User talk:Robertsky

Reversion of my edit

Ouch, I'm so sorry, I should do research! Cheers, Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Hockeycatcat, no worries. Such edits may be seen as vandalism actually at the first glance by many. (This coming from a Chinese person here. Ha!) It is just that I had graduated from the university, so I am aware of the rename, but I did not get around to edit on the main SMU article, assuming others will do it... with references included. – robertsky (talk) 09:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, congratulations on your graduation! Someone will probably find a source soon since the rename was recent. Cheers, Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Hockeycatcat, it was a long time ago. haha. I did find a source or two, and have updated the article accordingly. – robertsky (talk) 09:42, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

That's good, hopefully there won't be any more confusion from now on! Cheers, Hockeycatcat (talk) 09:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Hockeycatcat, it shouldn't now. For a good measure, I have moved the School of Law article page accordingly as well. The article move should hold given the justification. – robertsky (talk) 10:05, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Good idea! Hockeycatcat (talk) 10:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Total Defence Logo 2020.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Total Defence Logo 2020.png. 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) 17:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Removed links under Further Reading

Hi Robertsky, I noticed that you removed links to further reading that I added in entries related to COVID-19 apps. While I agree with your reasoning in some cases (e.g. the links might be too country-specific for the "contact tracing" entry), I do believe that they are very relevant to other entries such as "COVID-19 apps" and "Corona-Warn-App". I also don't think these links violate the guidelines on external links. Could you please explain why do you feel otherwise, so I can better understand how to add/edit such sections? Thanks!

See point 6 under WP:ELNO. – robertsky (talk) 10:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

And WP:ELPOV – robertsky (talk) 10:19, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of City Developments Limited

The article City Developments Limited you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:City Developments Limited for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Willbb234 -- Willbb234 (talk) 15:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 43

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021

• New Library Card designs
• 1Lib1Ref May

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:12, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Article SGP

Am I missing something with the English version of Culture of Singapore? Why was there stuff being removed constantly, because in other languages it seems like there's no problem. It seems like the German version hasn't existed yet so I am planning on creating one. I am willing to translate to my native language, but which version? One has much less information than the other. It would seem weird if one language has more information than the other, especially since English is considered the language that most people understands. Thanks. BrandenburgWatch (talk) 18:15, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

BrandenburgWatch, The version is currently being removed is because it was done by someone with a Long-term abuse case. And per point 4 in WP:ROLLBACKUSE, other editors have the right to revert these changes, that is until someone comes along and vet through every single change that was made. I won't say that it must be an established editor doing the review, but established reputation on the site helps in staking the vetting process and outcome, this is especially when we are dealing with new accounts trying to circumvent the LTA blocks and reverts. Content on sister wikipedias does not concern us. In fact, there are countless of articles in other languages with more information than in English. Being someone who understands different languages and peruse sister projects for information/content/references, I can offer countless of such example in different languages. If you feel that that version is what you want to translate with, feel free to do for your wikipedia project. You just need to peg to the specific revision ID in your translation attribution. – robertsky (talk) 18:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Robertsky. Is that version in English just kaput then? What if that version was mostly translated into another language, which means that such content that was removed in the English version exists in another language Wikipedia. Would it still be forbidden or against the rules to have it in English? When I first saw it, I did not see anything particularly abusive, and realized that a lot of research time could had been saved. I also assume the reason that it was also being removed when I tried to save it was because I'm not an established editor on English Wikipedia. Your userpage seems to show that you're from Singapore, so I'd say you know more about Singapore culture than I do. I can't really confirm any subtle inaccuracies as I'm not native, but there was quite a date gap between when it was first introduced and then removed, so it must had been quite accurate at least from my perspective. BrandenburgWatch (talk) 19:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

BrandenburgWatch, I cannot say for sure, since I am choosing not to review the changes as they are for now. I have other fish to fry. – robertsky (talk) 20:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Trigger finger Libera.chat

Re: [1], Libera.chat is actually an internal link. :-P

In other news, see also: meta:Wikimedia Forum#Freenode_(IRC)

--Kim Bruning (talk) 16:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Kim Bruning, indeed. it was. (◎ ◎)ゞ – robertsky (talk) 16:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

And apologies from my side for thinking you were a robot for a second there ;-). Quick reflexes for sure! --Kim Bruning (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Kim Bruning, no worries. i get that a lot irl... with my name, and a particularly Asian tendency to mispronouncing it. – robertsky (talk) 16:34, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Remove MP from postnominal title

