User talk:Donald Trung/Archive 82

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) in topic Wikidata weekly summary #505
Archive 75Archive 80Archive 81Archive 82Archive 83Archive 84Archive 85

This Month in GLAM: December 2021

 




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Re:Flag

The alleged 'dragon star flag' with the red circle was on Vietnamese Wikipedia as old as from 2013. Since it mostly came from unreliable sources and its association with activities of Musée Annam and his sock puppets, there were a lot of discussion around it. I believe I've read that admins at Commons would not take this image down, and some folks were annoyed that this false flag could continue to spread all over other wikis as well as into media coverage and real life events. So yes, I agree with your resolution. Greenknight dv (talk) 06:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Greenknight dv: it has been used to many times to permanently delete, people have delete it in the past. Though I'm not sure if a "Commons cleanse" is possible as it could be seen as trying to force Wikimedia Commons decisions onto a large number of other Wikimedia websites, but this is a special case as this flag is actually being used by the modern Vietnamese government to represent the Gia Long Emperor, this lie has to be consistently addressed. I don't think that the Musée Annam family of socks (known here locally as "Unserefahne", German for "Our flag") is responsible for its origin but they have probably been its largest advocate online. The issue is that the meme has spread to others who now try to continue adding it everywhere.
I personally wish that it was the real Nguyễn Dynasty flag because it is such a beautiful design, but wishing something was real doesn't make it a reality, I can also wish for a hundred extra wives with high libido's but that won't make it a reality either and from all research I've done into this flag I haven't been able to find a single reliable source, only hearsay that sources I've never seen confirm it to be the flag of the 1886 Rebellion by Annamese and Tonkinese Mandarins against the new French protectorates over the Nguyễn Empire. But I haven't seen any of those sources myself and the only actual historical source I found that mentions it attributes it to the Revival Lê Dynasty half a century before the mythology claims it was invented so none of the narratives surrounding it hold up, this flag needs to be deleted and then undeleted after a week to include it in articles debunking it, this is the fakest fake flag to have ever faked. --Donald Trung (talk) 11:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Obvious red flags at the original version of that article relates to how the flag was supposedly used in the Hoàng Sa claim, this makes no sense as before the 1910's or 1920's the Vietnamese didn't even have a concept of "sovereignty" and the colour scheme explanations seem very modern. Musée Annam is trying to project modern sentiments onto the past, this is what Liam Kelley describes as the hallmark of a bad historian. No Vietnamese were even planting any flags in Portuguese-style / Castilian-style in the 1820's, this is a century too early. --Donald Trung (talk) 12:21, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll open up a village pump discussion there. Hopefully some people will agree with my idea of a cleanse. --Donald Trung (talk) 21:09, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: December 2021

 




Headlines
Read this edition in fullSingle-page

To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

You said so the copying was provisional Then I think you should use other places like draft, make sure the content is good enough and then move the content out of draft instead of rough copying.Then I think you should use somewhere else, like drafts, make sure the content is good enough, and then move the content from drafts(I'm not sure what you're saying is true or not, so what I can confirm is that if the draft doesn't work you can write it on paper, on a note or whatever else you can think of.) to articles instead of rough copying from other articles. Rough copy only makes the article worse.Content should be organized or rearranged, not just stuffed by copying.Although you explained a lot, the unorganized copying makes it difficult to read, maybe because you are the main original author of the article, so you can't understand it.--Rastinition (talk) 11:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

It's easy to find my own comments when I need to edit.It isn't organized here, it's difficult to find your comments,so I use (cur/prev) to see new comments recently.In short, it's hard to read here.--Rastinition (talk) 12:26, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia translation of the week: 2022-03

Wikidata weekly summary #503

19:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia translation of the week: 2022-04

Wikidata weekly summary #504

This Month in Education: January 2022

21:36, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022

A barnstar for you!

  The Original Barnstar
Great work on the Great Hanoi Rat Massacre article! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 05:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much. --Donald Trung (talk) 10:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Nguyen Kim HongNguyen Kim Hong

See:

--49.216.237.136 (talk) 18:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

I'd love to help, but I'm not allowed to be improve draftspace articles. You should submit it to Women in Red. --Donald Trung (talk) 19:08, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
See Vietnamese people in Taiwan, OK? --49.216.237.136 (talk) 20:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
You need to write more about her work and write why she's notable. The current draft basically only says that she exists... --Donald Trung (talk) 20:59, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2022

Wikidata weekly summary #505