Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hong Kong/Archive 3

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Recently I found that people always use (Flag of Hong Kong) to illustrate one's place of birth or something like that. However, I think a lot of people have mistakenly put this flag into some people's profile even when these people were actually born in Colonial Hong Kong. Examples include "

. It does not make any sense! Should we patrol around the Hongkong-related topics and replace all those "wrong" flags with flags like (Flag of Hong Kong 1959) or so?
Nxn 0405 chl 19:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

No. Just use the current flag. It symbolises HK now. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:38, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Then how would you explain the use of (Flag of Hong Kong 1959), for example, in so many articles (esp. of those contests or competitions)? Aren't these flags also symbolising HK? Also, in article Bruce Lee, his place of death is illustrated with . Should this be amended then?Nxn 0405 chl 19:47, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I think those older flags should only be used in articles on the history of HK. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

When it comes to the competitions before 1997, the previous flag is used because Hong Kong was officially represented in that event with that flag. On the other hand, when it comes to dates of birth and death, the current flag should be used since there are no official bindings. It's just like the old flag of Italy used in the

Kylohk

16:55, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Would it be worth while setting up a subpage within this WikiProject (as DeryckChan has suggested) to consolidate Hong Kong-related conventions made through consensus. Ex. when to use the colonial flag vs. the post-97 one, naming conventions, and other related conventions? Luke! 21:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe first we can look for existing conventions and guidelines that may be relevant to this issue. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:11, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Each flag has its own meaning, not only symbolising the territory, but also the era and the government. — HenryLi (Talk) 00:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not even certain why flags are included in something like birth place and death place on the biographical template. What's the point? I'm guessing it's there only to indicate geographical location, but it's completely unnecessary. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Though flags can aide in the quality of an article, they sometimes do not.

WP:FLAGCRUFT, an essay examines the use of flags on Wikipedia. Luke!

19:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Octopus card is now substantially cleaned-up and it's almost ready for GA nomination. But several statements still need citations and I was not able to find sources for them. Please see the article's talk page for details and help find some sources. If sources are not found in a week or two, I'll be removing or modifying those statements so I can nominate the article for GA. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I tried looking for a few and couldn't find a thing. Some of those might be from people working internally? Benjwong 05:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, 5 out of the 8 statements for which I'm looking for references can actually be verified by just personal experience. I think a lot of the content of the article came from personal experience of using the card. I had to spent a lot of time inline referencing the article already. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:38, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

You might want to do a "personal subway experience" or a "MTR subway manual" reference to substitute. I see no reason why anyone would object. Benjwong 03:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the remaining statements for which no sources were found, and have the article for GA status. Please re-insert the statements I deleted if sources are found. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:44, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I have improved

22:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I actually did some clean-up on the article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Das ist gut then. Hopefully a concensus can be made finally.--

Kylohk

15:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

FACs can take a long time. Don't be surprised if it takes several weeks. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know that. The reason why I posted about it here was that, the nom did not receive any comments for an entire week. Whereas other nominations received comments within hours of its appearance. Probably that is because not many people know much about the subject.--

Kylohk

22:14, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. There not being many commentators could either be good or bad for an FAC. :p Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 01:17, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Right now, you'd be surprised that an Australian user has voiced support on the article, when I checked it today.--

10:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

For anyone interested, there are

WP:BLP concerns raised at Talk:The Bus Uncle#Removal of names of names of private individuals, leading to the removal of content. FA status uncertain. –Pomte

19:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, per Raul654, the article is still featured, even though a user removed it, but it's reinstated.--

Kylohk

19:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh jeebus. Stupid

WP:BLP, before they go around deleting articles and removing content as they please. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs

) 20:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Possible use of wikipedia for product placement

Whilst in Hong Kong recently I came across an advert for a health supplement in the "Apple Daily", an url to an wikipedia article was given a prominent position at the bottom of the advert, as an endorsement for this product. The wikipedia article may be legitimate and the health supplement company making a legitmate reference. However being the paranoid that I am, I fear a company may have created an article on wikipedia, and then used wikipedia's credibility as prop for their product.

I would investigate this myself and bring it to the attention of somebody, but the cuttings I made of the paper have dissappeared somewhere since by return to the UK. So can any Hong Kong editors out there keep an eye out for this ad (pretty conspicuous as they took a full page advert). The only other thing I remember was a supposed link to its use by the Argentinian national football team.

Thanks to anyone who takes this up.Koonan the almost civilised 07:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

would you mind stating the name of the health product? Thank you. Justicelilo 13:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thats the problem and why I'm making this request, I was relying on having the cutting and didn't make a proper note of all the details.I think it was some kind of concentrated drink thing made from a supposed South American super berry/fruit.

