User talk:Shenme

Hello Shenme, I want ask you for your advice. I have source^[1] that I want to use on this article this article[1]. But I don't know that which section of that article I can add the source's information to. Shahanshah5 (talk) 12:24, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

It appears the Chicago Tribune archive is now on Ancestry.com. Sold to the Mormons, purveyors of fake religion since 1830. So no. What about Frederick Grant Gleason? It was four years ago, I really don't remember. Tried the Wayback Machine? MinorProphet (talk) 21:39, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I did see the section China#Names, and I did see their breakdowns and "zhōng "central" and guó "state"" which don't match what others have for a long time written. "Middle" is the normal translation of 中 and is apt and poetic while "central" is rigid and a little boastful. "Country" is also the standard definition of 国, and "state" is rigid and inelegant; China is not just a state, it's a country (and a nation). Translations are natural not state defined. "The '-' dash bothers me for some reason." Its arguable that its non-standard form. Its not pinyin to use dashes but maybe it should be because its clearer, and inline with the monosyllabic separation between hanzi glyphs. "Multiple guides to pronunciation, including [ʈʂʊ́ŋ.kwǒ]." I would welcome some improvements to the IPA, but then which Chinese language/dialect would be the one used? The putonghua wins out here. -ApexUnderground (talk) 04:09, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@ApexUnderground: Obviously 普通话 , but there seem to be so many variations on IPA, that using what already existed in the article - and presumably has already been argued over to consensus - might be a good thing? Some people will get upset at any change, but more people if the change ignores (seems to ignore?) previous text. Shenme (talk) 04:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

The IPA has two modes, one which honors the simple form and approximate pronunciation and the other which honors precise native pronunciation, even when the phonology is unusual. China having so many different languages means we go with the main one. ApexUnderground (talk) 06:54, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Racial_discrimination&oldid=903968918

I recently made these edits. They are cited by this article (though you can find others):

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/are-jews-white/509453/

On the talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Racial_discrimination

some seem to disagree that the Jews were discriminated against. These seem to be the same people who believe that the holocaust never existed. Nick is just a really bad person. At this point, I believe I need administrative help.

Nick has a track record of stalking and disruptively reverting my contributions to wikipedia. I was hoping Nick could be blocked from editing, or that a report be submitted against him, at the very least. His abusive behavior is getting out of hand.

People like him also launched several smear-campaigns, simply because I wrote about some things that are well-sourced and well-documented that does not fit their chauvinistic point of view.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Xinjiang_Pages_and_User%3AAlexkyoung

I appreciate your input on this urgent issue. Wikipedia has no space for such bullying and abuse.

Alexkyoung (talk) 05:05, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Have you seen situations like many short snippets of non-English text handled nicely? The editor has a particular presentation desired for these snippets, and that makes using a surrounding {{lang|grc|[πεμ]ψω αυτον ... του ζητειτε}} impossible. And adding lang templates to each each each small bit is a recipe for pain? Shenme (talk) 03:05, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I tried putting a whole block in span tags manually, but unfortunatly Mediawiki auto-closes the span tag at the end of the line because of the other formatting. It's not too bad to put one {{lang}} per line, which works (other than the lines that already have span tags). Though I would question whether this amount of non-English text is appropriate for Wikipedia, especially since there's no English translation. I would be inclined to move the full text of this document to Wikisource. -- Beland (talk) 15:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate your hard work for the encyclopedia! But you are creating a lot of punctuation errors tonight. Compound modifiers are supposed to be hyphenated and you're taking the hyphens out of them. For example, if someone is in a commercial that is thirty seconds long, it's a thirty-second commercial. A break that lasts two minutes is a two-minute break. (A cup that is stained with coffee is a coffee-stained cup, not a "coffee stained cup"; a manual that is easy to read is an easy-to-read manual...) Unfortunately, many of the examples one sees in the media are incorrect also; it is very frustrating for some of us! The examples in MOS:HYPHEN regarding compound modifiers will illuminate this further, I hope. Thanks! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 04:13, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you again for your really thoughtful discussion on my talk page a few weeks ago about compound modifiers! (For what it's worth, I'm not an English teacher, but I'm a U.S. federal lawyer, which means my job requires me to analyze specific grammar and usage every day. Unfortunately, this also means I sometimes can't take the time in one sitting to answer good questions like this, and I apologize again for the delay.)

The ultimate answer to your question is that it's almost always obvious from the rest of a particular sentence what a particular compound modifier is intended to mean. This is really subtle and you are not to be faulted for finding it weird and confusing. Your analysis shows that you are far more scholarly and precise than most native English speakers I know professionally (in other words, other lawyers, who get paid to write and analyze very precise English sentences for a living, who have in some cases been doing so for decades).

A good example is with respect to Dick Vitale. (I'm making up these facts quickly to highlight weird usage questions; they aren't intended to be accurate.) Let's assume these facts:

• Dick Vitale recorded thirty-seven promotional ads for ESPN.
• Each of those ads lasted thirty seconds.

Under MOS:NUM, the correct rendition of this is "Dick Vitale recorded 37 30-second promotional ads for ESPN," which has the benefit of eliminating the hyphenation question. But, if you were spelling out the numbers, the rendition would be, "Dick Vitale recorded thirty-seven thirty-second ads for ESPN." "37" is one modifier; "30-second" is a separate one. This is hard, grammatically. Really, I can explain this to people who were born in the U.S. and have been writing professionally for 20 years and many of them have a hard time understanding it.

Here's another (non-sports) example. Assume these facts:

• I have a cat, Mischa (I do, in fact, have a cat named after Mischa Barton).
• Mischa has long hair.
• Mischa is fourteen years old.

