User talk:Yug

Archives

2004-2008 →2011/06

If you leave me a message on this page, I will reply on this page.

Cancelled— Lack of graphical sources. Lack of time. Yug (talk) 09:35, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yug, I saw your post asking if someone would be interested in following a tutorial on how to create maps - I would be interested and I'm happy to give it a go at copy editing. My machine is not very powerful so it might not be able to cope. On a second issue when I was looking at this talk page (to see whether there was a section I should respond in) I spotted that you seem to have chinese language skills - so perhaps you can help with the 2011 China floods article - which badly needs a map showing all the provinces and autonomous regions, and showing where the flooding is. Just a simplistic - flooding is 'here' type map with the names of all the regions would be great, could I persuade you to have a go - or to show me how to do it. Ideally the map would be clickable with submaps of each province showing the counties - and all kinds of funky stuff, but I think that's probably too technical for my machine to handle.

Cheers EdwardLane (talk) 09:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edward, I'm indeed working on China, and looking for such challenge, but I will be busy in the coming 2 weeks. So I need a clear list of informations to draw, or some summary maps displaying these inforations to copy. This will allow me to move fast (1~2 hours). Can you provide this ? Yug (talk) 11:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I can try and get that for you :) Is this a good spot to paste that summary of information ? EdwardLane (talk) 16:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can put it here, or create a section "map request" in the article, and tell me when finished. Yug (talk) 16:31, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm it's looking complex as the situation keeps changing - and I'm not really sure what is best to display on the map. A basic terrain map of china showing rivers (with names for the major ones), major cities, provinces (including autonomous ones) names + boundaries would be a good start. Any more and it starts to look cluttered I think. Perhaps a blue overlay for flooded provinces, but getting the extent of the flooding correct is I think impossible, but a label saying 'extent of flooding on 30 June' might I suppose do the job. And then I can and track down things up to but not after that date (I've been a bit slack not tracking the news properly for a week or so, just getting the big headline info into the article). EdwardLane (talk) 10:48, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cancelled— I m not anymore on the way do draw them. Yug (talk) 09:35, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How is the work progressing? It has been 18 days since you agreed to my request for these locator maps, so hopefully you should have a clear idea of how to create just one. If not, then this is most disappointing. If you are at an impasse, ask NordNordWest on Commons; I have refrained from pestering him because he uploads many German train station pictures... —Xiaoyu: 聊天 (T) 和 贡献 (C) 21:19, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Xiaoyu, i got busy making the tourist guide for 3 groups of taiwaneses coming to my home/region. My progress is that i downloaded the gis files needed, and made one test which work. Stay to find time to actually do the serieb of files. Yug (talk) 21:54, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found some solutions, my data files and techniques are both fine, all is ready to generate some nice files. I will upload a first example tomorrow. Then, it will just need to do it carefully. (georeferencing) Yug (talk) 23:17, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PRC pushpin maps[edit]

Cancelled— I m not anymore on the way do draw them. Yug (talk) 09:35, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not to seem pestering, but not one map has been produced since the release of Hubei on 17 Aug. It has been more than 3 months. Just a reminder. Thanks much  The Tartanator  00:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed, very simply not enough time for that. Sorry. --Yug (talk) 14:23, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

The Spring and Autumn map is one of the best maps we have. Benjamin Trovato (talk) 11:39, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Great, that's the first of a serie ! I will lead a map making project for Chinese history. For this case, I will soon upload the English version. PS: I'm mainly slowled down by the lack of authoritative sources. If you have such, please forward me sourced maps needing a big refreshing ! Ĩ will do my best. Yug (talk) 13:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. Title should read 'Chinese plain in the late Spring and Autumn period (5th century BC)' (the; spelling; 5BC means 5 years before Christ). 2. 'Chinese Sea' is normally 'East China Sea'. 3. If you change the map, changing Wei to Wey would avoid confusion.

I don't do much China now, so I can't help. Philg88 might know. I know some Russia maps we need. Also, thanks for teaching me about Mer de Chine :). Benjamin Trovato (talk) 00:05, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Yug.

{{tl:Cite GIS}} is a great idea for a citing a GIS map or USGS topographic map. It may be something I use in the future in my work-in-progress User:Matthewedwards/Antelope Valley, which will discuss in detail the topography of the valley and its surrounding mountains. There is one thing that needs adding to the citation template, and that's the accessdate= field. Your "home" is the French Wikipedia, right? I've never edited an article there, so I don't know what the rules are on references, but we require an accessdate= for each citation that uses an external URL, so that other editors and readers know what date the URL was accessed on, and thus how up-to-date the sentence or paragraph is that is being cited. I have never edited a citation template, so I'm not going to do it myself, but this really needs adding in.

QGis Tutorial: Secondly, I noticed Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Resources/QGis lesson 1: Create a topographic background. At first glance it looks like a great tutorial! I've attempted to make some maps before, similar to what you and Sting make, but I've had to use a partially translated version of Sting's instructions for GRASS GIS, 3DEM, GIMP and Inkscape. It hasn't really been easy as the translations have never been completed, and there has been no instructions for doing any bathymetry. File:Topographical map of the Antipodes Islands in English.svg is the best I was able to do under the circumstances.

QGis Tutorial, Questions:I am going to try using your Quantum GIS tutorial, but I need to get some further information, which you may decide to include in the tutorial.

1. How do I access the ETOPO1 files? I looked at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/global/global.html and from past discussions with Sting I know to click on "Create Custom Grids" on the left, but I don't know how to use the table. If you could explain it or add a paragraph or two to the tutorial, that would be helpful.
2. Do we need to use the NASA SWBD files for the coastline? If so, how do we add this to Q-GIS?
3. At what point is the projection changed to reflect the curvature of the Earth, and see curved latitude lines?
4. Is Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Resources/QGis lesson 2: Merge tiles and Shaded reliefs a completed tutorial, and are the Using Gdaldem hillshape (best) instructions for Windows or only Ubuntu?
5. Are Composite relief (0%) and "Black waters to transparency" incomplete?
6. What is Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Resources/QGis lesson 3: Raster to vector and Change projection for?

Hope to hear from you soon, I am very eager to try out the tutorial. Regards, Matthewedwards :  Chat  05:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mat,

I'm currently travelling for 15 days and without my computer, I can't dig in. The tutorial is still an open work in progress, we need people to explore around & push forward. In short, you will move smoothly to a correct level, then you will have to tinker.

