User talk:Sanmosa/Archive 01

Welcome!
Welcome!

Hello, Sanmosa, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you are fairly new! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I also see that some of your recent edits show an interest in the use of images and/or photos on Wikipedia.

Did you know that ...
 * ...Wikipedia has a very stringent image use policy?
 * ...most images from Flickr, online news websites, and other web sources are copyrighted?
 * ...Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously?
 * ...freely-licensed images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, a central location for images where they can be used on all Wikipedia projects?
 * ...we recommend that new users use our "files for upload" process - at least until you get the hang of things?

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type  on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Codename Lisa Codename Lisa (talk) 11:35, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * Manual of Style

February 2018
Could you change your custom signature? It may violate Wikipedia policy by including swastikas. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 15:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually swastika originally means good luck (Left turn ones). I should ask Hilter why he made swastika a symbol that violates Wikipedia policy. Anyway, I will try to look at a better signature. — 卍・〇・卐 00:20, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Is it OK now if my signature changes like this? I personally think that differ from "卐", "卍" has absolutely no relation with the Nazi. — 卍 (talk) 00:25, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Even inverted swastikas are offensive to some people, even some Asians. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 00:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually as an Asian who is influenced by Buddhism very much, I even don't know "卍" is still an offensive symbol for Asian! It's absolutely ridiculous. — 卍 (talk) 00:58, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You might want to read this: https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/279877/is-swastika-really-treated-as-offensive-even-when-its-used-for-religious-purpos Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:04, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Then I shall tell you a blocking case in Chinese Wikipedia: a user called User:台灣通過同婚了 (means Taiwan has accepted same-sex marriage) was blocked because of offensive user name, but soonly unblocked because of the arguments between other Wikipediens. — 卍 (talk) 01:13, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Maybe he was blocked because his username would upset those in Mainland China. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:18, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * No, absolutely not. Every Wikipedien is equal in Wikipedia regardless the language version, if the blocking reason is that the username would upset those in Mainland China, the user must be immediately unblocked by other Administrators in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau, etc. They won't think the username is offensive. Minor note: the user is believed to be a Mainlander, as he uses Baidu Search, and he calls PRC as "China". — 卍 (talk) 01:26, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Please also see the deletion request for the UBX that claims someone who has a habit of Cannabis smoking in Chinese Wikipedia, because it would harm the cooperation of the community. Including me, the Chinese Wikipediens are now discussing it, and some of us voted Keep or Speedy keep, because there is a big argument: if the UBX was deleted, all the humor pages and templates shall all be deleted with the same reason. — 卍 (talk) 01:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The corresponding UBX in English Wikipedia is User:UBX/Cannabis. — 卍 (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Anyway, I've changed the signature. I would rather not to be blocked in English Wikipedia. —  Sanmosa   03:59, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * That was honestly a good idea to just to change it :-). I came here because someone reported you to a noticeboard about it (albeit the wrong noticeboard, but oh well). Even if you weren't using the actual swastika symbol and instead something very close to it, you'll just continue to receive messages and reports about it from other editors non-stop. If anything, you're saving yourself a headache more than anything ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:22, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Just good for everyone. I don't want to have a nightmare like Bismarck, with a silly reason that Hilter ruined the swastika. —  Sanmosa   04:25, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * But actually which notice board? There are so many notice boards which made me dizzy. There are just a few boards in Chinese Wikipedia, which is the one I used the most. —  Sanmosa   04:32, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It was reported to Usernames for administrator attention (which is for reporting blatantly inappropriate usernames of accounts, not to report inappropriate signature use).  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:37, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