Sorry for the lack of details and thanks again to anybody who can take this up.Koonan the almost civilised 06:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, if some article was created to read like an advertisement for the product, it probably would have been removed by the WP community at large already. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

not if the article is not well-known. Besides, a seemingly neutral wiki article when used in a particular context might give rise to some non-objective effect. no matter how good wikipedia seems to be, let us not forget that ANYONE can become an editor, and that is dangerous if false information on wiki about some health products is depended on by people Justicelilo 18:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course, for things to be objective, you'd need to fulfill the

Kylohk

09:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

you missed part of the point, even seemingly objective information can be used dubiously in dishonest context. Justicelilo 07:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't that basically cover all of Wikipedia? We can only go so far as to ensure that information is presented in an objective and neutral manner, how this information is used, even if it is in advertisement, is really beyond our control after that. However, if the information is not presented in an objective manner in the first place, then we should definitely fix that. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:01, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I've seen people on both sides of an argument twist statistics to their liking. That happens every day. If that is so, then it is still POV. Tag it, or remove it. Cheers.--

Kylohk

08:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I've listed the Hong Kong film article

13:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at the April Fifth Action article. It reads like it has some POV problems while being poorly sourced. Can somebody who knows more about the subject or can devote more time to it take a look and possibly clean it up? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

A possible reference would be to look through the archives of local newspapers, like Ming Pao, but through a subscription. Then you can jump back to year 2004 where he said this and that, and so on.--

Kylohk

08:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm just concerned about statements like:

• Although the group strives for an anarchist-communist, revolutionary ideal akin to Che Guevara...
• The group is well known for its aggressive and civil disobedience-style of actions to protest against governments of China and Hong Kong during celebrations and visits of state leaders, often resulting in confrontations with the police.

Statements like that are kind of bold without sources, and look kind of bias. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it sounds extremely biased without sources. Although I could think of several incidents regarding "Long Hair" and his female equivalent, they often get carried out at important events after scuffles. One example is the Chief Executive Election of 2007. Man, that was funny. And I remembered reading it on SCMP.--

Kylohk

19:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I have made a few minor changes to the article, and also suggested on the Talk page that the English title should be "April Fifth Action Group", which is the form usually used in the English-language media.

Rodparkes 01:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I fixed the page up some more. There were so many "big words" in the article adding confusion. I don't think that entire group is tied with che guevera, maybe 1 member. It's quite misleading. Benjwong 03:06, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

And I though

07:40, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Those Che Guevara shirts are basically a fashion trend in HK. I've asked a few people in HK wearing those shirts if they knew who he was, and none of them knew. But Leung Kwok Hung, being who he is, he may be wearing it because he's actually a fan of Guevara. Still, it's very speculative to say he's a fan just because he wears those shirts. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

That's true, he's never mentioned Guevara on the newspaper or television. Although someone should dig up whatever that Young Post article about him. I remember it was like 2 years ago on a Sunday. Oh and by the way, I looked around the pages and found one article that may be POV:

Kylohk

17:19, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

I've placed a POV tag at the top of April Fifth Action. Not sure if it's the best tag, so please replace it with a more appropriate one as applicable. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:32, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Currently, both Tung Chung and Mong Kok are rated class A. I've never rated anything class A because I've always found the rating kind of ambiguous, but one thing's for sure, both articles seem to be very under-referenced, and there may be MOS problems with them as well. Do these articles need re-assessment? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:46, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

A class articles are considered to be 1 step higher than

Kylohk

19:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Class A being one step higher than GA never made sense to me, because GA requires third-party review, but Class A requires no such process. If I were to review either article for even GA, I wouldn't have passed them on the basis that they're both very under-referenced. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:09, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, when assessment is concerned, both A class and GA class are obtained in similar ways. All you need is a person who has not edited the article significantly to come and give it the grade. It's just that for GA, an additional step is required that you add those templates, and notices to the GAC page and so on. But the awarding process it's the same.--

Kylohk

20:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

13:14, 24 May 2007 (UTC).

I think it's basically ready. There may still be minor prose and grammar problems. But I don't see any major problems with it. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

And now, is the moment where you sit around, waiting for someone to come around and promote it to a GA status.--

Kylohk

16:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

And make sure nobody messes up the article in the meantime. I also put Octopus card up for GAC, but I think that's going to take a long time because there are like 6 or 7 articles before it in the same category (Transportation). Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

The GA section is really known for all the backlog. Something tells me there should be some designated "quality control" people responsible in that area, much like the FA section.--

Kylohk

20:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

And just as we were complaining about what a backlog the GA nomination page has, someone passed the article.  :-P Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:07, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

That was certainly very kind of the reviewer. Now, I guess the next step is to nominate it for a FA.--

Kylohk

16:56, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should put it through a peer review? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It is up for a peer review right now. Cheers.--

Kylohk

19:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

As I seen some big WikiProjects have their own logos. I don't think the coat of arms of Hong Kong will do. Please discuss more or create a logo for this Wikiproject. --

15:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I actually think the HK coat of arms is fine. Either that or the HK Brand logo. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:15, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