1. ETOPO1: follow the tutorial Lesson 1, to download, and to load into QGis. That's explain, and have been tested and copy edited by MissMJ. Should be fine.
2. Coastline/SWBD : if you work on a really small area, the SWBD will be need, since they are the most precise for water. For world map, use the "Coastline" file. Both are available from the GIS source page, there.
3. Warp (Reprojection) : not yet writted down, you will have to tinker.
4. A series: After lesson 1 come /QGis lesson 2: Merge tiles and Shaded reliefs, being functions you need later on, for merging tiles and shaded relief. Gdaldem tested for ubuntu, to dig in and adapt for Windows (which I don't have). Likely to install Gdal (see official website), then should be quite similar.
5. Incomplete: Yes, Composite relief (0%) and "Black waters to transparency" incomplete. They are less used, also. For black water, I think merge tile delete this, or use the vecto Bathymetry (GIS source page) to hide it.
6. /QGis lesson 3 is a outline for content to be added next. That's still an open work. If you find some answer, share it.

In short, surf on this tutorial as far as you can, then explore and tinker QGis. This soft seems frankly great, we have to master it. Good luck ! 14.136.197.16 (talk) 09:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — issue closed. Yug (talk) 09:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your new article has a very small focus, but the term "selective omission" has a very wide focus. Are you going to expand it? Binksternet (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I met this term used in individual psychology too, but I'm here just to create the stub, without enough knowledge nor interest in the field to push further. Yug (talk) 16:11, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I may expand the article to include other uses. Binksternet (talk) 16:18, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy thanks to You. Yug (talk) 16:41, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — issue closed. Yug (talk) 09:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you write on my wiki-wall? (if it's not you, sorry for the bother)
Just in case you don't get the response there - the link was red because of the language change, I paste it here too:

Thanks for the tip about hugin, but no thanks :) My creations are non-photoshop or digital stitch tools of any kind.
I shoot each photo and print them separately.
Then I cut them with scissors and stitch them together with glue.
That's my kind of art... What you see here is merely a scan of the creation. In real life it looks much better.
You're welcome to visit my site for more of this kind: hapan.co.il or, if you can't read Hebrew... you can use the translated site (although the gallery widget doesn't work there well)

-- --מוטי פנחסי (talk) 21:14, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hahahahaaha !!! I love it, no sowftare used, I was so surprised. That recall us that art is first of all a things doable with scissors ; ) Yug (talk) 21:54, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

:-) מוטי פנחסי (talk) 22:05, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — issue closed. Yug (talk) 09:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great job, Yug! I truly admire the work you've done making these maps for Chinese history. I especially like the placement of a world globe in the top right corner. Unfortunately I am serving as a Peace Corps volunteer in Kyrgyzstan at the moment, so I will be unable to use Wikipedia on a frequent basis. When I return to the States in one year I will most certainly utilize these maps and provide sources when I can. Cheers old friend! --Pericles of Athens^Talk 09:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — issue closed. Yug (talk) 09:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again Yug. Sorry for long period of inactivity regarding the historic animated map of China, I am really overcommitted right now. How do you think we can make things more transparent and citable without a massive time commitment? prat (talk) 02:29, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done — issue closed. Yug (talk) 09:36, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Maps for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 00:51, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yug, Justthought I'd let you know I've written some stuff on that interview page, I think you would be much better placed to answer some of the questions than me though. Could you have a quick look and see when you do get a chance, particularly the last question seems like one we could do with fleshing out ways we could get help from others. Anyway hope things are going well. EdwardLane (talk) 10:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just thought you should know that the Signpost article will be published Monday. Since some of your answers indicated that you would be coming back to add more, please make changes directly to the article page before the end of Sunday so it can be included in the published version. Thanks! -Mabeenot (talk) 22:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost for April 30

Hi,

Tony asked me if I could put a big map at the end of Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-04-30/WikiProject report, so I added one. If you would rather have another map there, that's fine. I'm also going to ask EdwardLane, as I don't know which one of you is on line right now. The issue is about to be published. Thanks, MathewTownsend (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I saw your Signpost interview, and especially took note when you said:

For the future, I personally think that map-making and image creation in general now need a stronger and ACTIVE support from the Wikimedia foundation. Wikipedia is both text (wiki editor system) and images, with maps having a special place. Some innovative technical solutions and projects are already financed by the Wikimedia Foundation on the editing side. Serious and professional technical innovations projects are needed for images and maps as well. A good direction, for example, would be the development of a free on-the-cloud global map-making system similar to Google-map. Sharemap.org is creating a such online system specifically for encyclopedic maps and Wikipedia, but currently without any official support. But as for other heavy-coding projects, only some financial support can avoid failure and keep them going to improve the Wikipedia map sites. I sincerely wish the foundation can wake up and support this graphic side of its projects.

I encourage you to file this feature request in our request- and defect-tracking system, and to reach out to us in the MediaWiki community (I'm mw:User:Sumanah) to talk with us more about your needs. Thanks! Sumana Harihareswara, Wikimedia Foundation Engineering Community Manager 01:03, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yug, I was wondering whether you have shared your ideas at the maps-l list? Let me know if there is anything I can do to help. I work with Sumana at the WMF and you can find me at mw:User:Qgil.--Qgil (talk) 23:28, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yug, and thank you for your note on my talk page on the strategy wiki. Several of the questions that you ask are unfortunately not ones that I know the answer to, but I'm more than happy to try to connect you with the people who will. If you'd do me a favor and send me an email (ideally with the same content as on my talk page), then I can forward it around until we find out who can answer your questions. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 06:19, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done

Hello, I had decided on the map I'm working on to do the following for dry water bodies.

I took the normal fill color for water bodies (c6ecff) and reduced alpha to hex 66. This will show any objects under the dry water body but, I feel, help conveys the sense of "dryness" or transience of a dry water body. I also changed the outline to a dashed stroke which seems to be common in other atlases and topographical maps I've seen.

For rivers, I suppose the same rule would apply. Let me know what you think. Thanks for the response.

Ixnayonthetimmay (talk) 11:15, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yug, I am from the Russian Graphic Lab and I need your advice, as I believe you are very experienced in this. Recently, we have got a reqeust from one of the users to make a public domain map out of a fair use image, uploaded to the russian wikipedia. I saw how well you did on Tang dynasty map, so my question is, how much information can someone actually use from a fair-use image or a map? This particular request has to do with Ming dynasty, so the case is similar. Thank you in advance. --Ahnode (talk) 21:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

O.O : russians have a GLab !! ok.