You deserve some credit
It takes a lot for someone to respond and say, "you're right, I do need to stop and calm down" and actually do so. I want you to know that I have great respect for you because you did this. It's becoming a rare trait to see in editors and a very rare thing to see them actually do on Wikipedia. Having a high degree of emotional intelligence, the ability to think logically through raised and heated emotions, and the ability to react proficiently and respond because it's the right thing to do is a trait that is highly cherished - these traits are what separate the wise and the experienced from the average and the new, it makes leaders out of followers, and paints maturity and wisdom among those who have been an editor on Wikipedia for a long time. I hope you consider today a positive learning opportunity, that you take some time to reflect, and that you move on from this with more experience under your belt; don't beat yourself up over it. This is a normal part of learning and gaining experience, and while you didn't handle things perfectly, you handled it better than many others would have. Thanks again for listening to my responses and my advice, and I hope it provided you with some help and good experience :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hope everyone will be sorrow-less, just like the meaning of ashoka tree, so the first thing I need to do is reduce sorrows. Sænmōsà 00:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sanmosa - There's nothing you need to worry about as far as grudges or ongoing drama over what happened. I've smoothed things out with (see the discussion on my talk page here) and he's apologized and agreed to be civil with his edit summaries and interactions with others, and I've assured him that you've realized that the repeated discussions went overboard and that you'll move on and won't hold any grudges. So long as you both hold up the expectations that I've helped to pave and set, it should be smooth sailing from here. If you have any questions, concerns, or need my help or input with anything, don't hesitate to message me on my talk page and let me know, and I'll be happy to help. I'm just glad things ended up getting sorted out smoothly in the end and that everyone can walk away happy :-). Cheers -  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   00:26, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Citation needed
Hello! Your submission of Citation needed at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

 * Hi Sanmosa! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission.  I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
 * The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
 * The Teahouse new editor help space
 * Wikipedia Help pages

-- 02:20, Wednesday, August 22, 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Citation needed for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Citation needed is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Citation needed& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Openlydialectic (talk) 10:33, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thanks. By the way, the article in Cantonese Wikipedia is now in GA nomination, probably another GA. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 23:53, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Also forgot to tell you something. For MS 826, it's apparently from west to east. Just a minor tidbit that needs to be fixed for the zh-wiki article (great job with that and MS 902 too). Nova Crystallis   (Talk)  01:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. The east and west ends stated in the article here were reversed, and I have just had it fixed. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 01:32, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

October 2019
Hello, I'm SounderBruce. I noticed that you recently removed content from State highways in Washington without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  Sounder Bruce  21:27, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

How to create Wikidata from Wikipage ?
Hello,

A few months ago I received a notification from you stating that a wikipage I have created Swift Playgrounds now has a Wikidata associated (Q29364676). I would like to know how can I do that to other wikipages I have created. Do you use a bot? Can you give some guidelines?

Also, a few days ago I have received a notification from another user stating that another wikidata (Q64520544) was created for the same page. Is this a mistake?

Thanks, Coel Jo (talk) 19:03, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Good morning Coel Jo (actually where I am is in the morning), I may explain a bit about Wikidata for you here. Actually your first association notice received shall be Q64520544, as I had linked Swift Playgrounds with a page in Chinese Wikipedia (now deleted, though). And for the notice you have recently received, as Q29364676 (originally with the Italian Wikipedia article only) and Q64520544 (with the English Wikipedia article only at that moment) are duplicated items, a merge had been done, and as it relates to a page that you have created, the system noticed you again. When there is a particular page that you have created has been linked to a new Wikidata item (either first time to be linked or a change in item linked), a notice would be automatically made to you. There are 2 ways to create a Wikidata item. The first way is: look at the bar at the left hand side, under "Language", there is a button called "Add links", and when you press it, inputting an article in any Wikipedia in other languages, a new item will be created if both the articles have not yet linked with a Wikidata item. The second way is: just go to Wikidata.org, then click the button "Create a new Item" in the bar at the left hand side, inputting a name, and then an item with no article linked is created; you may manually link an article there by pressing the button "edit" in the box "Wikipedia" and then inputting the name of the article and the code of language of Wikipedia it belongs to. Please forgive my grammar mistakes if I have made any, as I'm not a native speaker. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 01:46, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Good evening Sanmosa
 * Thank you so much for the feedback. I've just updated the Wikidata pages for the articles I've published. Once you understand how it works it is quite easy. Do you usually create Wikidata pages manually or do you use some kind of bot to get the work done?
 * Kind regards, Coel Jo (talk) 21:24, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Good morning Coel Jo, I usually create Wikidata items by the first way that I've mentioned above, but that's not robot's work. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 01:24, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Sanmosa. If you don't mind me asking -just out of curiosity- do you happen to know why was the Swift Playgrounds page in Chinese Wikipedia deleted? Cheers, Coel Jo (talk) 02:05, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The reason was that it had not enough content. Chinese Wikipedia deletes pages being substubs for more than 30 days. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 02:30, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic (2nd nomination) - snow close". Thank you. Thryduulf (talk) 12:38, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Regarding your AFD
Greetings,

