User talk:Hybernator

• 
• 
• 

Happy New Year!

• 
  MMXXII Lunar Calendar

Hybernator,
Have a great 2026 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

---

   – Background color is Very Peri (#6868ab), Pantone's 2026 Color of the year

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year 2026}} to user talk pages.

Thank you Hybernator for your contributions to WikiProject Myanmar. May you and your family be blessed with strength, health, wealth, and peace. Much love and respect from WikiProject Myanmar senior editor and colleague. KhantWiki (talk) 00:59, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

On 4 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Thihapate III of Taungdwin, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Thihapate III of Taungdwin pledged his allegiance to King Thado, only to renounce it upon returning to his fief? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Thihapate III of Taungdwin. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Thihapate III of Taungdwin), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:03, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

On 29 January 2026, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anawrahta of Tharrawaddy, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Governor Anawrahta was pardoned by two different Ava kings for his allegiance to Hanthawaddy, only to die shortly after the second pardon? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anawrahta of Tharrawaddy. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Anawrahta of Tharrawaddy), and the hook may be added to the statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to nominate it.

Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Women in Red | February 2026, Vol 12, Issue 2, Nos 358, 359, 361, 362, 363 Online events: New: Alphabet run: countries starting with B | Black Women | Works by women: theatre, opera, music Continuing: #1day1woman ( year-long initiative) | Sports (year-long initiative) Announcements from other communities Join Wikipedia:26 for '26 and create or substantially improve twenty-six Wikipedia articles during the year 2026, at least one for each letter of the English alphabet. Tip of the month: Our redlists are a great resource, but not every redlinked subject is notable. Be sure to research before starting a new article. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Lajmmoore (talk 22:48, 31 January 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

You have written an excellent series of articles on these wars and I note that they are currently in queue for GA review. I am a coordinator for the military history project. I work on GA reassessments and B articles assessments, including reviews of bot B class assessments, since the bot occasionally makes an error in a few ambiguous situations - usually because the article is not in the scope of the project and should not be assessed by it. I have not been working on GA assessment requests but I occasionally look at them to see if I can make comments that could be useful.
There is a difference in B class assessment criterion 1 for military history that is allowed due to an exception for this project. When the difference, concerning the requirement for paragraph ending citations, appear, these articles are assessed by Milhistbot as C class. This is the case for the subject articles except for one that I rated B class when I did not pay full attention to the difference in the criteria a few months ago. I have changed it to C class like the others. GA assessors may or perhaps may not take these military history project C class ratings into account. If they do not do B class assessments for military history articles in particular, they may not find the project rating prevents a GA rating overall. However, an experienced military history project assessor might not promote the article or at least not wish to assess it for GA due to the difference. Also, the project rating will remain C even if the overall rating for the article is assessed as GA if the citations at the end of paragraphs are not added - odd as that may seem. I should note that some GA articles that do not technically meet the project b1 criterion may in fact show that they do meet it, most likely due to the GA class assessor changing it or for the same reason that I missed the b1 criterion difference in one of these articles which I later found as I looked at the series of articles up for review
I left the following edit summary "reassess as C class for military history project; fails b1, some paragraphs do not end in citations but in explanatory footnotes which also need citations; explanatory footnotes themselves cannot be used as citation footnotes, even for multiple citations; each should be done separately, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Citations and references especially When to cite section." If you have a question about this please ask and I will try to explain this more clearly.
I encourage you to add citation footnotes at the end of all paragraphs that now end in explanatory "notes." This will allow the assessment for military history to be increased to B class and may increase the possibility of quicker and more likely favorable GA reviews. It is the only technicality that could be a problem that I saw. Note however that the GA assessment list is quite large for military history articles and overall at this time so that may be at least one reason for assessment requests waiting a long time for a review. GA assessors are volunteers, as we all are, and are not required to review these requests in any particular order.
I hope that you can make the citation additions from your sources without taking much time and work to do so. If you choose to do that, let me know and I will reassess the articles as B class. You also can also place B class (or lower as they may turn out at first) assessment requests at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Requests. In turn, I am rather confident that these articles will be assessed as GA as promptly as possible.
I know this note is somewhat long and detailed but I thought it necessary to explain this as thoroughly as possible because it can be unfamiliar, if not a little confusing. So I hope it may be useful and not too bothersome to read through.
I realize you have been an editor and have done good work for a long time but you may not have run into this difference before which is the reason for my note here. I encourage you to keep up the good work. Donner60 (talk) 06:09, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

• Hi Donner60, thanks for taking the time to explain the process. I was a bit confused by the "lack of citations" assessment from the bot. I'll double-check the articles but the only areas currently without inline citations should be the leads. That wasn't an issue with my previous GAs. Re: the citations in the notes, I'll do a pass to ensure everything is properly supported. Thanks again! Hybernator (talk) 19:35, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, as I noted, the milhistbot does not count "explanatory" citations and wants to see a citation footnote at the end of each paragraph and is picky enough to want it after an explanatory footnote at the end of the paragraph and not preceding it. Experienced military history assessors will look at these in much the same way. I won't repeat the details I noted above. Best of luck with the higher assessment classes. Donner60 (talk) 01:39, 9 February 2026 (UTC)

Pls ce on Princess Thonbanhla if you have time. Thanks Hteiktinhein (talk) 16:32, 7 February 2026 (UTC)

