User talk:Citobun

archive

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear,

I have cited the proper sources for constructive editing on Wikipedia. Please refrain from deliberate vandalism. Meanwhile, as Wikipedia is a free one, please abide by the policy that anyone may edit it as long as the sources be cited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mockingjay28 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mockingjay28: Please review the policies at WP:BLP and WP:NPOV. Secondly, the sources you are citing at Joint Declaration do not actually reflect the content you are adding, only the position of the Chinese gov't. Citobun (talk) 09:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As illustrated in the declaration, HK is part of China under the basic law. Therefore, the Chinese government is the official one to state the status of HK, not the Group of 7, in which neither mainland China nor HK is involved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mockingjay28 (talk • contribs) 09:22, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Mockingjay28: It's called "joint declaration" for a reason. The content you are adding is uncited and controversial. It's not Wikipedia's role to issue a judgement on this issue. Citobun (talk) 09:24, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As a courtesy, this is to notify you that an article you successfully nominated for deletion, Kartikeya Sharma, has been restored to mainspace with new information and sources. You may wish to examine the new version to see if you still have any remaining concerns regarding notability. SilkTork (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 16:10, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Citobun,

Hi. This is 1233, a board member of Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong.

We will soon hold our first online conference call of year 2020 in the coming days. As a major part of preparation work ^[1] will be held in our Telegram group, we wish you to join us in Telegram and are also looking forward to your opinion.

Shall there be any inconvenience or requesting access ^[2] to access Telegram group, please feel free to contact me via email (i.e. williamwchan.hk) ^[3] or leave your Telegram ID on my talk page (Note: This will disclose your Telegram ID to the public).

Note: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings from Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong, please remove yourself from the mailing list. If you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.

[1] Preparation work include finalizing the date and time
[2] You may also contact WhisperToMe for Telegram access
[3] Or other means if you can find me

Kind regards,
1233 on 09:33, 31 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This message is sent through the mass message extension by 1233.

Dear Citobun,

This is User:1233 from the Hong Kong User Group.

We will be hosting our second online meeting on the Hong Kong User Group's Wikipedia Discord Server [1], where we will be discussing matters that weren't finalized at the last meeting. We will also be discussing the future of the User Group at the same time. Please join us on the server at that date. If you do not have a Discord account, please feel free to register one or contact me for more details.

[1]: Hong Kong User Group's Discord Server: https://discord.gg/7chaCt

Kind regards,
1233 on 14:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: If you wish to opt-out of future mailings from Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong, please remove yourself from the mailing list. If you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
This message is sent through the mass message extension by 1233.

If including such information, which is verifiable, is merely presenting political point of view, therefore has to be deleted, then Yuen Long and Prince Edward station has to do the same, otherwise it would be double standard.--owennson（Meeting Room、Certificates) 08:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NNC. Notability does not apply to the content within the article. Also, how much the media reported, how much the information I added. That is not any political viewpoint, that is a FACT. It HAPPENED. The station was destroyed, like it or not.--owennson（Meeting Room、Certificates) 12:54, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well... no, the station wasn't destroyed. Anyway, I have opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hong Kong to find consensus on this. Thanks, Citobun (talk) 13:24, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

16:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at 2019-20 Hong Kong Protests. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

• If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
• If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. WP:BOOMERANG Sleath56 (talk) 02:18, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't post frivolous warning templates on my talk page. You are the one edit warring (three reverts and counting). Citobun (talk) 02:19, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly an issue of WP:CIR exists if you can't see the unresponded comments I've left on the Talk thread you've opened under the claim that you wanted to prevent an edit war and gain community feedback. Sleath56 (talk) 02:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pray tell, what are the problems with the External Links that I've attached to two or more Wikipedia page - in particular the one's you have just removed from Ghost Festivals and Sai Yeung Choi Street?

I hope you have very good reason for doing so. The photo galleries to which the links point contain images that are of significant interest and specifically relevant to each of those sections.

Looking forward to your comments and reasons.

