btw if no one has suggested yet, learning to archive your talk page is worth the effort, specially as you venture into more contentious subject areas than people have breakfasts in a week or something like that... JarrahTree15:52, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to, though admittedly the instructions I am reading are giving me a nervous breakdown not seen since failing computer science in my high school days. Borgenland (talk) 16:21, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Francis Omondi Ogolla, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Amissing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
I posted my reply there. If you can properly connect Ram Mandir to Modi's controversial speech in April then I would not touch that title. Borgenland (talk) 14:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good day! Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia by writing this article. I have marked the article as reviewed. Have a wonderful and blessed day for you and your family!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
Apologies I did not mean it was you. Prior to your deletion, another editor had inserted the attribution part that may have contributed to you deleting it, which was the actual tampering I was referring to. Had I known that it would have caused the deletion I would have opposed inserting the attribution on grounds on good faith of the source. Borgenland (talk) 14:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough – thanks, and please accept my apologies for jumping to the wrong conclusion. Keep up the good work :) MIDI (talk) 20:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! You are engaging in edit warring. If your edit has been reverted, you are supposed to engage in a discussion on the talk page, not add it back in. Concerning this edit of yours, your edit summary of "improper format" is puzzling. There are no formatting problems present in the relevant text fragment. — UnladenSwallow (talk) 08:27, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The use of parenthesis in an article is greatly minimized due to its incongruity and clumsiness with the article. At this stage, the best option is to have it in note form or retain its visibility by removing the parenthesis. As far as consensus goes, reliable sources are sticking with the 8 figure, so prominently saying 9 would be undue. Borgenland (talk) 08:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mind you also that IRNA was also the same source for the death tolls for both 8 and 9, so I would definitely hold off on reffing it directly. Borgenland (talk) 08:32, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Broc: Hello! I am a non-Austrian and non-German speaker who happens to be curious about incumbents dying in legislatures. I created this article from available data in the German language Wikipedia with the help of translators. I have noticed that the Austrian Parliament's website is a good starting point but I decided to see first which sources can be found in a regular news site before going to it. As such I will start looking back into the Parliament. Thanks for pointing these issues out. Borgenland (talk) 15:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I had just run the test and found that there were possible copyvios (45.7%) but apparently of another source. But since the edits appeared to have been made over a long time I am no longer sure which revision to start with. Borgenland (talk) 01:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My impression of them was that they were merely challenged as regards to copying material from articles and WP:NEWSPAPER issues. They had pledged not to repeat again after warning but some aspects of problematic editing remain, particularly WP:QUOTEFARMinArnolfo Teves Jr. and WP:NEWSPAPER (personally peeved in in inserting "person said" at the end of quotes). Borgenland (talk) 12:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They just split the issue into two disjointed ends of the section. I think it should still be reduced to just one paragraph. Still suspicious about copyvio and WP:NEWSPAPER about the use of the word Mr. to refer to Samaniego. I think offending user needs to be told off on when to use a personal title. Borgenland (talk) 13:52, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I just stumbled upon Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Archive 51#Artworks while compiling some notable discussions on FoP status of the Philippines here. My apology if I didn't comment there because I do not regularly add the TAMBAYAN talk page on my watchlist.
Regarding the artworks, in addition to User:Seav's insight, I'll further add. Copyright laws vary across the world, and somehow a nuisance for many uploaders. Here are the FoP statuses of countries that you mentioned in your query.
Philippines: right now not OK. Though there are pending bills to seek modernization of the copyright law, much of support is for the passage of the bills that solely focus on giving the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines the power to order blocking of websites or online platforms hosting pirated or infringing content. There is little to no support for three House Bills and one Senate Bill that contain FoP provision. More info: meta:Pilipinas Panorama Community/Freedom of Panorama/Progress.
Hong Kong: per c:COM:FOP Hong Kong, museum indoors are OK. Only 3D arts like sculptures. Do not upload copyrighted 2D graphic arts like murals, graffiti, or street art.
Australia: per c:COM FOP Australia, identical with Hongkongese FoP. Both HK and Australian FoP are inherited from the UK FoP anyway: UK FoP is OK for architecture, sculptures, and artisan works (like mosaics, textiles, jewelries, handicrafts etc.), but not OK for 2D flat arts.
Taiwan: no. No commercial FoP for anything found in public except architecture. Only works like Taipei 101 can be reproduced by photographers to be licensed commercially: c:COM:FOP Taiwan. Copyright expires 50+1 years after artist's death.
Thailand: no. Per c:COM:FOP Thailand, Thai FoP only covers outdoor landmarks like architecture, murals, and monuments. Anything indoors not covered. Copyright expires 50+1 years after artist's death.
Japan: no, just an identical carbon-copy of Taiwan; or maybe the Japanese law influenced the Taiwanese law. See c:COM:FOP Japan. Copyright expires 70+1 years after artist's death.