Some rules :

1. Are you using a trustful source ? if not, don't continue.

2. facts are not copyrighted : they are facts, not a creation. Historical facts (name of cities, place of battles, battle names) are thus free to be copied.

3. Word-to-word translation are not copyghted (北京 -> Beijing) ;

4. A territory area is free to be... 'vampired' ("territory according to [Author name], in [Source reference]"). Except if its a claim specific to this author (thus a personal creation).

5. Colors, styles, fonts, background, place and look of the legend, icons : all this is copyrighted. Don't COPY the WHOLE SET, that's a copyrighted set. But : yellow, red, blue,... are not copyrighted : if the author's map and your both use it, that's still fine.

In sum, you can pick up facts, not the styles, nor the icons. The best is to add some other facts to even create a truly new set of facts.

PS:I work using SVG, but my full set of SVG tools for Chinese History maps are not yet finish, and not yet share on commons >.O But I encourage you to start your work by using this SVG version: File:China-Historic_macro_areas.svg, easy to map-edit using Inkscape.

Yug (talk) 07:09, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is fantastic! Thank you very much, also your maps are state-of-the-art :) --Ahnode (talk) 13:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a brand new page to promote (french;) Geolocalisation. Have a look at "From image to its parametrization". (please fell free to fix my poor english)

I also want to (re)create Commons:Template:Map to document ... maps ;)

Finally, I'm looking for good maps to test fr:Modèle:Géolocalisation/Projection perspective (fr:Modèle:Géolocalisation/Stéréographique/0/0 is awful (unusable?) and too simple)

Best regards.   <STyx @ (I promote Geolocation) 22:18, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GotR ^Talk 04:27, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

La section pour récupéré les résultats est basée sur :

• Dillon (2008), How to style Google Forms: Step 8, Morningcopy.com.au
• Dillon (2010), How to style Google Forms: Redux, Morningcopy.com.au
• Kennedy, Amanda (2012), Create a contact form with Google Docs? Yug (talk) 22:01, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

about that - I tried that Template and I don't like it becouse it links to the Graphic Lab at the english wikipedia, and not to our Lab. Amirki (talk) 14:49, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The English text version of your template read by English speakers will link to the English lab.

The Hebraic text version of your template read by Israeli speakers will link to your lab.

The Hebraic text version of our French template will lead to your :he lab.

The work I do in the French or English lab will provide links to your lab. That's the point. Yug (talk) 15:19, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

DONE! Amirki (talk) 16:44, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Yug, your kind attention here. Best regards, — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 08:28, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yug, I see that you are editing again. The two month window for the proper adjudication of the dispute has passed. Would you still like to help with the map guidelines with your recommendations? — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 06:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug. It's been quite a while since we spoke about these. I stopped trying to make maps for a while, but I've had some free time lately so I decided to give it another try.

Unfortunately, I'm still not getting to grips with Qgis. Are you still making maps yourself?

Have you considered making a Youtube video or ogv video lesson, teaching all the steps necessary to create a map? I know it would help me as I'm a very visual learner, and if people were able to make a map while referencing a video at the same time, it might make it easier.

Also, once I know the steps, I would be able to help with typing up the tutorials.

All the best, Matthewedwards (talk · contribs) 22:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Matthew,

The QGIs tutorial serie wait a long due revamp. I reorganized the lessons in a better way to prepare this, but I have so, so many other priorities to manage recently (real life AND Free knowledge life). My priority on wiki should be

1. a push for locator maps and color blind guidelines. I did read academic documents about that (Cynthia Brewer 2005), and need to share it.

2. I need to request WM founding for Sharemap.

3. I need to push on these QGIS tutorials, which need about 3-5 days of doing-writing.

In real life, my big projects are:

1. to push my PhD,

2. to write a study to be published,

3. to push a mobile apps project,

4. to apply to some Chinese scholarship,

5. to move to a new apartment,

6. to find a new part time job.

I'am very sorry I can't contribute more. At less, the structure of the lessons is there, google and trying may then help you to find a way.

Last, Please, tell me where you are locked ? upload your last work. Maybe I may help around (-> video). Yug (talk) 19:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scholarship last date:

1.  Done: Wikimania2013:02/22;
2. PassadenaUS Conf:03/01;
3. PLIDAM;
4. China 03/31;
5. WMF: ?;
6. French-German Research:04/15

Yug (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Safiel (talk) 21:23, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm GSK. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Google Glass, because it seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. GSK ● ✉ ✓ 13:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 — TORTOISEWRATH 15:56, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Topojson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Typology (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:33, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move back to the Map workshop. Yug (talk) 19:06, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see on this page: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/ShareMap#Project_goals Jakub Kaniewski has requested a grant for the development of Sharemap. My question for you is: how can we rally support for this request from our fellow Wikipedians who are interested in creating maps? Wereldburger758 (talk) 12:11, 11 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ma®©usBritish^{chat} 19:33, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Yug !
Je viens d'apporter mon soutien à votre projet sur Meta mais seulement aujourd'hui. J'espère malgré tout qu'il sera pris en compte. Bonne chance ! Sting (talk) 18:26, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. : Quant à « magicien », c'est plutôt à toi que sied ce qualificatif puisque tu es en voie de pouvoir créer de façon semi-automatique des cartes de qualité, chose que je serai bien incapable de faire !

Ce n'est pas encore fait. Avec de grands pouvoirs viennent de grandes responsabilités. Yug (talk) 20:15, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yug, I'm sending you this message because you're one of about 300 users who have recently edited an article in the umbrella category of open educational resources (OER) (or open education). In evaluating several projects we've been working on (e.g. the WIKISOO course and WikiProject Open), my colleague Pete Forsyth and I have wondered who chooses to edit OER-related articles and why. Regardless of whether you've taken the WIKISOO course yourself - and/or never even heard the term OER before - we'd be extremely grateful for your participation in this brief, anonymous survey before 27 April. No personal data is being collected. If you have any ideas or questions, please get in touch. My talk page awaits. Thanks for your support! - Sara FB (talk) 20:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Islamist unrest in Egypt (2013–present) page, your edit caused an unnamed parameter error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:33, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to notify you that the current events page is NOT a place where Palestinian propaganda can be posted. Please refrain from posting Palestinian propaganda in the future. Also using words for "shock value" like "sniping children" is not acceptable. Also your warning you left on my page is pitiful and a unnecessary threat. Already your story was taken town by another user. The consensus is in, you cannot post Palestinian propaganda. Thank you and I hope that your contributions to Wikipedia in the future are fruitful and unbiased. --Newsjunky12 (talk) 12:22, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

user:Newsjunky12, I don't care what country are these men, you are human, you know that what happened there is not acceptable. Yug (talk) 13:44, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Video revew suggests that teenagers where not threats and killing was willful. (The New York Times, The Guardian, Al Jazeera)