TIA

Tingyat (talk) 06:48, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tingyat most of your edits (going back to 2007) serve to add links to websites promoting the work of one particular photographer, hence it appears to me like a case of WP:EL#ADV. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a vehicle for promotion. In addition, the articles already have links to their respective Commons image pages, and the links you are adding seem to be outside the scope of what the external links section should contain. Thanks, Citobun (talk) 07:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm EGL1234, and I wanted to inform you about a case of edit warring on the page "Kowloon". Although you are on the correct side of the argument (IMO), you are constantly reverting IP Account 100.12.216.122's revisions. If you carry on participating, you may be blocked by an admin.

I know how frustrating it feels when someone keeps reverting your edits, but instead, just tell an admin perhaps on the Teahouse to block them.

EGL1234 (talk) 03:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:EGL1234 for the notice. I only made one revert on that page. Anyway, I already reported the IP to ARV for edit warring after level 4 template warning & abusive edit summaries. Citobun (talk) 04:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User: Citobun. I really appreciate your help. EGL1234 (talk) 04:03, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. What do you mean by not public housing? The template was put into the original articles of the Monster Building's sub-blocks. Then why put this template into the article if it is not related? Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 09:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Teemeah: I removed the template from the article. It's not public housing. Citobun (talk) 09:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see that. Can you also tell what your problem is with the sources of the article? Did you actually check the sources? And what is it if not public housing...? Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 09:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Teemeah: The article claims things such as "because it is such a dense living space, it is difficult to have it demolished" which, from an engineering standpoint, makes no sense. So there should be better/more reliable sources attesting to such claims. Secondly, there should be more evidence that "Monster Building" is the common English name of this building. It just seems like a nickname among foreign instagrammers. I don't understand your last question about public housing. Citobun (talk) 10:03, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Article titles and naming conventions already describe that the subject should be called by the name it is most widely know at in English. I don't think anyone knows this building by its Cantonese name outside of HK. Whether it is instagrammers, Time Out Hong Kong, South China Morning Post or videos on youtube. There are other examples, like China Zun which is featured by its popular English name instead of its original Chinese name. Or Petronas Towers that deviates even from its official English name. Teemeah ^{편지 (letter)} 20:12, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pease see my proposal to upmerge Category:Railway stations in Hong Kong opened in 2020 to Category:Railway stations in China opened in 2020 as we do not have categories for subnational divisions like railway stations in California opened in 2019 or railway stations in Hong Kong opened in 2020. And the categories by country should be restricted to those countries with a number of new railway stations in all or most years e.g at present only China, Canada, Russia and the United States. Hugo999 (talk) 21:52, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi According to Link REIT (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Link_REIT&oldid=948093289), I totally agree with you that ‘monopoly’ has been referenced in the body of Link REIT’s wikipedia. However, there is no reference to refer Link REIT as a “corporate monster”. This term and the statement are misleading which has harmed Link REIT’s reputation unjustly. Such term and statement are completely a defamation and must not be posted on wikipedia according to Wikipedia:Libel. "The goal of Wikipedia is to create an encyclopedic information source adhering to a neutral point of view, with all information being referenced through the citation of reliable published sources, so as to maintain a standard of verifiability". Also, as Wiki’s co-founder Jimmy Wales said, zero information is preferred to misleading or false information^[1]. As such, the statement ‘it has been widely considered a “corporate monster” in Hong Kong partly responsible for the city’s socioeconomic issues’ must be removed from wikipedia.