But the Brand Hong Kong Logo is coprighted. It cannot be used on templates. --

Jacklau96

01:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

So do HK coat of arms. — HenryLi (Talk) 16:01, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Curious, what don't you like about the current set up? Luke! 04:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The coat of arms clearly represents Hong Kong. If you don't like it, it may be a good idea to draw a new logo with a junk in the middle, and that's another symbol for Hong Kong.--

16:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't like using a junk as a symbol of HK. It's too touristy. I mean, there's only one junk left in HK, and they only bring it out just to show the tourists. Stick with the Bauhinia as a symbol, even if we create a new logo. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the Coat of Arms is a great symbol. Just maybe a little bit bigger so some ppl can read the words w/o having to click into the pic. Herenthere (Talk) 22:36, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I think the coat of arms is too formal --

Jacklau96

02:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

There are in general, several possibilities. Either you use the government emblem, an item that symbolizes HK (Tsing Ma Bridge, Bauhinia etc) or the shape of Hong Kong as the logo.--

Kylohk

11:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I think making a Hong Kong location map according to this standard should be useful to the project. Anybody interested in doing this? --Deryck C. 03:10, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, but I don't know anything about it. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

See the examples there. We only need a blank Hong Kong map and some coordinates and it's done. Do you have a blank Hong Kong map? --Deryck C. 04:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

This topic comes up quite often. The best thing to do is to take the many regional maps and trace over it. This is alot of work. I was tempted to do it, but have a stack of projects on my list. If you are looking for the full HK map in a single color, there might be one in wikimedia commons. Benjwong 06:13, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Just realized that Instantnood (talk · contribs) was totally banned by some non-process decision. I think WPHK might want to know this. Personally, I am in deep sorrow for his departure, but since we are process-abiding people, I can't do much. Probably I'm the only person in the world who's sorry for this. --Deryck C. 07:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I feel sorry about that. Instantnood (talk · contribs) had contributed a lot in Hong Kong-related articles. — HenryLi (Talk) 07:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

He's been banned for a while now. I think when he actually takes the time to discuss, he was a very good contributor. But most of the time he is revert warring across multiple articles, with him being the sole editor that agrees with the changes he himself is making. That kind of behaviour eventually got him on revert parole (one revert per article per week). If he had just abided by that, he would still be here. But he started revert warring with sockpuppets instead. I think this is why he's been permanently blocked. Again I feel he was a very good contributor when he wasn't revert warring, but he needed to understand that WP is a collaborative process and that there are going to be times when he cannot have things his way. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:54, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

And many a time I agreed with Instantnood's viewpoint. Now he's banned and Wikipedia had lost the best (in my opinion) devil's advocate from Hong Kong. Now I retrospect the days back about one and a half years ago when Instantnood, Jerry and I collaborated the Hong Kong article stack together... --Deryck C. 15:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Having read his talk page archives, it seems that he has had a lot of conflict with others, over whether to use "mainland China" in articles! His also argued over whether Taiwan or Republic of China should be used in articles. I mean, aren't there better things to argue about? Being sent to RfC or Arbcom over such trivial matters really amazes me.--

Kylohk

17:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

He has endless conflicts with SchmuckyTheCat (talk · contribs) and Huaiwei (talk · contribs). It's really amazingly long. — HenryLi (Talk) 18:12, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Did they ban his username? Or they ban his IP permanently? Benjwong 19:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I guess they banned his IP. The block log stated that he's prevented from creating any new user accounts for a certain period of time.--

Kylohk

19:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

According to his account log, the block is indefinite. Although knowing his behaviour, it's possible he's been editing under a different IP. As long as he does not revert war, nobody would take notice, and it wouldn't really matter anyway. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I think everybody in Hong Kong edits from multiple IPs. And many a time proxies and tors are used. Sigh. But the community has to take responsibility - who made all the ArbCom rulings against Instantnood? If I were him, I'd also go crazy. --Deryck C. 01:55, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The main

) 15:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Is the under-referencing because of the new content or content that existed even when the article is nominated for FAC back then? --Deryck C. 15:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

It was promoted to FA almost 2 years ago, and back then FACs are less stringent than they are now. It does look like the version that was promoted was even more under-referenced. If you take a look at any FARs that are going on today though, you'll see that reviewers want to make sure that an article is very well referenced. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:30, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

But "very well referenced" does not mean over-footnoting. We should be careful not to add too many superscript notes, especially for stone-hard facts. --Deryck C. 17:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Of course. I don't think we should over-reference the article. But I do think right now it is under-referenced. We must remember that we should be writing articles as if it is read by someone that doesn't know anything about the subject. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:45, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I think I can go and do something with the politics section in a few days. --Deryck C. 17:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

That would be great. I don't think the content of the article needs much work. I just think that for the information that's already presented in the article, we need to reference them better. But don't you have to study for your A Levels? :DHong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure we are under-referenced? We have never been slapped with a "Unreferenced" warning. If anything I think we are overdoing it. Stuff like statistics should definitely be referenced, but alot of the facts are already in the internal articles within history/politics etc. Benjwong 19:48, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