What is also not acceptable is Palestine, Iran, Syria, and other Muslim organizations and countries calling for genocide against the Jewish people and Palestinians dragging people by a rope on a motorcycle through the streets until they die without trial. Yeah, it goes both ways. --Newsjunky12 (talk) 16:21, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to extent my gratitude to you for re posting the news story with unbiased sources and also representing the response of the Israeli government. Very good reporting. I hope that we can both reconcile, but I stand by my opinion that Palestine is just as culpable in violence and human rights abuses as Israel. --Newsjunky12 (talk) 16:28, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I know about that all, there are crazy people on both side. We are here to denounce them all, whatever the side they are. In this case, the IDF should be sharp and honnest to itself, catch this crazy sniper who is not giving a terrible bad image of the Jewish people, and jail him for life. Yug (talk) 16:44, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Slashme (talk) 16:53, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pay more attention to what you're doing before submitting an edit so subsections don't get deleted and other editors aren't forced to correct your mistakes. -- Veggies (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm going to draw some range maps about plants living in the Mediterranean. I noticed you have made contributions to WikiProject Maps. Should I use SVG or PNG graphics? Which map should I choose to start? Thanks in advance.--Carnby (talk) 22:10, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article 2015 Chinese stock exchange fall has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not a collection of news stories, notable or not. Should be copied and pasted to Shanghai Stock Exchange or somewhere related.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. George Ho (talk) 07:58, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, 2015 Chinese stock exchange fall. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – China stock market crash. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at China stock market crash – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. George Ho (talk) 18:29, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article User base has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:NOTDICT, already exists at wiktionary, wikt:userbase

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bazj (talk) 13:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I’m Chris, a community liaison in the Discovery department at the Wikimedia Foundation. One of the projects we’re working on is to bring interactive maps to Wikipedia. If you are interested, I’d like to have an informal conversation with you about your work with WikiProject Maps, and the conventions you all have created. I'd like to learn more about your work and how that might influence the design of interactive maps.

Please let me know of some good times to chat via email and I can setup a meeting for us. I can be reached at ckoernerwikimedia.org.

If you’re not interested, that’s fine. I would appreciate any direction to other editors that have been involved and might be interested.

Have a good day, CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 20:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed some of the content you added to the above article, as it is almost identical to the source, http://www.crookstontimes.com/news/20160817/turkey-to-release-38000-from-jail-frees-space-for-plotters, a copyright web page. All content you add to Wikipedia must be written in your own words. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa (talk) 21:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa : Ok, thanks. After rereading, my reformulation of this section was light indeed. I went deeper into reformulating the thing and added it back. --Yug (talk) 09:36, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, much better. I am going to do some revision deletion now. — Diannaa (talk) 13:30, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yug, Well, I thank you for your message to me. My response and reasoning is that my reverting of your edit was based on a review of your past contributions and tone verses the contrasting tone of the edits in question and the tone of the Edit Summary. When I saw your edit and Edit Summary here with the misspellings, I thought your account must have been hijacked. When I saw the other following contributions from you for that day:

eople's Protection Units|YPG]] positions, an other group fiercely opposing ISIS, to prevent them from capturing areas th

id Air Vehicles HAV 304 Airlander 10]], make a wild landingcrashes at RAF Cardington, Bedfordshire, during its second test flight. Cockpit is damaged, the crew is safe and has debriefed.

I tried to contribute by reverting what I saw as misspellings from a hijacked account. So I apologize that I reverted your true contributions to wikipedia. rkmlai (talk) 08:00, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi rkmlai, thanks for your explaination, it matters. These previous edits where quite well grounded. The facts were already available out there. Few news articles specifically focusing on these precise points have since been published :

• On Turkey claiming to fight ISIS but actually fighting ISIS's enemy, and the absurdity of it :
  • BARNARD, ANNE (Aug 29, 2016), Knowing the Risks, Some Syrian Rebels Seek a Lift From Turks’ Incursion
  • BARNARD, ANNE (Aug 28, 2016), In Syria, Rebels Threaten Kurdish-Controlled Territory as U.S. Allies Clash
• On planed gentle crash :
  • OLIVENNES, HANNAH (Aug 24, 2016), World’s Largest Aircraft Crashes, Gently, in 2nd Test Flight

I indeed often correct dramatic by a humbling wording and correct superficial coverages to add deeper contextual clarifications in order to say the things rights. Yug (talk) 12:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yug/Nutshell

Not sure there is a strictly defined term for it, although "bypass and reduction" are both terms used by the U.S. forces for such actions. In the Second World War, the U.S. tank force had an unofficial "rule" of Haul Ass and Bypass for positions strongly defended by the enemy. The term "reduction" can be found in lines like, "The result of the attack on 5 August proved that the reduction of St. Malo would take some time", found at http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-E-Breakout/USA-E-Breakout-21.html

Hopefully a bit helpful.