Vanamonde (Talk) 00:02, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Your hook made our all-time DYK page views list! Yoninah (talk) 11:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I have noticed my edits regarding the HK protests are reverted. Editors strive to maintain neutrality, but there is limited coverage of the other side and lesser-known side of the protests. The article in of itself is neutral, but the information provided is totally one-sided to the side of the protestors. Therefore, I proposed adding a section - "criticism of protestors," to which you deleted. If there is criticism of police responses, there should also be a criticism of the protestors section to balance things out and maintain a neutral even-handed tone. The criticism of violent methods, the counter-protests, and the people's negative views of the protests should also be presented to an audience who may not know about these protests. There are always positive and negative evaluations in any controversial article or Wikipedia pages of controversial figures, and I believe it is only right to do that. As a new user, I understand my citations and content may be a bit off, but I believe with the help of VIPs and other more senior and experienced editors like you, we can add a section like this and present the concerns and criticism of the protests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starslayer1234 (talk • contribs) 05:40, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there! It looks Wikipedia needs a new article about law of Honk Kong re on BBC news (BBC, China proposes controversial Hong Kong security law, May 21, 2020 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-52759578). I placed request on Wikipedia:WikiProject Hong Kong/Requests. I may add my own minor working with fixing References templates or like that, but my English is a bit weak as second language. Also, all issues of Asian English are very difficult for me (how to call article, will it similar 2019 Hong Kong extradition bill or National Security (Legislative Provisions) Bill 2003?). I see you now on Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23. The two topics, new 2020 bill and this one, Hong Kong Basic Law Article 23, looks to be close topics? Best wishes. PoetVeches (talk) 18:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, this article of the topic was created already long ago, that is National People's Congress Decision on Hong Kong national security legislation. There is only a bit puzzling how to call article (see Talk:National People's Congress Decision on Hong Kong national security legislation). So, I found and answered to myself while you was busy :) PoetVeches (talk) 22:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, According to Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view#Undue_weightDue and Undue Weight of Wikipedia’s NPOV, the term ‘corporate monster’ in your reference is only described by extremely minority. There is no another reference in Google regarding describing LINK REIT as a ‘corporate monster’. More importantly, the reference is belonged to an OPINION column - the view by Richard Harris. Personal opinion can’t be a reference except it's professional Wikipedia:Verifiability#Newspaper_and_magazine_blogs . Moreover, according to Richard Harris’ article, he only mentioned that "…it is described as ‘corporate monster’” but he did not provide any reference to support this. His article is not a professional one.

Unless you can find a few more strong reference to refer Link REIT to ‘corporate monster’, I don’t think the reference you provided is strong enough to support that Link REIT is a corporate monster. Please remember "All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view (NPOV), which means representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic". 21:00, 24 May 2020 ((GMT+10) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jybl (talk • contribs)

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I love HK, and I think that I found something useful to add to the article 2020 Hong Kong Legislative Council candidates' disqualification controversy. This piece of news where I can clearly recognise Jimmy Sham and Sunny Cheung but not the other three. As I have translated, they have also been DQ. Is it right?. Thank you and my warmest greetings. CoryGlee (talk) 21:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your actions taken against the revised version of 'Kau To Shan'. You put that the real estate pages were not trustworthy. However, they show valid transactions being made - the price you see on the houses are what came through on the contract. Therefore, please stop reverting these changes entirely, at least try and cut things out that you deem are 'falsified'. Thank you. Hushbraun (talk) 04:47, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied at Talk:Kau To Shan. Citobun (talk) 00:12, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a Hong Kong English-language editor, back on Wikipedia after a hiatus. If there are HK pages that need cleaning up, please let me know. PumpkinKitten (talk) 16:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi this is to let you know I have responded to your blanking notice on my page. Festerhauer (talk) 09:09, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Just as an FYI there was a discussion about this at the Manual of Style for China-related articles: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/China_and_Chinese-related_articles#Request_for_comment:_Do_the_traditional_and_simplified_forms_of_Chinese_count_as_the_same_name_or_different_names_in_regards_to_eligibility_of_displaying_characters?

As per the RFC the default is to display both Traditional and Simplified characters for topics related to the Chinese-speaking world.

The closer stated "A few editors limited their support for displaying both to the infobox, and most editors noted that there is room for case-by-case exceptions."

As per Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/China_and_Chinese-related_articles#Display_of_simplified_characters_in_Template:Infobox_Chinese_at_ROC_articles another user interpreted that as if a user wants an exception for an article, one needs to get consensus for that article.

What I meant by post-1997 is that Mandarin gained currency after that, not so much simplified characters. However the latter are usually to be displayed anyway as per the RFC.