I think Qigong is concerned mainly about the BLP content of the politics section. The history part really needs little work, as history is concrete facts. --Deryck C. 01:57, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the content needs to change, I just think it needs more footnotes. Just saying that it's "concrete facts" is not going to fly with FAR reviewers who want every fact to be provided with a source. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

In that case I just wonder if the FAR folks are crazy? --Deryck C. 04:15, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I've seen some that are pretty stringent. As an example of today's standard for an FA class article, check out the recently promoted Kung Fu Hustle. Note how frequently footnotes appear. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Benjwong - To clarify, I don't mean it's so under-referenced that it needs an "Unreferenced" tag. I mean it's under-referenced for an FA article and I fear it may not survive a FAR if it was tagged for one. I would like it to stay FA class. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:09, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I added more footnotes. I think it is already overdoing it. Try getting it reviewed again. I think the reference requirements are getting ridiculous. Benjwong 03:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks good! I'll try to find the time to do some of the other sections as well. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:44, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, Octopus card has passed its GA nomination. The first step to bringing that article back to FA status has been accomplished. I may not get to it right away, but what I plan to do next is:

1. Create stub articles for the red links in the article.
2. Request a peer review.
3. Nominate for FAC.

Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:39, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Great work! --Deryck C. 17:42, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Nice. That's good news. Benjwong 19:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I've requested a peer review for the article. Wikipedia:Peer review/Octopus card/archive2. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks goes to

) 03:25, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! This really is a first for WikiProject Hong Kong. It is the first Hong Kong film article to be featured! I'm happy because of this, also because England managed to draw Brazil 1-1 at the new Wembley stadium!--

Kylohk

21:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Great work once again! –Pomte 22:40, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Where is the spoiler tag for the plot section? --

Jacklau96

04:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Per

Resurgent insurgent

05:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I always thought that spoiler warnings aren't very professional. You don't have film magazines tagging each article with that warning, since it's obvious they will expose the plot.--

07:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I noticed that an editor requested that an article about Centamap be created on the project requests page. An article previously existed for this Hong Kong mapping service; however, it was deleted (not by myself) per CSD criteria - A7 (Unremarkable people, groups, companies and web content...)

I contemplated re-creating the article for this service, however a quick Google search (first three pages only) does not yield much notability. Putting it out there, if we all feel that there are enough sources out there to support this article, then we can ask for a

19:48, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to see what the article looked like before it was deleted actually. But definitely, if we can't assert notability, then there's no point recreating it or asking for a deletion review. I'm just going by personal experience that I know a lot of people use it. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The worst thing is that the article Centamap is deleted without discussing with any major contributors or related project / noticeboard (According to Wikipedia:Notability). The nature of Centamap makes it notable in Hong Kong only but not the rest of the world. If you search its Chinese name 中原地圖 in Google, you can find more extensive usage. — HenryLi (Talk) 03:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's why I'm curious what the article had looked like before deletion. It probably failed to assert notability. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:53, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I restored the article and moved it into my user space. It is now here:

Resurgent insurgent

03:57, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I added a piece of information to try to assert notability. Not sure if it's enough though[1]. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

It's not enough.

Resurgent insurgent

12:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, between User:Luckyluke and I, three sources have been added to state that:

1. It's the first mapping service licenced by the HK Census and Statistics Department.

2. It's monthly page views jumped from 0.1 million to 4 million from 1999 to 2003.

3. It was ranked the top website in HK's online travel industry in March of 2007.

Do we need more? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You've got a point to show, but a main problem is that the harsh people at deletion review and deletion requests do not accept foreign-language sources as notability evidence; and btw Resurgent insurgent be careful, an admin has previously been desysopped by Jimbo's intervention for simply offering to unveil deleted content to others. --Deryck C. 06:47, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually the three sources that are now provided are all English-language sources. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think restoring a deleted article whose revisions all do not violate key policies (such as

Resurgent insurgent

08:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at

10:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Nice expansion! I don't think the article is in danger of failing a notability test now. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

After two years of (hard?) work, the article's finally up-to-standard and I've nominated it for GA. Give some comments please! --Deryck C. 07:11, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Some of the sections look a little under-referenced, but I think unless you get a strict GA reviewer, the article will pass. I didn't know Lam Tin used to be salt fields though. Good job on the article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:20, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks bit under-referenced because I wanted to avoid over-footnoting. Most of the references have now become bulleted lists at the bottom of the page instead of inline footnote links. But if this should really be reversed, it can be done. Nevertheless, I think putting in all the footnotes will make the page less readable. --Deryck C.^{review my hometown!} 10:16, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I guess the readability of having footnotes is a matter of preference. But I do think that many article reviewers are looking for footnotes these days. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:25, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Close-file - the article was given a detailed fail. If possible, everyone can help fixing the problems as addressed by the reviewer. For the inline references, I should be able to fix them. --Deryck C. 10:38, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Update: The article needs a format fix. As reported, it currently looks broken on IE. Anybody using IE is able to fix it? It is alright to fix the article at the expense of removing a few images. --Deryck C. 09:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

