WikiProject Malaysia | (Rated Project-class) | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Wikimania 2020 |
Bangkok, Thailand – 05-08-2020 |
End (optional) |
Local Time ( ) |
New micro-stub on a possibly important topic
A user began a two-sentence stub on the 1994 Malaysian football scandal. While there are enough sources to justify a standalone article, I urge you to expand the article with context and other details. Should it be moved to draftspace? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- I agree it could serve as a stand-alone. Other potential sources: [1][2][3][4]. If the current state is insufficient, I would suggest merging to History of Malaysian football rather than drafting it. CMD (talk) 11:10, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:1948 in Malaya#Requested move 3 August 2021
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:1948 in Malaya#Requested move 3 August 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 15:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
Please see SM Nasarudin SM Nasimuddin
I would like to improve my understanding of names. Please would you explain whether "SM" are initials or are an honorific. Please ling me in any reply FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 09:38, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Timtrent: Pretty sure they are initials and stand for Sheikh Muhammad, although the spelling might be different. Lulusword (talk) 14:53, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Lulusword thank you. We learn as we go! FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 14:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
Help evaluate article on Abdul Rahim Kajai
I recently wrote an article of Abdul Rahim Kajai. Photos were added, but I can only find 7 reliable citations directly related to his name.
Extra: I'm planning to create a lot of Malaysian skyscraper articles. There are at least 2-3 dozen completed skyscrapers that haven't had a page of their own and even more for proposals, and those that are under construction. Peace out. (PenangLion (talk) 06:38, 30 December 2021 (UTC))
- @PenangLion: You can find more sources about Abdul Rahim Kajai at the eresources.nlb.gov.sg website. I hope it helps you.–Fandi89 (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
JB-SG RTS
Hello, greetings from across the border.
Would any Malaysians living in Johor be able to obtain a photo of the Bukit Chagar RTS station construction site? This would be greatly appreciated as we document the history of the RTS as it approaches competition. Seloloving (talk) 10:39, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Ketuanan Melayu
I have nominated Ketuanan Melayu 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. Z1720 (talk) 16:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Article importance needs reassessing
The importance ranking of some articles are very strange, and need to be re-assessed. for example fish cracker was ranked a high-importance Malaysia article, which cannot be right given that Nasi lemak which is usually regarded as the national dish is ranked mid-importance. Chew Mei Fun, a Secretary-General of MCA and a deputy minister cannot be ranked more important than her superior, the president of MCA and a minister Ong Ka Ting. These are just two I see on a casual glance at the list, and I've adjusted them. If anyone has the time to go through the ranking, pleased do, because some of the ranking just don't make sense. Ranking needs to have some kind reasoning in their hierarchy, not random assignment. Hzh (talk) 16:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
- There needs to be a consistent system of ranking, for example, many of the towns and cities are ranked as far too important. Ranau or Tamparuli cannot be ranked the same importance as Kota Kinabalu or Sabah (capital of a state or the state itself must have higher ranking than the capital of a district or a small town). Same for other things in the importance ranking. Hzh (talk) 10:59, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- I've made some adjustments to mid or low, if anyone disagree and want to rank them higher please discuss first. There need to be some rationale for giving these places high importance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hzh (talk • contribs) 12:05, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- For a fully consistent importance criteria, we'd need to establish a criteria. Taking cue from Template:Importance scheme, top would be for "crucial" articles, high for "extremely notable" within a Malaysian context, mid for notable within a more specific context, and low for everything else. (Bottom seems deprecated in practice.) Over a decade ago I had a stab at what might effectively be a top list in creating a Wikibook, now here. I wouldn't make the same list now, but it has the contours. Inclusion criteria for high articles could include specific topics, eg. state capitals, prime ministers, prominent historical events.This does however raise the question of what the goal of ranking articles would be. Unless there is some concerted effort to eg. Raise the quality of top articles, I don't know if it would be worth the effort. There are other goals that could be worked on without needing ranking. For example, we have four states and one federal territory at GA, this provides an interesting starting point for a project to get all states to GA. CMD (talk) 01:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
- Well, the importance ranking may be useful in other context, for example in helping to select articles for offline releases - Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria#Priority of topic. Even for a casual reader it is disconcerting or extremely misleading to see something minor ranked to be of high importance in WikiProject Malaysia. We shouldn't really make something more important than they are (or indeed make something to be of lesser importance than they are). The importance shouldn't be left to individual editors who are interested in promoting certain articles, for example, all the articles on Sabah that were given high ranking beyond their actual importance. There is the ranking criteria here WP:WikiProject Malaysia/Assessment#Importance scale which is a bit vague, since it's an
"attempt to gauge the probability of the average reader of Wikipedia needing to look up the topic"
. Still, that should still tell us that some of the articles in the high importance category shouldn't be there, for example, who cares about Malaysia–Solomon Islands relations? Not even those in Solomon Islands I'd guess. Probably only the top-importance and high-importance articles need going over for now, which shouldn't be something too onerous. I can probably do that whenever I have some free time, and that shouldn't take a lot of time. Still, it might be be useful to establish some better criteria, for example, I would rate all the states to be of top importance, which would contradict the example of Kelantan ranked as high-importance, but that can be discussed another time. Hzh (talk) 19:55, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
- Well, the importance ranking may be useful in other context, for example in helping to select articles for offline releases - Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria#Priority of topic. Even for a casual reader it is disconcerting or extremely misleading to see something minor ranked to be of high importance in WikiProject Malaysia. We shouldn't really make something more important than they are (or indeed make something to be of lesser importance than they are). The importance shouldn't be left to individual editors who are interested in promoting certain articles, for example, all the articles on Sabah that were given high ranking beyond their actual importance. There is the ranking criteria here WP:WikiProject Malaysia/Assessment#Importance scale which is a bit vague, since it's an
- For a fully consistent importance criteria, we'd need to establish a criteria. Taking cue from Template:Importance scheme, top would be for "crucial" articles, high for "extremely notable" within a Malaysian context, mid for notable within a more specific context, and low for everything else. (Bottom seems deprecated in practice.) Over a decade ago I had a stab at what might effectively be a top list in creating a Wikibook, now here. I wouldn't make the same list now, but it has the contours. Inclusion criteria for high articles could include specific topics, eg. state capitals, prime ministers, prominent historical events.This does however raise the question of what the goal of ranking articles would be. Unless there is some concerted effort to eg. Raise the quality of top articles, I don't know if it would be worth the effort. There are other goals that could be worked on without needing ranking. For example, we have four states and one federal territory at GA, this provides an interesting starting point for a project to get all states to GA. CMD (talk) 01:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
- I've made some adjustments to mid or low, if anyone disagree and want to rank them higher please discuss first. There need to be some rationale for giving these places high importance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hzh (talk • contribs) 12:05, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
FAR for Durian
I have nominated Durian 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. Hog Farm Talk 17:34, 2 April 2022 (UTC)