WhisperToMe (talk) 06:12, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to challenge my revert please consult the MOS talk page on Chinese related articles. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

18:17, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

The 2020 totals are now complete, and your hook for Suara (newspaper) ranked as the No. 7 hook of the year with 2,581 DYK views per hour. A list of the 25 most viewed hooks of 2020 can be viewed at "Top hooks of 2020". Congratulations on your hook's remarkable showing, and keep up the great work! Cbl62 (talk) 09:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Cbl62! Citobun (talk) 03:16, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason why this control point gotta be removed from the Yuen Long district template? Yes there were, please state them in the template's talk page. 203.218.129.244 (talk) 12:26, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@203.218.129.244: I have replied on the talk page. Citobun (talk) 12:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated MTR for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. FemkeMilene (talk) 17:25, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#PailSimon.  // Timothy :: talk  18:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shau Kei Wan Government Secondary School, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shau Kei Wan Government Secondary School until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

CLAUDIA MO

Stop reversing my edits on Claudia Mo's page. I have inserted factual information about her arrest under the NSL, her bail hearing and the fact that she is now remanded in gaol custody for three months. I will add a citation to newspaper reports to support this. It is also a well known fact that she is a controversial politician. If she were not controversial, she would not be facing criminal prosecution for conspiracy to commit subversion. Thank you. Stoatmonster. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stoatmonster (talk • contribs) 17:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Suara logo.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) 03:43, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Happy St. Patrick's Day! I hope your St. Patrick's Day is enjoyable and safe. Hopefully next year there will be more festive celebrations. Best wishes from Los Angeles.   // Timothy :: talk

Please see WP:AN3#User:Citobun reported by User:86.9.227.81 (Result: ). You may respond there if you wish. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 22:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Citobun. Just wanted to touch on something you said at your Hong Kong Free Press protection request: ...Hong Kong media outlets such as Apple Daily, RTHK, and Epoch Times (perm link, bold is my emphasis). Two things stand out for me: 1. As the opening sentence to the The Epoch Times notes, the publication is considered "Far-right" — non-RS: was deprecated on Wikipedia in 2019 (WP:EPOCHTIMES). And 2. Although expressly an "international" publication, I always thought their general locus was more Taiwan than Hong Kong — possibly, a misconception on my part...? Regards, El_C 14:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi El_C, to be honest I have never read the Epoch Times, though I am aware it is not mainstream media as Apple Daily and RTHK are. It was on my mind since their Hong Kong printing press was attacked last week ([1], [2]), which was big news here. I am not sure of their geographic focus, although Falun Gong street booths are commonly seen in busy parts of Hong Kong, where they hand out copies of the paper, and at pro-democracy protests. Regardless of their editorial slant or reliability (or lack thereof), I think the printing press incident is part of a broader trend of intimidation and attacks against non-pro-government (usually that means independent) Hong Kong journalists and news organisations. Best, Citobun (talk) 14:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting — I was unaware of that printing press incident. Though I wouldn't call The Epoch Times contributors "journalists," except in so far that they are "bad journalists." Regards, El_C 14:59, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

