarid1 (talk) 14:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Feedback from New Page Review process
I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: I've finished cleaning up the tone and concision of the article and have marked it as reviewed. Also some copy editing was done to make the article more about the archive itself rather than the founder (who has their own WP-linked article for readers to learn more about him if interested. If another reviewer disagrees with this decision (or the review is premature in relation to the DYK process) they can mark as unreviewed. Nice collaboration on this article on an important archive.

Netherzone (talk) 13:43, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Format: Photo-books sub-section and Publications section could be combined into one
@Munfarid1, I think it makes sense to move the Photo-books section down into the Publications section. Having two sections on books/publications is redundant. I suggest keeping the Publications section where it is, and moving the content from the Photo-books section into Publications as an introductory text before the list of books with their ISBNs. I'm going to go ahead and make that format change, and if you disagree with it please undo, or comment here if you would like a longer discussion. Netherzone (talk) 18:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Critical reception section
@Munfarid1, after re-reading the Critical reception section last night and again this morning, I think it needs to be cleaned up for tone. I agree with @AirshipJungleman29 that it leans promotional. Almost as though it is trying to influence our reader's opinion of the archive. I also think it should be about half the length. Do you mind if I do some work on it to make it less promotional? Netherzone (talk) 19:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Netherzone, no, I don't mind at all. You have more experience about this, and I am happy for any of your sound changes. - I guess you know WP:CRS, which has given me some great ideas to follow for my further articles. Munfarid1 (talk) 19:16, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, I've made some changes to modify the promotional tone. Editors watching the article are asked to look over this section, to see if the problems are taken care of, and if not, your feedback is appreciated. @Munfarid, is there any negative criticism that has been published, if so, it would be important to add that perspective as well. Netherzone (talk) 15:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Netherzone Thanks again for your work, - I just added two missing words for grammatical correctness and some Italics for names of news media. - Other than this review in a local entertainment guide, I could not find any other review, not through a search engine, Google scholar or books. Also, added Further reading with two scholarly publications mentioning MPA and some archived URL for existing sources. Munfarid1 (talk) 16:57, 9 March 2024 (UTC)