And finally, hosting on enwiki is of no use. English Wikipedia only follows the U.S. copyright law, hence U.S. FoP is applied (see WP:Freedom of panorama). As the U.S. law does not grant FoP for any copyrighted public art, enwiki cannot accept good-quality images of sculptures, statues et cetera. Such images, even if made by Wikipedian photographers themselves, must strictly comply with WP:Non-free content policy. Merely hosting images of copyrighted Philippine, Taiwanese, Thai, and Japanese museum art is an infraction to that policy. No use to tag such images with fair use rationale description boxes; a bot would surely flag those as unused fair use files, to be queued for deletion if not used after a week.
The Philippines is not the only country with relatively outdated copyright law (RA8293) not providing an exception that serves as a legal waiver for users to freely use, share, distribute, and/or publish their images of copyrighted architecture and monuments even for commercial purposes (the essence of FoP). More than 100 countries either do not provide or (worse) do not permit commercial FoP. See c:Commons:Freedom of panorama/table for the summary table as per Commons' perspective (commercial use should not be restricted). On top of that, seven countries – Denmark, Finland, Japan, Norway, Russia, Taiwan, and the United States – have nuanced FoP rules: architecture is free to be used even commercially, but public art and monuments still under sculptors' copyrights cannot be freely used. The country most visited by tourists, France, also does not allow commercial FoP.
It remains to be seen when will our country finally introduce Freedom of Panorama. Current progress in the congress show the bills that are solely focused on site-blocking and anti-piracy provisions (no provisions on FoP) are gaining momentum and greatest support from many stakeholders, from telecommunications companies to CitizenWatch Philippines. JWilz12345(Talk|Contrib's.)03:36, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Borgenland, speaking of FoP, have you tried talking to your "mga kakilala" with regards to the need for FoP and the pending bills to amend/reform R.A. 8293? The relative "lack of attention" to the three House Bills with FoP clause (HB 799, HB 2672, and HB 3838), as well as Senate Bill 2326 bothers me. JWilz12345(Talk|Contrib's.)17:40, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By coincidence there's one Tambayan editor who I personally know and I think they're aware of that too. Otherwise I'm not an expert when it comes to lobbying. Borgenland (talk) 02:15, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Um can you add release of their songs in 2023? Their article history has 2023-present but the first info is already 2024 and not 2023 not even a 2023 date on that part of the article.
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2024 Enga landslide, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The National.
Yeah! Saw you removed almost all of the reactions on the "Reactions" section. Are they not notable enough? (Chat With Term)talk06:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia editors usually resent Reactions sections for being a dumping ground of all grounds of reactions from everyone. In cases such as these, it is generally accepted practice to include reactions from incumbent authorities, particularly those who have direct jurisdiction over the area and who stand to be directly affected in some sort. Borgenland (talk) 06:13, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was on the fence about adding the 2011 incident to List of explosions because of the lack of injuries and deaths and no standalone article, but there were also a significant number of structures affected, more than in some other entries — I know that this invokes WP:OTHERCONTENT but the parameters for the list are vague. See also the notability discussion that I started right after the incident. Mapsax (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think your argument is good for the history of that town, as someone who also contributes in local history articles, but as for the explosions list, I do have doubts over its notability in a longer-term article especially due to relative weight of details. I previously made a WP:BOLD purge of non-notables based on similar criteria that you acknowledged because the article was bloated at the time. Honestly since you have been kind enough to raise these concerns to me I do not have the mood to risk going into an edit war over this, but I do have to notify you in advance that this entry would probably be reverted if the page gets bloated again in the future. Borgenland (talk) 01:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There wouldn't be an edit war since I never reinstated that entry (and I try avoid those, as I should).
I note that you've done some edits lately purging entries with fewer than 5 deaths. While that's a bit arbitrary, it would be a good start for a parameter, with consensus of course. Mapsax (talk) 00:28, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Borgenland. I'm currently expanding the section you recently added to this article. I want to consult you for clarification about the definition of endorsement and its scope here in Wikipedia. Can collaborations and partnerships be considered "endorsements" in the context of Wikipedia? Bini collaborated with Coke Studio Philippines in 2022 and partnered with Kumu in 2021. I was wondering if these could be included. Please let me know what you think about this, thank you. AstrooKai (talk) 09:24, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about that. The ones I cited pertain to brands with dedicated ads, plus I doubt a collab with government agencies could classify as an endorsement given the risks of partisanship. Maybe the guys at Wikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & Advertising could help. Also see templates on similar groups. Borgenland (talk) 09:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, I would like to follow up on this. I did some research about the group's event with Coca-Cola, and I found out that they were only collaborations or partnerships.