El_C – I'll be sure to pick up a copy next time to see what the fuss is about :). I just looked at their English homepage and didn't expect it would be so Americentric. Anyway thanks again for the assistance. Citobun (talk) 15:12, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brain worms at your own risk, Citobun! For sure, glad I was able to help. El_C 15:15, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Citobun! I recently made a minor edit to the Hong Kong Free Press page to change a sentence credibility rating of 5.56 out of 10 that the Hong Kong Free Press received to make the sentence more neutral. Can you please explain why you have reverted my change? 219.79.0.26 (talk) 15:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 219.79.0.26 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), I reverted this edit because it does not seem to me to be an improvement – it appears to remove important contextual information and the reason for doing so is not clear. The original content is not an "opinion" or a "POV" statement (as you wrote in your two edit summaries). It is neutrally worded and is reflected by the cited source. Please discuss further on the article's talk page. Thanks, Citobun (talk) 02:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I intend to make some update of the pl.wikipedia-article on pl:Halifax (Kanada), but I stuck in the beginning of it. First, I plan to update the status of the place according to [3], so it became not a city (miasto) as it is now, but a metropolitan area (obszar metropolitalny). But there is a problem: in the lead pl.wikipedia-article it stands, that Halifax is the capital of Nova Scotia. I couldn't find a reliable source, that says, that Halifax (metropolitan area) is no more the capital. In pl.wikipedia there will be also an article for regional municipality [4]. Could you help me? User:Paelius 19:58, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As of 29th May, 2021, the MTR has announced that it will open on the 27th June 2021. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheIdeasOfPanthers (talk • contribs) 01:55, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Hong Kong Examinations and Assessment Authority logo.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.   JaJaWa |hello  23:57, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you removed More citations needed|date=July 2021 from Melanau people, Divisions section without adding any citations. May I ask why? The section still has no citations. Likewise you have reverted a number date changes I reverted as the users who did them were subsequently suspended from editing due to making unreferenced changes. Please see User talk:183.78.44.154. Sciencefish (talk) 08:48, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Sciencefish: I am making hundreds of reverts of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Date-changing vandal from Malaysia, apologies if I have reverted a legitimate edit by mistake. Citobun (talk) 09:11, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at these two who have been blocked from editing for changing such dates: Special:Contributions/183.78.44.154 and Special:Contributions/Diane Molly Handerson. You have inadvertantly included me as a vandal and reverted my reverts of these individuals. Apology accepted. Sciencefish (talk) 09:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I saw you reverted the changes to the LTA list so I wanted to explain. I removed the cases that are no longer active, already archived by somebody else (some haven't been active since 2010 or before), or pending, and then went through the pending ones, approved many of them, then added them back. I don't see a reason for undoing that as the vast majority of pending cases that needed to be added back already were (apologies for missing the Date-changing vandal from Malaysia), and the archived ones that are practically useless are cluttering up the page. Even if somebody needed the archived cases, they can all be found here. It'd be more useful if instead of reverting the changes, adding any you deem useful that I missed back to the short list (intended to be shorter, see full list here). I went ahead and set the Date-changing vandal from Malaysia to active. Thanks. 0qd (talk) 13:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks 0qd, I understand and will self-revert. You are correct that it was the Malaysian case being removed that confused me. Since unfortunately he/she is still very active... Citobun (talk) 05:05, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have just declined your speedy deletion nomination for DJ KayWise as a repost of a page deleted at a deletion discussion. The current article is not similar enough to the old one to justify speedy deletion. You may like to take it to WP:AfD again. JBW (talk) 09:17, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understood JBW, thank you! Citobun (talk) 11:16, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Citobun, I saw you mentioned me under an Administrator's Notice Board sub heading saying I made promotional edits. What is more shocking to me is you mentioned me in the same content you used to discuss sock puppetry. I understand the rules on Wikipedia is to first discuss with a user if you notice any unhealthy use of the platform by the said user before going to Administrator's notice board, I stand to be corrected on this anyway. More importantly, I realized that you mentioned me after I disputed a speedy deletion nomination you made on an article titled Dj Kaywise. Firstly, I created that page a while back because I see the growth of the subject and noticed they didn't have a Wikipedia page. Since I have created it, it has been reviewed and rejected and I have tried to improve on it because I also use articles to improve my knowledge of how Wikipedia works. I need to let you know I had no idea who edited the page recently, how it got reviewed and accepted, I didn't know. I only got a notification that you nominated the page for deletion and I noticed the reason you stated is not good enough to delete the page because the article is not the same as the article that was a subject of deletion conversation earlier. I am the first to state here every time I speak to anyone here that I am not a genius of Wikipedia, I am literally learning on here every day but what I don't appreciate is you consciously or unconsciously accusing me of sock puppetry. If you see an edit I made that seem promotional, it is most definitely an honest mistake because like I said, I am still learning how to edit here. I use only one account since I have been on Wikipedia. Just thought to speak to you about this. Thank you Olakunle Rufai (talk) 08:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Citobun,

I am reaching out to you because you signed up to be a member of Wikimedia Community User Group Hong Kong.

We will be hosting the next virtual meetup to discuss the annual report and future arrangements on election of the board. The event will take place on Sunday, September 19, at 20:00 HKT (1200 UTC), and the presentation will be in both Cantonese and English.

If you are unable attend, you can also submit questions and suggestions before the meeting at our telegram group.

The link to the meeting room is here: virtual meeting room link.

We hope to have you join us online!

（第一百二十八屆香港聚會將會喺今年9月19日夜晚8點開始！到時撳依條拎一齊入去開會啦！）

--MediaWiki message delivery（留言） 2021年9月12日 (日) 17:50 (UTC)

---

Please update your subscription to these messages by clicking here.