Hello Robertsky, would you be able to help me remove 'MP' from all our politicians' pages with AWB when you have the time? 'MP' is not a postnominal and merely a position, and I wish to standardise the pages like those belonging to that of British politicians, who don't have 'MP' as part of their name. Thank you. Seloloving (talk) 00:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Seloloving, sure. i will look into that if there's no one else beating me to it. <(￣︶￣)> – robertsky (talk) 00:41, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! That would be greatly appreciated. I considered doing it myself manually, but there are so many pages.... :( Seloloving (talk) 00:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hmm "and I wish to standardise the pages like those belonging to that of British politicians, who don't have 'MP' as part of their name"--that assertion is quite untrue though, just look at Boris Johnson for example. Many others here too. Per Member of Parliament (United Kingdom)#Title: "Members of Parliament are entitled to use the post nominal title MP." But I have no idea what's technically the case for us here in SG. Kingoflettuce (talk) 12:53, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Kingoflettuce, iirc, LKY did away with some formalities such as honorifics when he and PAP took over the governance of Singapore. There is no mentions of entitlements in the Standing Orders of Singapore Parliament about the usage of post nominals (and pre nominals for the matter of fact. I would have done away with 'The Honourable' as well if not for a prior conversation somewhere on Wikipedia). – robertsky (talk) 13:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Good on LKY, ha. I do vaguely recall that "prior conversation" but can't really remember where it is. And I believe someone pointed out that 'The Honourable' is technically used (or usable?) here. Wonder if the same source that person referenced also mentions the "MP" issue. Kingoflettuce (talk) 13:25, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

In Singapore, our postnominals are only those from the list of Singaporean orders and decorations. There's no source that our MPs use 'MP' as a postnominal title, and barring a source, I daresay we should not adopt it, like the case of the 'The Right Honourable' title (though 'The Honourable' is definitely confirmed as being used). That say, I admit I could have checked better on more pages as those pages I checked then did not have the MP title, strangely enough, and that's my lapse.

In any case, great thanks, robertsky, if a source does turn up that our MPs are entitled to the title as a postnominal, I will take the responsibility. Seloloving (talk) 13:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

It's just my personal take that the infobox looks more aesthetically pleasing with an "MP" postnominal. :P Kingoflettuce (talk) 13:27, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

If only somebody would ask The Honourable Tan Chuan-Jin about this matter... Kingoflettuce (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Seloloving no problem, awb find and replace done. 55 of 197 pages edited. – robertsky (talk) 13:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

I emailed the Parliament admin on this three months ago. They ignored my email. Seloloving (talk) 13:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Sad react Kingoflettuce (talk) 13:36, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Kingoflettuce Seloloving, one can try... Twitter: https://twitter.com/robertsky_/status/1396098294531584008 (⁄ ⁄•⁄ω⁄•⁄ ⁄) – robertsky (talk) 13:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Imagine if he replies here. o.o Seloloving (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Seloloving: if so, his account here will have to be verified by OTRS first with {{Verified account}}. 😂 Don't forget, we had someone using names of public figures vandalising BLPs. – robertsky (talk) 13:55, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

By the way, here's the source from the PMO where our orders and decorations are a form of postnominal, in case anyone asks in future. Their names from page 9 on and every award after have the post-nominal for those who have already received such a decoration; ie "Mr Tng Kay Lim, BBM" or "Mr Tan Ee Tiong, PBM". Seloloving (talk) 22:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Some incorrect content about Sambhaji

First you tell me what souce you used to write this some incorrect information about the great king Sambhaji. There are very few nonsence books/writers who at one side doing defamation of Sambhaji while stating about his contribution and bravery on other side. How much this is logical you think. You just took the summery of these books and content of some distorted writers right. So there huge number of books who describes the real sambhaji which is proof of this that The true story is Sambhaji was an ideal king who didn't have any bad addiction and was a symbol for bravery and patriotism which he shown in his sacrifice. He was a great king that's how he managed to defeat Aurangzeb Right? How a king who is badly addicted can manage this? And why Shehenshah of Hindustan Aurangzeb can be so desperate to capture like such King which is coloured by some distorted writer? Use simple logic. Sambhaji is a god for many people so stop his defamation. Swarajya History.. (talk) 04:04, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Swarajya History.., check your facts before you shoot from your hips. I didn't edit on the article directly itself. I have no idea what you are talking about here. If you think your material should be on the article, suggest the changes with sources included. Your last edit on the Talk page, right now to others, it is just a piece of original research with no backing. – robertsky (talk) 04:46, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Please restore the images on The Youth Coalition for Organ Donation page

They're all available under this link. At the top of the page, they're licensed under the creative commons 4.0 license (listed as a white bar at the top of the page). https://www.ycod.org/design-files

The links to news sites are needed for Wikipedia notability. Evanroden1 (talk) 09:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)