(reply to Qigong as of above) Well, it is indeed a case that people actually prefer the presence of a (probably) excess amount of footnote links. I've added a lot to the article, more than doubling the number. Thanks Qigong for helping with the layout of the article, if there's no objections I'll put it up for a GA renom tomorrow. (ie. later today HKT) --Deryck C. 16:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I would leave a note at the Talk page of the original GA reviewer about the improvement, and ask if he'd be willing to re-evaluate it. That way you can cut out any possible wait on the GA candidate queue. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

So would you do it? Thanks. --Deryck C. 15:14, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

There is this fair use image problem in 3 of the images in

08:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

The images don't have to be replaceable with much likelihood, as long as it is possible. The argument seems to be that the specific scenarios aren't very significant. Them being in interviews is not a central topic in the article, and anyone can imagine a man being interviewed on TV. Reading the article, it did seem that the images were used solely to show their faces. I've responded to your proposal of 2 other images here. –Pomte 04:41, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

) 21:12, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Need Template Opinion

I was about to go down the food or items list and try standardizing the format on a number of articles. However, I cannot decide which one to really use

22:57, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I'm finally satisfied with the state of Stanley Internment Camp, and I've nominated it for GA status. Hopefully the images won't be a problem. I had to tag 2 out of 3 of the images as fair use, justifying that since the camp was only in existence from 1942 to 1945, a new version of the images cannot be produced. The third image, fortunately, should be public domain since it was Crown copyrighted more than 50 years ago. I've uploaded it to Commons instead. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:36, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. Try nominating it. Benjwong 02:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

After weeks of waiting, the article has unfortunately failed it's GA evaluation. But that's OK, the evaluator listed some issues in the Talk page, and they look like issues that would have came up when I eventually try to push it to FA status anyway. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:05, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The original image that the WPHK Userbox uses (

) 00:43, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

If the infobox wasn't red, it'll likely show up 3D. Benjwong 02:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think the userbox need to be red (that symbolized the Hong Kong, as it is used in the flag) and the image need to appear in 3D. --

Jacklau96

09:47, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

How about this:

Jacklau96

10:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks fine! -Herenthere (Talk) 19:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

That new image looks fine. But why do you think the image that goes in the userbox needs to appear 3D? I don't think that's necessary, especially since the userbox is so small. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Impressive! That looks professional. Let's use it in the userbox. Benjwong 02:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Alright I'm going to change the template to use the new image. If anybody has any problems with it, feel free to revert or discuss. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:05, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the colour is too sharp, consider a duller colour. --

10:08, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

How's that? Or alternatively, we can just make it white.

Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:20, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The white one rather, look like the Japan Flag. --

Jacklau96

00:49, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Hahhah, alright I've changed it to the duller red. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

User:Ohconfucius has placed a "prod" tag on Hong Kong Society of Cinematographers, and the article will be deleted in a few days if the deletion is uncontested. I don't know too much about this organisation or association. But if someone think it's notable enough for an article, please expand it a bit to assert notability. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

It is 香港專業電影攝影師學會, one of 13 organisations managing

Hong Kong Film Awards. — HenryLi (Talk

) 00:10, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Siu maai

I just noticed we have two different articles for 燒賣. If there are no objections, I'll be merging

) 19:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome to merge it however you like. I am not too concerned with any of the names as long as there are redirects. In fact, I don't have a history of its actual origin to make a call on the romanization etc. Benjwong 19:45, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a food of Cantonese origin (isn't it?), so should be under the Cantonese romanization, the way

Bing (Chinese bread) are northern and under pinyin romanization conventions (though one can sometimes find these foods in Cantonese restaurants). Badagnani

19:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I think articles like Jiaozi are named by Mandarin pinyin because pinyin is a naming convention for romanising Chinese things that do not otherwise have popularised English names. I really don't know if Shao Mai/Siu Maai are Cantonese in origin, but it's probably been popularised in the west as a dim sum dish. Actually it doesn't matter too much to me what name we use as the article title. Let's see what others have to say about this before we do any merging. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

It's now redirected into shaomai. Benjwong 00:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Very good. I always thought more Mandarin speakers know about that dish (which I dislike a lot!) than simply Cantonese speakers.--

Kylohk

22:19, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it is best to set guidelines for TVB related articles. The article Myolie Wu was written inthe form of an advertisement. I've cleaned up that part, but there is still referencing to do. I would suggest creating a page or a TVb Wikiproject and lay out some guidelines, like the style of writing and the use of acotr/actress/drama show poster images, as most are non-fair use.--TVBdxiang (Talk) 13:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

There really aren't that many active participants in this WikiProject as it is, I don't think you'll get much activity in a WikiProject devoted entirely to TVB. But we can certainly talk about establishing some guidelines for TVB-related articles right here. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The first guideline should be to move list of TVB series to list of Hong kong TV shows. It looks like a monopoly list owned by TVB at the moment. Benjwong 17:04, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually I think the lists are fine where they are. They are specifically about TVB shows after all. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:30, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Keep in mind there are multiple lists also.