Also, Thanks Temp3600 for his hard works.

Thanks for removing "Police violence". Let me talk about something I think is not appropriate in your restored version: 1, Only mentioned police entered the campus and fired tear gas, bean bag, etc, no mentioning the reason: protesters tried to throw objects to block railway and road, and eventually the railway and roads were blocked after police retreats. Which is bias. So I think should add something like "To prevent block of railway and road, the police entered the campus ..." 2, President Tuan's mediation was not directly refused by police. In fact, I think both sides were in tension (such as new attacks by throwing hazardous objects and laser beams by protesters), making it fail. So I suggest directly say it fails and cite proper sources and let readers to judge by themselves. 3, Police retreat by around 13, and protesters occupied the campus during 13-15, which is of course illegally (most faculty members, staffs and students left the campus during these 3 days) 4, Other truths not mentioned: leaving thousands of petro bombs by protesters; Protesters barricaded most entrances and exits, leading to a campus-wide transport disruption.

@JusticeforHKpatroits: Please make suggestions on the article's talk page. There is a discussion there. Citobun (talk) 08:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you've bothered to read the paper of Ir Joseph Lo et al you wouldn't have called that name of the Harbour Crossing Tunnel "a hoax" - And if indeed that's like a hoax the name of XHT sounds more like a hoax too. As the first subsea railway tunnel in the territory it would be difficult to argue it isn't notable, given that there are other railway tunnels in the territory which got their articles. 202.130.98.98 (talk) 13:42, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I googled "Harbour Crossing Tunnel" and came up with nothing except the Checkerboard Hill page. It's not an official nor a widely used term, hence why someone repeatedly adding a red link to a made-up name seems hoax-like. Anyway, I don't think it's necessary to split the MIS immersed tube into a separate article unless you have a lot to write about it. Citobun (talk) 00:16, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | November 2021 Backlog Drive
On November 1, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here. (t · c) buidhe 01:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You claimed my edit was misleading. How was it misleading? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1053170358 I noticed your user page is dedicated to HK and Apple daily. Perhaps your own bias is corrupting your bias to slander me as misleading. 49.179.75.4 (talk) 10:49, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re this note, an individual likely does not have control over their IP. I don't think it is sockpuppetry. May be better to ask them to sign off with a specific name. Best, CMD (talk) 05:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chipmunkdavis: Thanks. It's just that I have been encountering this individual for some time and suspect the IPs are the same person based on common editing patterns and subjects (e.g. the MTR, Hong Kong place names, road tunnels). But I'm not certain. Citobun (talk) 06:49, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is 203.145.95.X harassment, personal attack and possible part of off site canvassing behaviours. Thank you. Matthew hk (talk) 07:12, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Citobun, I noticed that you reverted my edits to Valentin Pavlov and Nikolai Ryzhkov a few days ago. I checked the page history to see why my edits had been reverted and it said something about a “date changing vandal from Malaysia”.