I'm a bit confused, as sources states that the group had endorsements with Coca-Cola. But besides these two events, I don't see other articles nor events that mentions the group for endorsement. AstrooKai (talk) 11:44, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's necessarily an endorsement. It's more like a musical event with the sponsorship of a major brand or institution. For example, the dreadful fainting incident in Dagupan was a concert co-sponsored by Coke and the LGU for the patronal fiesta, which I included at the bottom of the Concerts list. Borgenland (talk) 11:49, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not totally confident but in the case of Coke Studio, it would be better placed in History. As for the partnerships, the closest you've got for now is the Kumu webcast. Borgenland (talk) 11:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. Then I guess I will exclude Coca-Cola from the endorsements for now until more corroborative information becomes available, thank you again. AstrooKai (talk) 11:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template index/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 14:15, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I hope an article can be created about this public figure Magomed Omarov (Russian politician) since I understand that he was arrested for his involvement in the recent attacks and will subsequently be not prosecuted but executed by the Kremlin under the precept of "Russian treason" would work a lot for American politics to create an article for it. User.shanie6 (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I'm currently working on a new article for Bini's song "Karera" as it is listed under Tambayan's articles for creation. While working on the infobox song template for the song, I got confused by some of the parameters (genre, songwriter/writer, composer, and lyricist in particular). The song was composed by three people from FlipMusic, but Bini members Colet, Mikha, and Stacey wrote the rap parts of the song. I'm currently stuck on whether I should include the three group members in the composer parameter of the infobox or have them in the lyricist parameter. For the genre part, I know that the song is a pop song, but I'm also thinking about whether the song has other specific genres. Could you please share your thoughts on this, to help clarify some confusion? AstrooKai (talk) 12:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
When it comes to music I’m more of a national anthems person (lyrics and music only), with rap as my greatest enemy. But given my understanding of things the BINIs are better placed in lyrics. As for other categories rap is under WikiProject Hip hop. Borgenland (talk) 13:46, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! My apologies also for the disambiguations, I was rushing to tally the early-morning surge. 10:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC) Borgenland (talk) 10:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just read the passage. Simply terrible. I’d erase it immediately if if my laptop were on. This really now needs to be raised in Tambayan, if not ANI. Borgenland (talk) 17:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Borgenland it should be raised to an admin to hide the infringing revisions. The copyvios are still accessible thru article history and someone can access that to copy without the original publisher's authorization. JWilz12345(Talk|Contrib's.)09:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't mind, I would like to ask if you could file the report since you appear to have more experience handling this case and I am also dealing with a similar case on an overseas article. Borgenland (talk) 13:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Borgenland I'm afraid I can't file a report in the forseeable future. I'm focused on several things on Wikimedia Commons at the moment. Additionally, the method of filing a report here may be more complicated than similar actions on Commons (I'm much more used on Commons methods). Regards, JWilz12345(Talk|Contrib's.)23:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Borgenland. This is regarding your recently opened topic about potential WP:NEWSPAPER content in the Bini (group) article. Can you please explain what kind of revisions can be made to address this issue? So that I can familiarize myself with the procedures and contribute when possible. Thanks! AstrooKai │ Talk08:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is content that should look less like it was taken from a newspaper. While under normal circumstances this applies to copyvios, in the case of Bini it is kind of formatted similarly like a series of collated news reports with tons of redundant items. For example at one point Cherry on Top was described three times as their upcoming pre-debut single in one chapter alone. What I propose to do is to reduce the number of instances to make the article more readable. Borgenland (talk) 09:30, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your reactions to the IP editor seem to be unduly harsh , WP:DONTBITE.
They clearly do not know much about wikipedia (as evidenced by the fact they said "im american" when the IP tool easily shows their in Iran) and their edits seem to be done in good faith AlexBobCharles (talk) 14:38, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies. When I first saw the IP's edits I suspected it was a sock of Baratiiman given their similar incoherent grasp of English. Then when said editor made false and racist aspersions as to my identity I totally lost faith. Finally the fact that they deliberately misspelled my name in the last edit reminds of an infamous sock of @/DirceuMag who was banned for POV pushing and WP:SOAPBOXING in previous election articles and who had a habit of deliberately misspelling my name and making long rambling edit summaries similar to the IP, in addition to falsely claiming questionable and partisan sources to be official. Borgenland (talk) 15:11, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! I just want to inform you that I have corrected your recent edits on Bini (group) and Biniverse: The First Solo Concert, particularly the "diversify ref" edits. The citations were not formatted correctly, so I have converted them. You can see the difference here:
Understandable, I'm glad to hear that. I was also planning on doing the same thing as I think that the articles are a bit more reliable on the publications by the home network, though there are some circumstances where only the home network covers certain topic. But thank you for that. AstrooKai │ Talk07:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. On the page Eva Lasting you said that you added the Update template to the cast list because there are names missing from season 2. My question to you is: if you know that names are missing from the list then why not add them yourself instead of using the Update template. I have not seen the season so I am unable to know if new cast members joined the series and the reference I added about the season 2 date doesn’t mention new cast members [5]. Telenovelafan215 (talk) 17:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies but I haven’t had the time to read through the credits and edit heavily on the page due to prior commitments. And to prove in good faith that such new characters exist and at the risk of spoiling the plot there is Jose’s mother, former lover, and love child for example. Borgenland (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]