Cheers

Oh thanks Anonymous, that's a good lead. --Yug (talk) 10:41, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Institute for the Analysis of Global Security 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 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Institute for the Analysis of Global Security until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Guy (Help!) 19:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you I have nothing to do with the other account. 2A02:908:D840:74C0:F9FF:4C24:214D:2840 (talk) 13:54, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I'm sorry, but it really is nothing but coincidence. I browse the "current events" page a lot and contribute to it here and then, the reason none of that is shown in my "contribution history" is because of me editing anonymously and the dynamic IP adresses changing from time to time which I can't control. Again, I am not the other editor and neither am I the user Sigehelmus who also reverted your edit as I just saw. There are thousands of people editing Wikipedia at every moment, it's not automatically a case of sockpuppetry when two people edit something in a similar fashion. If you want to defend your edit, please discuss it thematically and not by assuming that an edit that goes against yours is automatically some kind of conspiracy. Thanks. 2A02:908:D840:74C0:F9FF:4C24:214D:2840 (talk) 14:28, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Boleyn. Yug, thanks for creating Chang Wen-Ing!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Please work on this in draftspace and move back when it is finished.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Boleyn (talk) 18:38, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Men single table tennis world cup championships, does not have enough sources and citations 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. Boleyn (talk) 18:13, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the {{copyviocore}} template from articles, as you did with Basic English. Your action has been reverted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept non-free text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted, and removing copyright notices will not help your case. You can properly contest the deletion at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you are the owner of the material, you may release the material under the Creative Commons and GFDL licenses, as detailed at WP:IOWN. Alternatively, you are welcome to create a draft in your own words at Talk:Basic English/Temp. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators and/or removers of the copyright notice templates may be blocked from editing. Please feel free to comment at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2018 October 9 or to edit the draft re-write at Talk:Basic English/Temp. Cnilep (talk) 01:29, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cnilep, in the future, please properly review my edits and respond politely and without threats of blockage. Hasty threats are not in accordance with Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in edit wars#Threats and intimidation. My edit :
1) removed the copyright content from the publicly readable page for 3 months and replaced it by different words expressing same rules (your revert restored the copyrighted content into the article) ;
2) removed the therefor unrequired and impressively polluting copyright notices template (you restored it)
Please take time to review other users edits and source. For legal reasons, some parts of the history may have to be remove, this is another issue, and should not prevent users from correcting the current article, removing copyrighted sentences and replacing them by alternative free variations, nor prevent removal of the thereby unrequired copyright notice.
Accordingly, I suggest to 1) restore the version without copyright violation, 2) push for removal of the copyrighted contents in the history. Yug (talk) 13:57, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug. I am sorry that came across as threatening. It certainly wasn't my intention to threaten or intimidate you. Most of the message is a standard template that is added by the gadget WP:Twinkle, with only the italicized part added by me. I am certain that your edits were in good faith, but I wanted to make sure you were aware of policies and best practices surrounding copyright problems. The discussion I linked to in the italicized part is intended to do just what you suggest: remove only the parts that may violate copyright, and treat the history if necessary. Sometimes (as in this case) it takes time for the busy editors who are expert in copyright to see to all the potential issues flagged by other Wikipedians. I think it is inappropriate, though, to remove the 'copyviocore' template (which produces the "impressively polluting" bit) until they weigh in. Again, my apologies for the tone of the message. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 23:51, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cnilep, thanks for the explanation. This template indeed feels threatening. On Nov. 1st, you reworded the set of rules to remove copyvio. On Jan. 2nd, I reworded the set of rules to remove copyvio. Since Oct. 9th 2018 no other editor has expressed interest in the matter. It's pretty clear we have to replace the current content (as I defended upper and as you suggested on Nov. 1st). If you prefer to use your work (Talk:Basic English/Temp), go ahead. I don't see the point to keep this *wiki* page staled since November 1st with this massive polluting panel. Can you move forward ? If not, please allow me do move forward. We already spent about over one hour time-energy explaining, while the corrective-edit and validate a change we both see as logical and inevitable required about half of that. Yug (talk) 09:24, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have (at long, long last) done as you suggest. Not sure if the copyvio wallahs will have anything to add. Sorry for the delay. Cnilep (talk) 04:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful ! This is wiki progress, thank you ! :D Yug (talk) 11:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, Draft:Chang Wen-Ing.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:25, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug,

Thank you for creating Abu Mansour.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

While I appreciate your attempts to improve our coverage of such topics as ISIS, please tread very carefully when dealing with a biography pf a living person, especially in such a sensitive issue as this.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|John M Wolfson}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

– John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:04, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Men single table tennis world cup championships, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 00:30, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Men single table tennis world cup championships".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! CptViraj (📧) 11:59, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Al-Sudani has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Only have two items. Not needed.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Interstellarity (talk) 18:27, 8 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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 {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited History of Spain, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yamna (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 07:52, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Case[edit]

Hello Yug! It seems my unblock request isn’t being updated anymore. Could you please take a look into it for me as an administrator? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Arcanery Kingrayen (talk) 17:29, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingrayen: hello, first i'am not admin here; then, it is visible on @Arcanery: talkpage that Arcanery just been blocked for 60 hours; third, it is also visible within a minutes that Arcanery is pushing people around. Arcanery talkpage isn't his kingdom where he rules as king, he and we are custodian of our talk pages : we host civil talks there with respect to our visitors, including respect in the discussion's format so people understand who says what. I encourage Arcanery to integrate or reactivate these rules of positive behaviorship in order to enjoy again Wikipedia contributive side. Yug (talk) 17:54, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. What do you mean by pushing people around? Appealing a case because of a disagreement inevitably leads to differing opinions I would say. Kingrayen (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Kingrayen:/@Arcanery: Arcanery is visibly watched over for poor collaborative behavior, yet claims his talkpage and its formal his totally up to him (aka "my kindom my rule"). Secondly, you have the profile of the "willful conflict actor", consuming the time of others. So I will minimize engagement. Arcanery has to slow down, accept his *temporary* block (which is not such a big deal and allows to take some time away from keyboard), and to follow usages on wikipedia, including talkpages' practices and formats. Yug (talk) 18:14, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Kurzgesagt.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:39, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Bak Bulhwa, does not have enough sources and citations 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. Celestina007 (talk) 04:49, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Chang Wen-Ing".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Lapablo (talk) 13:31, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Panai Kusui, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paiwan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done -- Talk moved to template talkpage. Yug (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please add Category:Public Health Emergency of International Concern to the bottom of 2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak. This is literally on the Wikipedia front page in the news 199.172.169.87 (talk) 20:08, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@199.172.169.87: Oh! great idea, thank you ! :D Yug (talk) 20:11, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't added the category to ALL articles related to the 2019-20 coronavirus but I added your category to Category:2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak :D Yug (talk) 20:15, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

JSFiddle (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Cursor and Versioning

CodeMirror (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Cursor

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 15:42, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An article you recently created, Courthouse arrest, does not have enough sources and citations 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. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 22:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus data/China medical cases has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Graham Beards (talk) 14:30, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Leyla İmret".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 22:22, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, what is the asterisk on certain values in the 2019-20 seasonal flu entry on Template:Notable flu pandemics intended to denote? 89.107.6.24 (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

89.107.6.24 Ongoing epidemic. Yug (talk) 23:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yug (talk) 21:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Huon: : I created the template creating the initial concensus, which I then found inadequate to the content and piloted the scope correction while requiring the community's feedback. Only Graham had argued something and with extreme brevity. I did not renamed the page, I was still getting feedbacks, when he deleted relevant content. My "revert" was a compromised ceding to Graham request, and non-disturbing edit since it restored the content inside a noinclude tag, therefore ceding to Graham request while letting me continue my daily updates, display the proposal to template editors and commenters ONLY and staying open to discussion. Block is inadequate. Yug (talk) 23:02, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You could have put the coronavirus content into a sandbox or the like. The point about WP:OWN and how it doesn't matter whether you are the original author of the template has already been made elsewhere, and you're aware of that. It appears that others find the scope that you originally gave the template more useful than what you're proposing now. Huon (talk) 00:20, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To continue.