Why were my edits reverted? I am fairly new to Wikipedia, so I apologise if I have done anything wrong, but I am not trying to vandalise. Thanks LivingInTwilight (talk) 04:10, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LivingInTwilight, apologies, your edits were collateral damage. There is a vandal (see Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Date-changing vandal from Malaysia) who makes a huge quantity of malicious edits that must be mass-reverted, and unfortunately sometimes constructive edits that took place in the intervening period get reverted as well. I try to avoid that but the sheer amount of vandalism that needs reverting makes it difficult and time-consuming. Citobun (talk) 02:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Citobun All good, I see what you mean now. Thank you for clarifying. LivingInTwilight (talk) 07:16, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to add right level of warning template after reverting legit disruptive edit. WP:AIV path is way easier than WP:ANI. Matthew hk (talk) 04:05, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why should I listen to you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.174.157.58 (talk) 04:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw the page you put up about this person on LTA. Do you think that rangeblocks would be effective in combating them, even if by a little bit? I've calculated the ranges 116.92.226.224/27, 219.76.24.192/27, and 219.76.63.96/27 for them. wizzito | say hello! 04:36, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also 124.217.189.0/24, 220.246.91.0/24, and 203.145.94.0/23 wizzito | say hello! 04:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wizzito: Thank you for looking into that. I am not exactly sure how rangeblocks (or IP addresses in general) work to be honest, but it seems like it might help. If you know how to request those blocks, your help would be much appreciated! Citobun (talk) 04:58, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wizzito, rangeblock is not effective as i believe it is not one person but a guild of it, so that you may need to block ALL of the HK ISP, or spend a lot of time isolate which range is more severe and really need a block. I think the "better" method is stating LTA and protect the page from editing and force them to use talk page first. And usually they may post non-constructive stuff in talk page likes personal attack or ranting other people's English , and if that exist, then we can consider also protect the talk page or issue block. Matthew hk (talk) 05:11, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Matthew hk: I strongly believe that everyone that I've added to the LTA page is a single individual. They are too consistent. There are other disruptive IPs active on HK subjects but their interests are different. Citobun (talk) 07:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I second the idea that this is a single individual rather than a group due to the extreme level of consistency in both editing behavior and ISPs used. A rangeblock is probably needed, and it doesn't look like there's going to be much collateral from the ranges they're using. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 11:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Made a nifty little subpage at User:Padgriffin/HKGW_tracking with some of the ranges that they've been active in. Might be handy to use it to patrol their ranges. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 01:40, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Padgriffin: That's extremely useful. Thank you for helping out with this headache! Citobun (talk) 02:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'm currently working on improving some of the articles on HK Streets and fixing their infoboxes. I'll try and add more ranges later. Padgriffin ^{Griffin's Nest} 03:12, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have a received a message from you recently about my WIkipedia edit. You have threaten me about getting banned for vandalism. If you are part of the Wikipedia team, please put me through customer service instead of personal threat. Your behavior is really inappropriate and I'm sad that you think you have any control over other people's freedom of speech. Btw, NO, HongKong celebrates 春节 known as spring festival. Stop using the Lunar New Year term, it has not translation in Chinese. If you think it does, then you go ahead celebrate 阴历 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.107.172 (talk) 20:44, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More proof for your misunderstanding: First day of the first month (Lunar calendar) Lunar New Year 農曆年初一 農曆 doesn't translate to Lunar. You know it. Please stop being aggressive and do the right thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.107.172 (talk) 07:06, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Citobun,

I noticed that User:Onel5969 converted the massive number of Hong Kong public housing estates from their own articles to redirect as per deletion discussion on Cascades, Hong Kong and Easeful Court. Please change them back to their own articles.

They are:

• Ching Ho Estate
• Cho Yiu Chuen
• Fu Tip Estate
• Hibiscus Park
• High Prosperity Terrace
• Highland Park (Hong Kong)
• Kwai Hong Court
• Kwai Shing East Estate
• Kwai Tsui Estate
• Lai Yiu Estate
• Model Housing Estate
• Nga Ning Court
• Sheung Lok Estate
• Sheung Man Court
• Shun On Estate
• Tai Po Plaza
• Tin Chak Estate
• Tin Ching Estate
• Tin Heng Estate
• Tsui Lai Garden
• Wan Hon Estate

Thank you.

Aravindhan Ravikumar (talk) 00:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey what had happened? What are you doing? [5] 1.64.46.233 (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, another user has brought up your name at ANI regarding some reverts you did in response to WP:HKGW. If you can perhaps stop by ANI and present your evidence that your reverts are indeed of HKGW, it would help us clear some things up. Thanks! --Jayron32 16:08, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Before I revert you, could you please just explain what was wrong with these edits? To me, they seem perfectly relevant and correct... Regards, -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 20:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey User:Ohconfucius. That IP is WP:HKGW, whom I believe is Instantnood. I block this individual's edits on grounds of block evasion. Some of their edits are constructive, some edits are tendentious or problematic, and some of their edits are vandalism. I just revert them all and report the IPs as I find it the only sustainable way to deal with this person. In this case I totally agree that the company name should in fact be written as Hsin Chong. Citobun (talk) 01:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation. I will revert you on this one, and will be on the lookout for others. Regards, -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 06:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohconfucius: Just so you know, I am reverting this person's edits based on WP:BMB. Citobun (talk) 18:41, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand that bureaucracy may have compelled to do so. My undoing of your revert was based on pragmatic reasons, because the banned editor corrected errors that existed on the page. Regards, -- Ohc ^{revolution of our times} 20:42, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noted on your concern on my recent edits to certain articles.

