This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Hi Folly Mox, you restored this article. Are you sure that the content in this article is okay? As in, the translations, transcriptions, dates, and that the uncited information is correct even if not immediately verifiable? —Alalch E.08:52, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
User:Alalch E., that's a good point. I do remember starting by restoring redirects blanked out of process by a sock account, and when I went to complete the Category:Ming dynasty eras I found that several articles were very short, and the sock had been blanking its own prior work, possibly because they'd rather have no articles in the list than some but not all.I think I stopped short at Hongxi because I wasn't sure whether the eras were all detailed enough to warrant standalone articles and whether I was violating WP:BMB or some other sock-related policy. This was my first ever SPI, and on top of that I actually know almost nothing about the Ming dynasty— but no other editors active in the Chinese history space seemed to be as concerned about the sock account's activity in this specific topic area. Maybe they've seen it so many times that they don't bother.The information all seems reasonable, and not skewed towards any POV the sockmaster mayb be pushing (which I can't readily identify in any case: from what I've seen they like to remove all information about the early Ming dynasty whether positive or negative) but I have other things on my plate this weekend, and I'd prefer not to verify the latter few articles restored from redirects which were Ylogm solo works, so I'll self-revert Zhengtong (era) and Yongle back into redirects until I'm prepared to dedicate the necessary time to get them to a state where I'm comfortable taking responsibility for their content. Folly Mox (talk) 15:21, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply. This appears to mostly be a translation of the Chinese article. It's probably essentially correct, but a Chinese history expert should look at it. —Alalch E.15:26, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My own sense of vanity compels me to assert that I'm not not a Chinese history expert (although I never finished grad school), but my area of concentration is way earlier than Ming.With that prideful nonsense out of the way, I'd like to ping @Girth Summit:, who actioned the SPI, to inquire about policy here. Am I able to restore the banned user's content if I verify it? Do I need to rewrite it from scratch? Like many users who go rogue, some of Ylogm's work appears constructive (especially the earlier strata), but I'd like to ensure that I'm acting in compliance with policy before I move forward with any of this. Folly Mox (talk) 21:14, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