"Long-haired" is one compound modifier; "fourteen-year-old" is a separate one. As such, they don't get hyphenated in one long construction. A grammatically correct description would be, "Mischa is a long-haired fourteen-year-old cat." "Mischa is a fourteen-year-old-long-haired cat" isn't correct, because the fact that she's 14 is a separate concept than the fact that she's long-haired. (Another correct sentence, which an American would almost never write unless they were trying to be humorous by being unnecessarily convoluted (the humorous newspaper columnist Dave Barry is the best example I know of someone who does this), would be, "Mischa is a Julietdeltalima-owned fourteen-year-old long-haired cat."

Now, to the question of football goals that occur at the 22'32" mark: Based on MOS:NUM and reasonable avoidance of ponderous grammatical constructions, I'd write "Zinedine Zidane scored a goal at 22'32" (or 22:32; I am unfamiliar with the nuances of MOS:FOOTY regarding punctuation for game-time references). If you were to write out the whole thing, it would correctly be "Zinedine Zidane scored a goal at twenty-two minutes, thirty-two seconds," or, equally correctly, "... twenty-two minutes and thirty-two seconds".

Please don't ever hesitate to ask me questions like this. They make me really happy to read, and to have the privilege of answering. All the best! - Julietdeltalima (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

I see you have been involved in discussions on the article Catholic Church. At present some editors are resisting fixing of the links so they match the article. One place where tere has been especially hard headed insistence on using a link to a redirect is on the article on Ernest Simoni.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

I found the following article in Encyclopedia.com, which asserts that both Marguerite Durand and her half-brother Charles were born out of wedlock: https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/durand-marguerite-1864-1936 Given that it includes the information about her half-brother and also cites several sources at the end of the article it seems unlikely that the article's author is simply repeating information taken from Wikipedia.

Whether this merits restoring that bit of information to the article I leave up to you. Ormewood (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@Ormewood: Yes, I had seen that one mention, but could not find any other significant mention. I _am_ down on IPs (and after all a vandal IP edit drew my attention elsewhere in that article) and so really wondered about the original addition. (Which took 3 additional edits by others to approach reasonable English)

Indeed, now that I check that broken English geolocates to France. Which put me in mind to check fr:Marguerite Durand (féministe). I see nothing there about this. So I think I'll leave at that, that the French article about a French notable says nothing.

One thing in sometimes short supply at Wikipedia is patience. Let the truth accrete! Shenme (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

..for this - GizzyCatBella🍁 08:17, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

I've taken a look at your edit, and support it upon closer examination of the refs provided (which I failed to do earlier, my mistake). Hopefully this should clear up any issues my edits may have caused, though if you feel the need to contact me for any reason please do so. Regards, Freezingwedge (talk) 16:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Oh I didn't know that the machine sometimes gives my gender as female. I must have set it in a moment of playfulness ... and I don't know how to reset it. Makes a change, I guess, for a bloke to be assumed to be a female. I would reset it for you if you tell me how <rant>although I personally think that we get over excited about the gender of our editors when the really important item is the gender bias of the articles.</rant> All the best (pronounced Roger) aka Victuallers (talk) 13:17, 10 May 2021 (UTC) P.s. is Shenme pronounced She'&/n'me? :-)

@Victuallers:

Pretty much like "shem-muh", it is a Chinese word zh:wikt:什么 for the question word "what?" among other usages. Un-grandiose that. Predictive also. :-)

But that was an issue for those people I mentioned: each time "bloke assumed to be a female", and horrible torsion of politeness then general nastiness ensued, at least 15 years ago. So disappointing when it "macht nichts"!

Click on "Preferences" at top of window. Then scroll down a bit more than one full screen, past "Basic information" to "Internationalisation" and section "Gender used in messages:". Of the three choices I think you have the middle one selected, 'feminine'? The upper one "gender-neutral" is the default, but that somehow must have gotten changed. Pick which one you want then click the "Save" button at bottom of window.

If you want to test, the only way I know of is to edit some page, add

{{gender:user|m_out|f_out|u_out}}

to the text then do a "Show preview". I see "u_out" from that, showing that neither the male alternative "m_out" nor the female alternative "f_out" are selected. Kinda weird discovering that you can't easily see what other people see from you! Shenme (talk) 03:28, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

I think it is now set to neutral now (Schrodingers cat box closed). Impressed by your skills with the tools. @Shenme: <--- find out. Victuallers (talk) 07:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for catching my missing words at WBPX-TV!

Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 03:53, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello,

The Wikimedia Foundation is conducting a survey of Wikipedians to better understand what draws administrators to contribute to Wikipedia, and what affects administrator retention. We will use this research to improve experiences for Wikipedians, and address common problems and needs. We have identified you as a good candidate for this research, and would greatly appreciate your participation in this anonymous survey.

You do not have to be an Administrator to participate.

The survey should take around 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement .

Please find our contact on the project Meta page if you have any questions or concerns.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 19:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

I recently invited you to take a survey about administration on Wikipedia. If you haven’t yet had a chance, there is still time to participate– we’d truly appreciate your feedback. The survey is anonymous and should take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You may read more about the study on its Meta page and view its privacy statement.

Take the survey here.

Kind Regards,

WMF Research Team

BGerdemann (WMF) (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello,

I'm responding to the message you left on my talk page. You mentioned you "have grave doubts about most of" the sources I added on the article for David Gillespie. What exactly are your concerns? Are there any specific sources that you find an issue with? Aneirinn (talk) 09:56, 26 November 2024 (UTC)