List of TVB Series (2007), List of TVB series (2006) Benjwong

18:41, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Cuisine redirect

I requested that

16:57, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do you think keeping the article adds confusion? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:32, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The

Cuisine of Hong Kong already covers the west. Benjwong

18:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Then just redirect the Western cuisine to the Hong Kong cuisine article, due to it being a subset.--

Kylohk

10:40, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Chan under peer review

Big brother

Kylohk

10:44, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Good job with the work. This might be a bad time to try to push any article covered by

WP:BLP. But hopefully that whole dispute is going away. I have the peer review page on my watchlist. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs

) 15:28, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, the article doesn't have any farfetched unsourced details. The most problematic one is definitely his injuries, which are mentioned by various media, and humourously referenced by Jackie himself!--

Kylohk

15:45, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

What I was afraid of was that the article mentioned stuff like how in the 80s, girls have committed suicide upon hearing that he was dating or was married, or that he has an illegitimate daughter. But I glanced at the article and thankfully it doesn't mention that stuff. Because those

WP:BLP vultures would be all over that kind of stuff. Hahhah! Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs

) 17:12, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and another thing. If someone's got the DVD for

Kylohk

19:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's even better news. Jackie Chan is now upgraded to Good Article status! Time to update that table.--

Kylohk

18:08, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Great job. By the way, you don't have to update Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Hong Kong articles by quality statistics manually. It's automatically updated by a bot every two days. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

FYI, you can update the table by running the bot (type in "Hong Kong"). –Pomte 19:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't know that. I just did an update. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:59, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

So how do we go from a page review to wikipedia frontpage? Benjwong 16:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

You mean "Today's Featured Article"? I've never nominated one before, but I think requests go here - Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Which article do you plan to nominate?--

19:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Let me try to nominate the historical articles to GA first. I have not done this process before. Benjwong 02:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Can someone please read through the article? It's under peer review, but no one's commented on it.--

22:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Hong kong wikipedians, on June 23, the Hong kong government changed some of the naming of different departments and HK government changed some of the position of the secretary. We must update these as soon as possible. --

03:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Can we find a list of these changes online somewhere? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, I just saw them in TVs in the Hollywood Plaza, it may be on the news, check Ming Pao website. --

Jacklau96

06:40, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

See also: [2]

Some templates related to MTR are proposed in

.

• Template:Kwun Tong Line (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Tsuen Wan Line (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Island Line (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Tung Chung Line (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Airport Express (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Tseung Kwan O Line (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Template:Disneyland Resort Line (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs
  )

— HenryLi (Talk) 16:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It seems like there is a recent wave of images that is going to get deleted. The new fair use policies said musicians/actors/actresses cannot use pictures from movies, screenshots, CDs, albums etc. I went talking to a number of people and we need some serious help trying to get "FREE" images of these celebrities. I have emailed a number of people at flickr. Almost every person said they can't share the image cause it was taken from random websites. I don't know where we will find this many image? Benjwong 03:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's frustrating. As far as album covers are concerned, according to

WP:Fair use#Images, they can be used if there is "critical commentary" of the albums in question. But that'll require article expansion in most of the articles we're talking about. I did a brief Google search for The Pancakes' most recent album, and there's not really any sources we can use to actually add information about her specific albums. But that's not surprising, because she's an indie musician, and in a city like HK of all places. Maybe we'd have better luck with the more mainstream musicians. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs

) 03:53, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Well they are saying you can't use album covers to represent artists. A number of people in the fairuse talk pages are complaining daily. Benjwong 02:42, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

The only ways to find "FREE" images is taking photographs on them ( which is ultra rare case) or find photos that are posted in Public Domain or Gnu licences. --

Jacklau96

11:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

We can always assign a squadron of Wikipedian photographers to ambush places like Happy Valley and the airport, or blend in with the fans/stalkers/paparazzi XD.

_dk

11:50, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at Aerosmith, album covers are all over that article. And screenshots are used all over Mariah Carey. I think it's because those articles actually discuss the specific albums and content of the screenshots. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:01, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Another point I'd like to add - while I think there should be a bit of leniency on the fair use of album covers and screenshots, because there are no free alternatives of those, I do think we should be careful about inserting random images into articles of celebrities. There are photographers and magazines that basically use the copyright of these photographs to make money, and they really shouldn't be used so freely here on WP. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:48, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

For a place like HK that is crazy over celebrities and tabloids, I am surprised we haven't seen more free images. Where can we seriously go for help? This is the big question. Benjwong 17:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

As per our reviewer, there are a few things that I need help:

• Probably a language rewrite of Lam Tin#Highway and road surface
• Somebody to find out which links linked to disambig pages and fix them
• Somebody (probably GB) to include the importance of Lam Tin's geologic makeup (monzogranite) to the district's development.