I've closed it as it had a clear consensus to keep the article. From your statement "If this act is really not suitable, please help me find a proper place to raise this issue. Thanks all." it seems like you want to discuss something, but it's not clear what. Your nomination statement says that the deletion review concluded that a page limited to deceased people might not violate BLP, but it's not clear how a deletion nomination follows from that. Perhaps you want to raise your point on Talk:List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:55, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe I should make it clearer. What I mean is that, there were an AfD discussion and a Deletion Review discussion on List of people with coronavirus disease 2019, which had made conclusions (i.e. consensus) of deletion and endorsement respectively. In the conculsion of the Deletion Review discussion, it has stated that "There was some feeling that…the WP:BLP issue could be resolved by changing the list to people who had died of the disease.", which I would understand as "a list to people who had died of the disease (which is in fact List of deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic) also violates WP:BLP (and other policies that the original list violated), and should be considered as the same list as the original list". So I would think that the keep closures are violating the previous consensus made (as a consensus would not be subverted in such a short time). ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 13:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Please forgive me if there're any grammatical mistakes. I am not so fluent in English anyway. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 14:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ah. I guess the problem is that (at least to me) that conclusion seems at odds with the actual statement that the problem could be resolved by limiting it to dead people. Note also that in deletion discussion, the closing statement emphasized the role of WP:BLP among the delete rationales, so I would not assume that a delete consensus there also applies to a list of dead people (WP:BDP vagaries aside). Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 14:30, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * What I think is that even when BPD is applied instead of BLP, the list still violates other policies that the original list violated, (personally) especially NOT. My another point that almost no people care of is that LISTN does not clarify that what is meant by "notable" in "'notable' people (or whatever) lists", which makes LISTN almost useless on "'notable' people (or whatever) lists". ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 15:04, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Ha, LISTN has always been vague, as is NOT. The point though is that the previous consensus does not necessarily extend to this list, and that opening a new deletion discussion within a day from the previous one is not generally the best approach to follow. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for late reply, and I have thought of what you have said for a week. Considering that a lot more people have joined the formation of the previous consensus that I've mentioned, I still don't think that the consensus made in a discussion with <10 people joining could replace the previous consensus. The AFD closure is in fact violating the policy. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 08:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not convinced that that is a good justification for opening a new discussion so soon after the previous one. Pinging since they closed the preceding discussions, as at least to me these discussions don't quite carry over to this page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:17, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * At the AfD I closed I noted an explicit consensus for a list of deaths. Many of those who felt that a list of people with the disease was a BLP issue did not feel the same way about a list of deaths. This was confirmed when the list of deaths was created and brought to AfD. As Jo-Jo notes repetitive AfDs can be disruptive. If you think there are issues with the list I'd wait at least 3-6 months before trying again. Hope that helps. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 11:16, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree that starting a new AfD the day after the previous one was not the best plan. Other than the exceptional case of something major happening which could reasonably be expected to change consensus, such rapid-fire nominations are generally considered disruptive.  I'm sure it was meant with the best intentions, but, as Barkeep49 said, waiting a few months before renominating is a good idea.  WP:RENOM talks about this; it's only an essay, but it's widely respected and thus worth heeding. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:00, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Andrew🐉(talk) 13:26, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Noted. ΣανμοσαThe Trve Lawe of free Monarchies 13:58, 30 March 2020 (UTC)