User talk:Lachy70/Archive 1

Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Áo dài into Vietnamese clothing. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g.,. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please provide attribution for this duplication if it has not already been supplied by another editor, and if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, you should provide attribution for that also. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 23:55, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Vietnamese poetry
Hi, Lachy70! Thanks for your recent contributions to Vietnamese poetry. I'd like to encourage you, if you have the interest and tenacity, to continue working on this article. As you noted, it still has issues. I would go further and say that the article today is really awful (and I say this as its second-biggest contributor). The article is based on a somewhat rough English translation of a Vietnamese Wikipedia article. Approximately the first third has been completely rewritten (mostly by me). But I ran out of sources and energy about the same time. The bottom 2/3 still needs a complete overhaul. Probably about half should be deleted and the rest aggressively rewritten: It's a big job, and one that should probably be taken in small bites. But thank you for considering the challenge. Of course, let me know if I can be of any help. Cheers. Phil wink (talk) 18:10, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The text is often unclear -- because of the sometimes shaky English, but also because the original content described Poetry to a Vietnamese audience, not Vietnamese poetry to an Anglophone audience. We require different emphases and different kinds of explanations.
 * The flood of untranslated Vietnamese verse is unacceptable. Only the most necessary examples should be kept, and every example kept should be accompanied by an English translation... if demonstrating content, then translated as literally as possible; if demonstrating form then I believe we should supply Formal equivalent verse paraphrases, which I've supplied before, and I'm happy to help with, if you're interested.


 * Hello @Phil wink, sorry for the late reply, I do intend on working on improving Vietnamese poetry, especially the section on Ca dao. Although I am not familiar with poetry terms, I am currently reading a book on Ca dao poems and hopefully soon I will be able to improve the section on Ca dao. I have already added a few examples with English translations, but I am struggling with demonstrating the form in the verses.
 * But I appreciate the help. Cheers. Lachy70 (talk) 03:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm very pleased you're pursuing this. The "rule" about form is my rule, not Wikipedia's, so please don't let it slow you down. I'm happy to come in later and work on the forms if appropriate (and if I can understand the forms well enough myself). I'll take a look at the ones you've already provided, and see if there's anything I can do to formalize them. Cheers. Phil wink (talk) 15:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)


 * As you'll see, I've very quickly looked at the translations -- for now, just adjusting their formatting. It seems to me that the main value of these translations is their content, less so their form. So I think literal, non-formal translations are fine here. I may nevertheless play around with one of two of them to see if we can get a suggestion of the original structure, without damaging the meaning. If so, I will of course rely on you to judge whether the paraphrase is literal enough to be used. Something like that 4-syllable line is almost hopeless from the start: English can never be as concise as Vietnamese, so a hard-core formal duplication (at best) would probably sound like Tarzan, which (I presume) would be an unfair representation of the Vietnamese. Cheers. Phil wink (talk) 17:35, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Ca-dao
Hello again. I just remembered that, back in the day, I acquired a book about Ca-dao. It's in English (my only language), but written by a native Vietnamese, and scholarly not popular, so I assume reasonably sound. Ca-dao: Vietnamese Popular Songs by Võ Phan Thanh Giao-Trinh (Brussels: Thanh-Long, Etudes Orientales #5, 1975). If you don't have this, and think it may be useful to you, hit me up at Email this user, now under Tools. Cheers. Phil wink (talk) 15:48, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Mechanics and Crafts of the People of Annam has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Mechanics and Crafts of the People of Annam. Thanks!  ❯❯❯  Chunky aka Al Kashmiri   (✍️) 03:22, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mechanics and Crafts of the People of Annam has been accepted
 Mechanics and Crafts of the People of Annam, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Mechanics_and_Crafts_of_the_People_of_Annam help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Nyanardsan (talk) 09:22, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

"Vietnam is not East Asian"
I don't know who else to consult, I saw you revert some of their POV edits in 2022 but I'm not sure who else actually cares about this. I noticed that a lot of articles about the Sinosphere seem to exclude Vietnam but I didn't know why this was or why information of Vietnam always seemed to be missing from these articles. I thought that this was the co-ordinated effort of lots of Sinophobic / Missinitic (however you call "anti-Chinese") Vietnamese nationalists but looking over the editing history of some of these articles I can see that it's often a single person that is to blame:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tibetan_calligraphy&diff=prev&oldid=886213766
 * At "Tibetan calligraphy" they removed specific mentions to China, Japan, and Korea and replaced it with "other East Asian calligraphic traditions" removing Tibet from being its own thing and placing it into the "East Asian" sphere, basically making it about geography rather than culture.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ink_brush&diff=prev&oldid=886213453
 * As early as 2019 they removed "CJKV" with "CJK" and removed references to Vietnam from articles.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nine-tailed_fox&diff=prev&oldid=886214492
 * Vietnam here was removed because it came from a college freshman, but the motivation doesn't seem to be that it's poorly sourced (as a better source was simply needed), only that it mentioned Vietnam (as their other edits will show).