{u|Huon} You were referring to the initial consensus then only I state the fact that consensus was my making. It does matters, because I'am therefore not undoing mindful decision of some other user. The fact a consensus emerged after the block (in favor of flu only scope, and allowing me to withdraw my renaming requests) does not validate the initial hasty block in an ongoing 1 vs 1 content dispute. You tell of "Repeatedly, over the objections of other editors", it's incorrect.

1) The template was created by me, so I'am not countering an editor there,

2) When the situation was ambiguous : I was collecting coronavirus data in a discrete coronavirus row thanks to a noinclude tag, one editor made a weird edit, removing the row but keeping the empty tag (clear sign of partial understanding of what was going on), not engaging in the encouraged discussion (ribbon on the page). The event was still informative: it was proof of the current confusion. I assumed an uninformed edit and went for legitimate revert supported by Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle#Alternatives > BRR guideline. But I learnt from it, so I moved away from the ambiguous "Before" state (table title "flu pandemics" + noinclude coronavirus row) toward a clearer new state table title: "flu and coronavirus" + in-article visible coronavirus row, therefore avoiding confusion as for the table and content. At that point, only myself and this weird edits had expressed hints of opinions on this matters. At this point, the coronavirus row was published to the article-reader. By then, an ribbon calling for page renaming was added and clearly visible if you read a bit.

3) Graham moved in via the following fast and low engagement edits which proved confusing:

• 2020-03-18T14:02:58, Graham: Reverted to revision 945591742 by Adrian J. Hunter (talk): This is about influenza not COVID (TW).
• Talk: Zero engagement in discussion despite visible ribbon on template.
• 2020-03-19T07:46:24‎, Yug: Restore "Major modern virus pandemics" scope as expressed within the table title. Renaming is underway, as expressed in the talkpage. Join the conversation if wanted.
• 2020-03-19T08:09:09>Talk, Graham: opposed to rename.
• 2020-03-19T08:09:55‎, Graham Beards: "Reverted to revision 946222154 by Graham Beards (talk): Please do not edit war (TW)"
• 2020-03-19T08:36:50>Talk, Yug: argues that opposing renaming proposal by arguing proposal is out of current scope is absurd (click for details).
• 2020-03-20T11:27:48+no include, Yug: Restores content changes visibility status of covid19 row via a noinclude tag: the row and coronavirus references are defacto unpublished by Yug for in-article readers, yet the ongoing active work is not lost and may continue for template editors. The template scope discussion & what should we display to the public can continue.
• 2020-03-20T11:32:03>Talk, Yug: I yet proposed a compromise] de facto respecting Graham opinion. At this point, the coronavirus row was unpublished by myself for the article-readers, in line with Graham position.
• 2020-03-20T12:00:38, Graham: Reverted to revision 946388365 by ImproveEverything (talk): This is no consensus to erroneouslt added coronavirus to this tgemplate (TW).Also removes relevant edits (therefore undoubious proof of hasty revert).

3) Then come the block.

I argue that no block was needed since I was actively engaged in the discussion and implementing changes according to Graham's position : I personally unpublished my content from the article-readers view. I argue Graham fast and low engagement edits were difficult to assess. That 3RR was not reached in any possible way. I argue that the ambiguous quality of the 2 edits I cited were answered with proportional and legit edits from my side. And I argue that a block that fast in a 1 vs 1 low stake content dispute while other avenues were clearly ongoing is abusive. Therefore the block should be cancelled. And optionaly excused would be welcome as well since the whole thing would not have taken place if the admin has simply taken time and not given proof of hasty reverts of relevant edits, by example. Yug (talk) 01:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Being actively engaged in the discussion is good, but it doesn't justify your edits to the template. While Adrian J. Hunter may have missed the <noinclude> tags, it's perfectly clear that he thought coronavirus doesn't belong in the template. I'll also point out that using <noinclude> doesn't allow you to put into a template whatever you want. Regarding "the ongoing active work is not lost and may continue for template editors", I again point to the possibility of using a sandbox. Regarding the "relevant edits", my answer is this. Regarding "consensus was my making", I don't think that's how consensus works; you can't make one on your own.

In summary, you seem to see nothing wrong with pushing your preferred version of the template despite other editors' objections - if it's a "low stake content dispute", why didn't you wait until the discussion reached a conclusion ? Thus in my opinion the block remains warranted. You are welcome to request another review by a different admin, of course. Huon (talk) 19:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huon 4) I follow the content. On the table's left, title column is listing pandemics, not viruses. So I included the ongoing respiratory pandemics. I wanted to see if the Covid19 pandemic data would fit and have all data under eyes, so I used the <noinclude> to test (WP:be bold, use most efficient means). Then, as explained in point 2 above, a weird edit pushed me to publish. It was not expected. I went with the events: It's wikipedia. I don't have a 1 month plan for my edits, none of us do.

5) Then, discussion with who ? Inspect the page statistic and history. I was virtually alone on this page. Other users just pass by. I created a page under a reasonable name. I made a test. I followed the content's flow (coronavirus pandemic test). I reacted to emerging events (a weird edit) as wikiwiki commends. I publicly called for discussion via a visible ribbon on the template page itself.

The following 10 users made minor edits, saving the page with the coronavirus row, yet did not join the scope discussion: Mauls, Keith D, Certes, Iridescent, Triggerhippie4, Gaianauta Tanvir Ahmed Zubair Global Cerebral Ischemia (note: changed title "influenza and coronavirus" into "virus" ; Graham will later objects "virus + pandemic" is too large and so revert to influenza is required) A sentient pickle 82.217.99.105

No one came. They just make minor edits, kept the coronavirus row, then left.

