Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Malaysia

GAR notice

Kuala Lumpur has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

GAR notice

Kota Kinabalu has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:17, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

GAR Notice

Sandakan has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikimania 2023 : Singapore, 16-19 August

Wikimedians! You are highly encouraged to apply for travel scholarship for Wikimedia Movement's largest gathering, Wikimania 2023. Wikimania 2023 will happen in Singapore and online from 16-19 August, 2023. There is a pre-conference on the 15th and a post-conference on the 20th. It is back on our region since Hong Kong in 2013. Application deadline is on 5 February 2023 at 23:59 AoE. Regular registration will happen around May 2023. --Exec8 (talk) Exec8 (talk) 07:39, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Japanese government-issued Philippine peso#Requested move 29 January 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Japanese government-issued Philippine peso#Requested move 29 January 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 01:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Golden Screen Cinemas, Lotus Five Star, MBO Cinemas, TGV Cinemas & the List of cinemas in Malaysia.

I apologise if this is not the right place to post this.

Correct me if I am wrong. Aren't these articles violating policies such as WP:CRYSTALBALL, WP:DIRECTORY, WP:NOTADVERT & WP:NOTDATABASE? I have, in the past, attempted to improve them by removing content that are in violation with Wikipedia's policies and by adding relevant maintenance templates. However, I am unsure as to how much more content I should remove in order to ensure the aforementioned articles comply with Wikipedia's policies. Can an experienced editor help me determine what is worth keeping and what is worth removing? Or am I just overreacting and being a deletionist? --Lousysofa (talk) 17:35, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

I think all of these are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles, same like the cinema chains in other countries listed in Category:Cinema and movie theatre chains by country. Just make sure these cinema articles have proper information to make them an encyclopedia articles, e.g. date of establishments, where they are located, history, changes in branding/logo etc. Chongkian (talk) 04:11, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

The problem isn't whether the subjects are notable enough or not, the problem is the content of the articles. I believe the articles have a slight promotional tone, contain predictions (e.g. predicting the year a cinema will open), and contain excessive information that aren't supposed to be included in Wikipedia articles (e.g. number of seats in each cinema). — Lousysofa (talk) 17:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:09, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Naming convention for federal and state constituencies

Please correct me if I am wrong but I think there had previously been an unwritten convention (or tradition) of naming constituencies in Malaysia with the (state/federal constituency) suffix. However, this was challenged in good faith around December last year by a few editors citing WP:PRECISE. I think that all constituencies should have the (federal/state constituency) suffix as most constituency boundaries in Malaysia usually have quite a significant discrepancy between the actual boundary of the place and constituency named after the place. For example, P123. Cheras is a federal constituency located solely in Kuala Lumpur, but the actual boundary of the place known as Cheras actually stretches into Selangor and is noticeably much bigger than the boundary of the constituency named after it. However, I am not sure if this is enough of a reason to propose an exception to WP:PRECISE in the naming convention. Should federal and state constituencies in Malaysia have a naming convention similar to those of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (UK Parliament constituencies) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Indian constituencies)? --Traxezz (talk) 09:30, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Can you provide a link to an instance where editors challenge the naming convention/tradition? Did they simply omit the suffix (e.g.: changing "Cheras (federal constituency)" to "Cheras") or did they remove the suffix in favour of the constituency's code (e.g.: "Cheras (federal constituency)" → "P123 Cheras")? Personally, I believe we could be more precise if we use "(Dewan Rakyat constituency)" instead of "(federal constituency)" and "<insert state name> legislative assembly constituency)" instead of "(state constituency)" as Malaysia is not the only country in the world with federal and state constituencies. — Lousysofa (talk) 17:43, 18 May 2023 (UTC)