@Hybernator အကို နှောင့်ယှက်ရတာsryပါ နတ်သမိုင်းတွေကို dykလိုက်တိုင်းအမြဲပြသနာဖြစ်တယ်...စိတ်ကူးယဉ်ဇာတ်ကောင်မို့ဆိုရင်လဲထားတော့ ဒါတွေပီးရင် နောက်လုပ်ဖို့ဆ်ိုတာ အတော်စဉ်းစားရတော့မယ်

အောက်တန်းစား တွေကapproveပီးမှ ပြန်ပြန်ဆွဲချနေတာ အဆင်ပြေမနေဘူး, အခု သုံးပန်လှမှာလဲ overကြီးလုပ်လို့ ပွဲကြမ်းထားတယ် အကို့ အမြင်ကော ဘယ်လိုရှိလဲ ဘာတွေပြင်ရမလဲ ပြောပြပေး အကိုပြောသမျှကိုမှတ်ထားပြီး အမြဲသင်ယူနေတော့ အတော်တိုးတတ်လာပြီး အရင်တုန်းကထက်စာရင် (အရင်တုန်းက kya nawဘယ်သူဆိုတာ အကိုမှတ်မိမှာပါ kya nawစကားပြောတွေအရဆို)

သုံးပန်လှမှာ နောက်ပြသနာက "ပဲရာဖရေးဇင်း" ဆိုပဲ တကြောင်းလောက် ပြင်ရေးမိတာကို အခု ကျနော်ပြန်ပြင်ထားတာကော အဆင်ပြေပြီလား...ကျနော်ကတော့ otsတွေကို အဆုံးထိ ကာပြန်မှာမို့ လက်မရှော့ဘူး ရအောင်promoteမှာ

နောက်တခု ခြေယာတစ်တောင် မှောင်မဲခေါင်မှာလဲ real life factကိုHookဖို့က ရွှေဆံတော် ဘုရား တရားဝင်web .orgကို hook refအဖြစ်သူံးရင်လက်ခံနိုငိလောက်လား

ကျေးဇူးတင်ပါတယ်နော် Hteiktinhein (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

• Ko Hteiktinhein, sorry for the late reply; been totally swamped. My two cents is that it’s usually best to assume good faith regarding the feedback you're getting. The reality is that most editors aren't familiar with Burmese topics, and we can’t really expect them to be. I’ve been through many rounds like this myself; for example, I once had to prove the Forty Years' War was a notable event! It can definitely feel exasperating but it’s not the best use of our time to assume bad faith on their part.

• Here is my advice for navigating the DYK process:

• Use English citations: Whenever possible, pick hooks supported by English-language sources. It makes it much easier for reviewers to verify.
• Keep it neutral. Especially with religious and nat figures, avoid hagiography unless you are explicitly quoting a source.
• As for "interesting" hooks, I struggle with this myself since "interesting" is so subjective. It is what it is!

• See if these hooks work...

• ... that the Burmese nat spirit Princess Thonbanhla was said to be "beautiful in three ways," changing her appearance to match the morning, noon, and evening?
• ... that the spirit of Princess Thonbanhla is believed to protect the harvest, but may curse "backbiters" with leprosy?

• Again, don't take this too personally. This too shall pass. Best, Hybernator (talk) 01:20, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

  သုံးပန်လှမှာ နောက်ပြသနာက "ပဲရာဖရေးဇင်း" ဆိုပဲ တကြောင်းလောက်ရေးမိတာကို ... အခု ကျနော်ပြန်ပြင်ထားတာကော အဆင်ပြေပြီလား...check pay par oo. Hteiktinhein (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

The article Razawin Linka has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No reliable sources found

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion based on established criteria.

If the proposed deletion has already been carried out, you may request undeletion of the article at any time. Kingsacrificer (talk) 06:37, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1408–1418) is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chipmunkdavis -- Chipmunkdavis (talk) 13:34, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Women in Red | March 2026, Vol 12, Issue 3, Nos 358, 359, 364, 365, 366 Online events: March 1-31: Artists & Activists | Artworks by women | Alphabet run: countries starting with C Continuing (year-long initiatives): #1day1woman | Sports Announcements from other communities: Celebrate Women Unreferenced articles backlog drive Wiki Loves Ramadan Tip of the month: Those experiencing difficulties with new articles can follow the guidance in our essays, perhaps starting with our Ten Simple Rules. Other ways to participate: Become a member. You can always opt-out of notifications. Join the conversations on our talkpage. Help us plan future events and add any general ideas on developing the project. Follow us on social media: Instagram | Pinterest

--Rosiestep (talk) 09:28, 25 February 2026 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Your good article nomination of the article Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1430–1431) is under review. See the review page for more information. This may take up to 7 days; feel free to contact the reviewer with any questions you might have. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Min968 -- Min968 (talk) 13:31, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1408–1418) has failed. See the review page for more information. If or when the reviewer's feedback has been addressed, you may nominate the article again. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Chipmunkdavis -- Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:00, 28 February 2026 (UTC)

Your good article nomination of the article Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1430–1431) has passed; congratulations! See the review page for more information. If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Please also consider reviewing somebody else's nomination to help keep the backlog down. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Min968 -- Min968 (talk) 03:31, 1 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1430–1431) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there at your earliest convenience. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Cbl62 (talk) 23:09, 2 March 2026 (UTC)