So we are then at a consensus de facto built by myself alone (and lonely XD), which 10 editors passively agree with or don't care, one weird edit and one single opposition (Graham).

Graham comes, alone, with visibly hasty WP:TW edits (we all know the risks of these tools), no deep involvement and ambiguous content arguments. When we maintain and pilote a page, we also have to make judgments based on the quality of other people edits. It's not WP:OWN which has no place here, but edits are also judged on their quality, it's classic editorship. When new users drop half baked comments and do visibly hasty reverts, we react accordingly : we have a WP:BRD page with a community supported Bold Revert Revert guideline for these case. I faced confusing contributions by passing-by editors Graham and Adrian J. Hunter yet I fully removed the disputed coronavirus row and title from the in-article view. Yet I hear a point and I do compromised by removing myself the visibility of the row and content. We are a collaborative community, adminship is no exception. Graham should also engage properly if he wants his edits to stay in place. He can also take responsibility by acknowledging such reverts create confusion and apologizing. If users edit or reverts carelessly, yes there will be confusion and BRR, as I did upon Graham. Yet... I compromised. I did 1.5 community-supported BRR on graham, 1.5 BRR since the second time I also removed the visibility of the row I argued for. I also advanced explicit, peace-reaching rational. This doesn't call for the administrator involved to block the page to his advantage as "disruptive edits". Competitive edits and position are at the core of Wikipedia. Discussion can go on. Yug (talk) 21:57, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting repetitive, and I don't see that you have addressed any of my points other than by dismissing everybody else's opinions and edits regarding the template. I'll not bother with making the same points all over again. If you want to request another review of your block, you can use the {{unblock}} template. If you want Graham Beards' actions reviewed, WP:AN is the place to go. Huon (talk) 22:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huon "I don't see that you have addressed any of my points". More I cite diffs, less I'am listened. Take your last question :

"Huon asked: why didn't you wait until the discussion reached a conclusion ?" => I answered above longly: I followed emerging events including ambiguous edits by sniper-editors, statement for which I literally provided 2 verifiable diffs of reverts with observable errors (Adrian J. Hunter, Graham).

I provided rationals: I saw Adrian J. Hunter and Graham's reverts as themselves revertables because of these observable errors signs of negligent participation in their reverts and BECAUSE of Graham ultra-light initial rational failed to convince in a 1 vs 1 content dispute. My action is sanctioned by the community-written written community guideline.

On collaboration: We have diffs showing that despite the opposite side WP:TW-edits with observable errors, I was making half of the way toward Graham: I hidden the row from public view myself. What compromise has done Graham ?

On the content dispute: the table's is still today organized (left-most column) by pandemics that the community and Graham himself has argued are not viruses. It points that defending this position is reasonable, and not simply a "Disruptive edits" position to dismiss and lock away.

On consensus and voices : the count observably shows that the "community consensus" Graham restored and blocked actually was at that time... the template name I created. It's 1 vote for flipped into 1 against, then Graham add 1 for. Still 1 vs 1 of expressed opinions. This position has since lost the vote and I respect it.

There is literally 2 verifiable diffs pointing to Adrian J. Hunter, Graham edits as hasty and therefor ill-informed, and 5~8 such arguments showing I was doing classic good faith edits and supported by community-written BRR rule.

Currently I'am swamped by this situation. Despite point by point arguments, observable diffs, etc, reviewver de facto ignore observable Adrian J. Hunter, Graham's diffs with errors and the confusions these can cause, and stand by "Umh.... weirds.... looks like disturbing editor blocked by admin. Let's keep it that way."

We are wikipedia, from wikiwiki and WP:BOLD, we are flexible and reactive. Not a "I over then I block when I want" community.

.

I'am not arguing to change the template. As an ex-FR+COMMONS admin I'am arguing to see if 2020 Wikipedia's admins can fix a hasty WP:TW-assisted admin's wrongdoing when there are written community guideline in favor of the fix. Yug (talk) 23:48, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huon of course I complain. If me, an ex-admin, I don't argue against sniper-admin doing hasty admin works... Imagine how the newbies get treated and crushedaway when they do their first good will mistakes. Scary. Yug (talk) 23:58, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't made use of WP:AN, you haven't made use of {{unblock}}. Complaining to me is pointless. If anything, you are reinforcing my opinion that the block is warranted. Huon (talk) 00:18, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huon You are expected to review the thing properly and not go by the social-class flow and push reviewee toward lengthy WP:AN. There is 3 times enough elements above to clearly tell Graham to slow down, stop the hasty TW reverts, and stop block-shocking other working users after ~4 minimal edits. Discussion is NECESSARY for admin, if Graham don't want this basic part, then he should quite the job. Yug (talk) 00:25, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HuonThe {{unblock}} is visibly calling over admins who, by 2020, have corporate biaise. Another admin publicly expressed disagreement with Graham, yet did nothing, publicly backing off from the thing he believes correct. These serie of visible systemic corruption of admininship is pretty shocking to witness. Yug (talk) 00:26, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huon : "If anything, you are reinforcing my opinion that the block is warranted." is exactly what I'am talking about. You talk about a block to punish a person, not actually against a blockable edit. I'am pretty sure it was the mindset of Graham when he unneccessarily blocked the page. I listed down observable diffs and rationals which have been flatly ignored. Therefore you can repeat accusations which have been answered. And there is not a word to acknowledge Graham's edits are too hasty, nothing, because there is unwillingness to correct other admins. Correction is constantly necessary. How can the admin stay reasonable if they don't keep each other at check. Yug (talk) 00:49, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I listed diffs with errors, and there isn't even a light "oh... yeah, it's strange". No, both Graham and you 'ignore' the issues so to insist on 'what didn't you wait ?'. It's wikipedia, we go forward. Yug (talk) 00:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Let me be blunt: If you dismiss an edit with a summary of "remove coronavirus - not a flu" as "ambiguous", if you dismiss edits made via Twinkle because they're "hasty", if you dismiss editors who react to a message on a WikiProject talk page that you placed yourself as "just flying by", when you dismiss the relevant community processes because admins "have corporate biaise [sic - does this mean that you're writing hastily and your opinion can thus be dismissed, too?]", it's pretty obvious that you'll find a reason to dismiss anything and everything that disagrees with you. You emphasize that Wikipedia is a collaborative project, but that apparently doesn't mean that you take other editors' concerns seriously - you go forward regardless. You have two basic options at this point: Either you can make use of the relevant venues and processes that you are well aware of, or you can simply wait out the block. This amounts to digging the hole ever deeper. Huon (talk) 10:25, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Huon This above is misrepresentation of my actions.