Thanks! See the comments at Talk:Lam Tin. --Deryck C. 07:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I did one round of cleanup for the Highway and road surface section. When you say "Grave sweeping days" do you mean Qingming Festival? If you don't like changes, feel free to go back. Benjwong 05:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Well yeh, Ching Ming, Chung Yeung, etc. --Deryck C. 02:19, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

02:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think putting Simplified characters in everything like the anonymous editor was doing is necessary. It just clutters up the intro of an article. A lot of times I don't even think romanisation of the Chinese characters is necessary. I see Chinese-related articles that start with both Traditional and Simplified characters, plus something like 2 different kinds of romanisation, and it just looks really clumsy. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:52, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with HongQiGong. Firstly, we should not focus on the naming of the article, like: Tsim Sha Tsui (Traditional Chinese:尖沙嘴/尖沙咀) (Pinyin: Jiān Shā Zuǐ). Secondly, we are writing Traditional Chinese in Hong Kong, not Simplified. You cannot see any road signs written in Hong Kong with simplified Chinese. --

Jacklau96

07:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Well to be honest, I don't mind putting Simplified characters in infoboxes. But I don't think we need to put Simplified at the beginning of an article. A lot of times I don't even think we need to put any romanisation Chinese characters in the beginning. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Is that the same person as 91.104.36.51? This person comes back everyday, does not create an account. You cannot even talk to him/her. I would prefer putting this person on a project to fix zh-yue and zh at the end of the articles. But obviously that is not possible. Benjwong 22:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

The establishment ceremony of Wikimedia Hong Kong will be held on July 14, 2007 at 15:00 at City Top, City University of Hong Kong. All Hong Kong Wikimedians are invited to join this joyous occasion. Application for Wikimedia Hong Kong membership can also be made at the event. For more details, please see m:Wikimedia Hong Kong/香港維基媒體協會成立慶祝活動.

For queries, you can contact me through my email. As I'm the master of ceremony that day, come and support me!!!! Thanks! --Deryck C. 15:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

I cannot go cause I am not in HK. If you can find people to take pictures of celebrities and popstars that would be great. Benjwong 22:22, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

There is a template called {{

03:02, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Good question. I had wondered about that myself. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 07:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

I asked this exact same question in August of 2006. It was created by an anon user. Luke! 21:57, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Alright, the leading sentence in this article is ridiculous:

• The Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China [1] (Traditional Chinese: 中華人民共和國香港特別行政區行政長官; Simplified Chinese: 中华人民共和国香港特别行政区行政长官; Pinyin: Zhōnghuá Rénmín Gònghéguó Xiānggǎng Tèbié Xíngzhèngqū Xíngzhèng Zhǎngguān; Cantonese Jyutping: hoeng1 gong2 dak6 bit6 hang4 zing3 keoi1 hang4 zing3 zoeng2 gwun1) is the head of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China, and represents the Region.

Can we talk about how we can trim this down? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I think you should remove the Jyutping or Pinyin. --

Jacklau96

00:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

How about an infobox? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 00:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Infobox will be fine if you want to keep everything, but I think we just don't need the Jyutping and Pinyin -- Feathered serpent 07:23, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Chief Executive is a title. It's just like Chief Secretary for Administration, Financial Secretary, and other officials. It should be simplified as

The

People's Republic of China

.

— HenryLi (Talk) 09:11, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to use the Chinese template for these occasion. See how it sorts out the Sino-British Joint Declaration. Benjwong 22:24, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Octopus card FAC

Alright, somehow Octopus card managed to sit in a peer review request for an entire month without anybody commenting on the article. So how I've nominated it for FA. Please help fix any problems any reviewers may find so we can push the article back to FA status.

• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Octopus card

Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Why don't we do another peer review for

Jacklau96

01:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if that's really necessary, and I don't feel like waiting another month with potentially nobody commenting on it. We can just see what the FAC reviewers say. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 02:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess I can review it and give my opinions, if you like. I haven't touched that article for ages.--

Kylohk

11:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Our COTM

Our COTM is very outdated. We have not chosen an article for April, May, June. I don't think people are caring about it. Should we disable it? --

Jacklau96

10:13, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I have no objections about disabling it. It's inactive. But I do wish we have some collaboration drive, not necessarily a monthly one, that'll help us pool our efforts together to push articles to GA and FA statuses. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:59, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

It is outdated. No objections. Although, as a community we are fairly good at improving articles, as some of the discussions from the Project talk page indicate. Luke! 21:55, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, why do we need a COTM? We can just post the stub articles that we found to the request page we have. --