However, I ask that you refrain from reverting entire edits, and make an attempt to indicate which sections you object to specifically, given that there are a number of amendments to the articles in question for each edit.

The justifications you have provided for the reversions are vague, and fail to justify the scope of the reversions. Carter00000 (talk) 01:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Carter00000 (talk) 16:31, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is actually at WP:ANI, and I have commented there. Cullen328 (talk) 17:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:01, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Issues with the Operation of ANI and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, Carter00000 (talk) 17:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Given that you have recently made allegations at the Arbitration Committee on me violating WP:NPOV & WP: MULTIPLEACCOUNT, you may consider taking your concerns to an appropriate venue such as WP:NPOVN & WP:ANI. Otherwise, please refrain from making such allegations. Carter00000 (talk) 04:59, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The recent request for Arbitration to which you were listed as a party has been declined, as the Committee felt it was premature. For the Arbitration Committee, firefly ( t · c ) 15:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | July 2022 Backlog Drive
On 1 July, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 20:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ho Ying-chie, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ho Ying-chie until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 19 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2022 backlog drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles. Redirect patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here!
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

(t · c) buidhe 21:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Citobun,

Much has happened since the last newsletter over two months ago. The open letter finished with 444 signatures. The letter was sent to several dozen people at the WMF, and we have heard that it is being discussed but there has been no official reply. A related article appears in the current issue of The Signpost. If you haven't seen it, you should, including the readers' comment section.

Awards: Barnstars were given for the past several years (thanks to MPGuy2824), and we are now all caught up. The 2021 cup went to John B123 for leading with 26,525 article reviews during 2021. To encourage moderate activity, a new "Iron" level barnstar is awarded annually for reviewing 360 articles ("one-a-day"), and 100 reviews earns the "Standard" NPP barnstar. About 90 reviewers received barnstars for each of the years 2018 to 2021 (including the new awards that were given retroactively). All awards issued for every year are listed on the Awards page. Check out the new Hall of Fame also.

Software news: Novem Linguae and MPGuy2824 have connected with WMF developers who can review and approve patches, so they have been able to fix some bugs, and make other improvements to the Page Curation software. You can see everything that has been fixed recently here. The reviewer report has also been improved.

Suggestions:

• There is much enthusiasm over the low backlog, but remember that the "quality and depth of patrolling are more important than speed".
• Reminder: an article should not be tagged for any kind of deletion for a minimum of 15 minutes after creation and it is often appropriate to wait an hour or more. (from the NPP tutorial)
• Reviewers should focus their effort where it can do the most good, reviewing articles. Other clean-up tasks that don't require advanced permissions can be left to other editors that routinely improve articles in these ways (creating Talk Pages, specifying projects and ratings, adding categories, etc.) Let's rely on others when it makes the most sense. On the other hand, if you enjoy doing these tasks while reviewing and it keeps you engaged with NPP (or are guiding a newcomer), then by all means continue.
• This user script puts a link to the feed in your top toolbar.

Backlog:

Saving the best for last: From a July low of 8,500, the backlog climbed back to 11,000 in August and then reversed in September dropping to below 6,000 and continued falling with the October backlog drive to under 1,000, a level not seen in over four years. Keep in mind that there are 2,000 new articles every week, so the number of reviews is far higher than the backlog reduction. To keep the backlog under a thousand, we have to keep reviewing at about half the recent rate!

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:11, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery at 06:58, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | October 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 October, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Articles will earn 3x as many points compared to redirects. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:13, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A category or categories you have created have been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 September 9 § Building collapses on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. + Qwerfjkltalk 21:01, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | January 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 January 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol | May 2024 Articles Backlog Drive
On 1 May 2024, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol | September 2024 Backlog Drive
On 1 September 2024, a one-month backlog drive for new pages patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each article review will earn 1 point, and each redirect review will earn 0.2 points. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:09, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]