Huon said "If you dismiss an edit with a summary of "remove coronavirus - not a flu" as "ambiguous". I precisely wrote to you above that I took into account Adrian's edit and explained the rational which is in line with community-written guidelines:

"2) When the situation was ambiguous : I was collecting coronavirus data in a discrete coronavirus row thanks to a noinclude tag, one editor made a weird edit, removing the row but keeping the empty tag (clear sign of partial understanding of what was going on), not engaging in the encouraged discussion (ribbon on the page). The event was still informative: it was proof of the current confusion. I assumed an uninformed edit and went for legitimate revert supported by Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle#Alternatives > BRR guideline. But I learnt from it, so I moved away from the ambiguous "Before" state (table title "flu pandemics" + noinclude coronavirus row) toward a clearer new state table title: "flu and coronavirus" + in-article visible coronavirus row, therefore avoiding confusion as for the table and content. At that point, only myself and this weird edits had expressed hints of opinions on this matters."

On Huon's "you dismiss [Graham] edits made via Twinkle because they're "hasty"", I wrote to you above that I took lesson from Graham edits :

On collaboration: We have diffs showing that despite the opposite side WP:TW-edits with observable errors, I was making half of the way toward Graham: I hidden the row from public view myself.

Graham and Adrian edits were taken into account, I learn from their edits and modified the content's direction to answer their concerns, there are diffs to observe it and I explained the rational above. These rationals are backed up by community-sanctioned BRR and are diff-backed proofs of compromise and collaborations. I answered your concerns. With rational and community-written rules guiding the on the ground collaborative process.

By misrepresenting my action, claiming I bluntly dismissed their edit, you are observably reviewing my unblock request without considering the community-guidelines and answers wrote to answer your legit concerns. Considering already answered concerns as never answered is a bias, likely due to either admin-solidarity or initial assumption that "blockee must stay blocked". You can ignore or consider the bias, but it's observable via diffs, and we are Wikipedia. Yug (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I put a note on List of hospitals in Minnesota to explain what a staffed bed is. It doesn't necessarily include a ventilator. G. Moore 03:29, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good job summarizing the NYT story about ventilators in 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic related shortages. I summarized the same story in Ventilator. Looks like we did it about the same way. --Nbauman (talk) 17:50, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nbauman: Ahahaha, awesome. You picked up detailed I forgot. Nice. Let's shade a light on these crooks ! Yug (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on a better way to do this using this GitHub repository: https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19/ which seems to be pretty similar to the Wikipedia data (and is from a reliable source: Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering)

I'm getting closer to working code.

I also am working on a Google Sheet project to display the data with a more useful comparison between countries. I think in terms of "case concentration" i.e. the number of cases per total citizens. I can then get a more realistic comparison between countries. I also time-shift the countries so that "Day-Zero" is the first day with a case concentration of >=1 case per million citizens. Some have suggested I use >=___ deaths per million citizens, and I'm looking into that also. All the data/charts I've seen so far just give raw numbers. Obviously the USA is going to have a large number of cases when their total population is >300M! How do you compare that to Italy or the UK?! You can only really do so by case concentration that is phase/time-shifted to a common reference value.

You can see a demo (implemented less rigorously in Google Sheets) here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Q0o82VOMHp0IpTs5bkC9fYuD1cNFNyMJk3K4RQj4lYs/pub Rebblumstein (talk) 10:44, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rebblumstein Thanks for this github repository. This folder is very interesting.

Yes. Lot of wikipedia data template talk in term of absolute numbers and therefor miss the point :

• Per capita: more relevant
• Epidemic maturity: may be calculated, see ratio "recovery/detected cases", which follows a S curve.
• Detection rate: may be calculated by using death/cases for country X (unknown) compared to with death/cases of best students Germany and Korea (Mass testing).

Also, The Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team produced on 03-30 a very nice projection. Yug (talk) 23:20, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think this basically works right. Please check if I messed something up:

https://jsfiddle.net/RebBlumstein/6zmtjfgq/latest/

--Rebblumstein (talk) 15:49, 2 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rebblumstein: Nice. #accessibility

FYI:

-Tests: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1_WihbCriZ9E5GovFnWE1J8vMNcdfI66FPfGZ-UVKWiM/edit#gid=0

-Dataviz: https://twitter.com/davemacladd/status/1246347096120332290

Yug (talk) 13:25, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Yug,

I'm not sure why you added Non-pharmaceutical intervention to the coronavirus template as it is a blank page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Liz: hello, yes, I think the article is much needed, it's a formal term in academic literature which I frequently met. I was willing to create it for the past week. But look at my contribs, I'am already overwhelmed by the current news flow on COVID-19 related shortages and others. So I drop the bottle to the sea. Maybe shouldn't. Yug (talk) 22:24, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also need a wikibreak. Yug (talk) 22:49, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Salut Yug ! Je ne sais pas tu étais participant ou témoin lors de la petite « bataille » concernant les figures semi-log contre linéaires sur la page COVID-19 principale (ici sur la en.Wikipedia) - le résult final était bien en faveur des semilogs (sans exclure les linéaires). En tous cas, voilà les cas lab-confirmés et les prévisions et voici le hic plus ultra de la recherche COVID-19 WP:MEDRS meta-reviewée 100% garantie ;). Bon courage ! Boud (talk) 00:23, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour Boud, je suis en wikibreak. Fevrier et Mars ont été tres intenses et anxiogènes a lire 500~1000 sources sur le COVID qui se deploit sous nos yeux avec des governements pathetiquement immobiles. Where are the WWII-scale mass productions of N95 masks and PPE, infra red thermometers, oximeters, cheap open sources ventilators, emergency hospitals, COVID19 tests kits, tracing process and tracing apps, mass education campaigns, and their scaling and shipping globally toward more vulnerable territories to save consumers and serve the security of all ? My 65 days non-stop sprint and anxiety have drained down my energy by early April. There are so much to say about the various failures we observed. Maybe create a group of core COVID19 wikipedians, contact a journalist, and write a "Draft:What Covid19 core wikipedians editors want you to know ?" opinions about that. Because it's scandalous. Anyway, i've been resting for 2 weeks and it works, energy growing back. How are you going ? Yug (talk) 15:16, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eric Feigl-Ding, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Public health emergency (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]