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chinese_culture&diff=prev&oldid=886218574
 * Here they removed any mentions of Vietnam from the article and replaced it with "East Asian" largely to imply that Chinese culture never influenced Vietnam, also notice the random removal of Vietnamese terms.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Korean_studies&diff=prev&oldid=887318951
 * Not directly related to Vietnam, but they removed references to broader Asian culture as "redundant".


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_East_Asia&diff=prev&oldid=893990762
 * Apparently even "some scholars" believing Vietnam to be a part of the East Asian cultural sphere is offensive. From 29 September 2019 their editing stops but is resumed on 1 September 2022 almost immediately pushing the same POV.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CJK_characters&diff=prev&oldid=1127481673


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Horizontal_and_vertical_writing_in_East_Asian_scripts&diff=prev&oldid=1127482056


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=East_Asian_hip-and-gable_roof&diff=prev&oldid=1127482533
 * This type of roof design is literally omnipresent in Vietnam, yet Chinese influence was apparently not greater than in India or Sri Lanka...


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Seal_(East_Asia)&diff=prev&oldid=1127482952


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sino-Xenic_pronunciations&diff=prev&oldid=1127483211


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_East_Asia&diff=prev&oldid=1127483801
 * Also, feel free to remove reliable and scholarly sources whenever it doesn't fit your narrative...


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Calligraphy&diff=prev&oldid=1127485329


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Four_Treasures_of_the_Study&diff=prev&oldid=1127485078
 * Removing sourced content and the source itself and then writing "", thankfully this was reverted, but a lot of similar vandalism done by them isn't.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ink_brush&diff=prev&oldid=1127485258


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ink_brush&diff=prev&oldid=1127485291


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hanging_scroll&diff=prev&oldid=1127485916

At this point it becomes clear to me that they envision a geographical East Asian cultural sphere from which Vietnam must be excluded.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_East_Asia&diff=prev&oldid=1151415604
 * But this also seems to be a broader push by them to remove any references to anything they perceive as "Southeast Asian" to be removed from "East Asian" articles.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/DelusionalThomaz515610&target=DelusionalThomaz515610&dir=prev&offset=20230423215241
 * April 2023 also saw them sweep through several articles to remove any references to Vietnam and the Vietnamese language.

Whatever their motivations for doing so, this is clearly pushing a POV, a POV which very much tries to erase Vietnam from the Sinosphere purely because it is not geographically in "East Asia". I am not sure how active you are with these articles, but it seems like this person went out of their way to remove content about Vietnam even when the article wasn't explicitly about East Asia. This isn't unique to the English-language Wikipedia either, I often see this at the Mandarin-language Wikipedia too, but I didn't realise that this was all basically done by one person here. --Donald Trung (talk) 14:51, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree, his reasoning for removal of content do not justify his actions. He is clearly pushing a POV. Most of his removals claim that Vietnamese is irreverent to Sinosphere even though many sources have stated that Vietnam has tremendous Chinese cultural influence.
 * I am not particular active on some of these articles, but I did try to revert most of his changes when applicable. Lachy70 (talk) 06:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Their argument is that historical Chinese influence in Vietnam is "irrelevant" because of geography, but they themselves define this geography which is clearly vandalism, unfortunately I am not allowed to report vandalism so I often see vandals on my watchlist that I can't do anything about. Anyhow, I saw the amazing articles you wrote about those books about Vietnamese culture, I am looking forward to see more of your creations in the future. -- — Donald Trung (talk) 08:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Brushtalk
Just wanted to say great work on Brushtalk. Really admire your ability to understand and eloquently explain such a technical historical topic toobigtokale (talk) 23:38, 19 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Lachy70 (talk) 14:12, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Request
Hey, thank you for your insight on chữ Nôm. I've spent the past few days reworking the Chinese characters article, it would be really great if you could take a quick look at the Vietnamese-related sections and make sure I didn't introduce any errors while copyediting? Remsense (talk) 17:16, 1 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Remsense Sure, I will go check it out soon. Lachy70 (talk) 21:13, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

October 2023
Hello, I'm Nagol0929. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Non-Sinoxenic pronunciations, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Nagol0929 (talk) 00:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Nagol0929 Ok, I will remove the rest too. Lachy70 (talk) 00:33, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Nagol0929 Would the content in the table count as "general common knowledge"? Because these words are used in Vietnamese (everyone should be able to understand them) according to this Wikipedia:When to cite. Lachy70 (talk) 00:45, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lachy70 Yes I would believe the words in the table would count as general common knowledge Nagol0929 (talk) 11:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Nagol0929 Then that would mean that the edits that you reverted were not needed due to Wikipedia:When to cite, meaning that the table did not need a source. Is it okay if I revert your edits? Lachy70 (talk) 22:51, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Lachy70 Yea I must’ve made a mistake sorry about that feel free to revert. Nagol0929 (talk) 11:42, 12 October 2023 (UTC)