JackLau

03:20, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind having the COTM if people actually wanted to participate in it. The advantage of a collaboration drive is that we can pool our efforts together to improve an article instead of each of us doing seperate and individual articles. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:31, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

But people are not participating. Yes, i don't mind if people are participating. --

JackLau

03:42, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

People are contributing just not necessarily the COTM areas. Is up to you guys. Benjwong 20:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I guess it's due to the limited number of members in this WikiProject. Had it been larger, there would be more people willing to lend a hand.--

Kylohk

11:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think we have enough members. But they are not participating. Look at the members page, there are many of them. But look at this discussion page there is only HongQiGong, Luckyluke, Benjwong, Kylohk, some other users and I (sometimes) discuss things here. It is only a little amount of the members we have. People are not caring about this project. --

JackLau

02:55, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It's not just this WikiProject. A lot of people sign their names up on WikiProjects but never actively participate. That's why I'm always hesitant when people ask me about joining a WikiProject or about starting up a new WikiProject. I would say that the amount of activity for this WikiProject is really not bad considering that Hong Kong is not necessarily a topic that generates world-wide Wikipedia editing interests, especially not in the English-speaking world. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Template talk

I started a conversation for template discussion here. Please join in. We need to decide which template to use to standardize on. There are too many floating around. Benjwong 19:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Conversation moved to here.

Hong Kong copy right ordinance

In light of the recent wave of image deletions, I wanted to link up the text for the copyright ordinance in Hong Kong for all of us to examine. It's extremely long, but as far as I can tell, it's pretty air-tight, with even government works being copyrighted.

• Copyright Ordinance in Chinese
• Copyright Ordinance in English

Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:41, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I've discussed it in another wikipedia before. Government's work have longer protection period. It is 125 years. I'm not clear about it. I doubt Government work is eligible to crown copyright. Which rules applies when copyright law is different in Hong Kong and US? — HenryLi (Talk) 23:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Government copyright lasts for 125 years.[3] I think this specifically applies to the Executive Council, because copyright of the Legislative Council lasts for 50 years only.[4] I think crown copyright is only applicable to the works of the British colonial government, and anything after the handover is under the current Copyright Ordinance. As far as comparison with the US, I'm not exactly certain, but for example, take a look at George Bush's picture. It is tagged as public domain for being the work of the US federal government. So maybe the US government releases its photos to the public domain instead of holding the copyrights like HK? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 00:22, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Hong Kong and UK has separate set of law even in colonial era. I would doubt crown copyright of UK is applied to Hong Kong as well. — HenryLi (Talk) 15:20, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Nadia Chan

I propose that we move this article to her stage name

Nnadia Chan? Thanks.--TVBdxiang (Talk

) 02:30, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Chan now a FAC

Big brother Jackie Chan is now

Kylohk

08:33, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

• I'll add, some external copyediting assistance will be appreciated.--
  Kylohk
  00:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I did some copy-editing for it the other day. I think it's ready. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Standardizing Chinese Template

I would like to see if anyone has any last opinions on standardizing

here. We have fixed quite a number of issues over the past week. Benjwong

21:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

If anyone have any opinion about pinyin being used as the default/international romanization permanently shown in the standardized template such as

here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjwong (talk • contribs

) 2007-07-20 06:18:26

2the Max

I am going to write an introductory article about 2the Max, a well-known computer hardward brand in Hong Kong. Products include motherboard and power supply (牛魔王). However, the article was deleted in an initial state because of its notability. It is under deletion review (Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 July 26). I cannot find much information in a short time. Any one help? — HenryLi (Talk) 15:51, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Does being the 2nd runner-up to the "SME Accounting Management Excellence Award" in HK help establish notability?[5] I've never heard of this award before. However, this source also says that the company was formerly known as "JDR Digital Technologies Limited". Have you tried searching for info under that name? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. — HenryLi (Talk) 18:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

District emblems

Unfortunately all the pictures of the district emblems have been deleted from Commons.[6] Nothing on the government websites say that they are copyrighted, but supposedly they are "implicitly" copyrighted. The good news is that I saved them all on my hard drive as soon as they were nominated for deletion. I guess the alternative here is to upload them here on English Wikipedia itself. But the question is, do we upload them under fair use? And does fair use apply here? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 22:07, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you tag the emblems GFL, maybe you should upload them back to the Commons. Since there isn't a copyright notice on the website, where the emblems are found, we need to prefer it is designed by the government and give a fair use tag for the emblems. --

JackLau

00:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

You can't upload anything to Commons under fair use. Everything in Commons has to be free. There isn't a copyright notice on the district council website, but according to one editor at Commons, copyright is "implicit". Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 01:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I believe that copyright protection is implicit at creation of all creative works in all common law jurisdictions unless otherwise stated. Luke! 01:36, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

So do you think they would qualify under fair use here on WP? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 01:51, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

A second copy editing request for Jackie Chan

Please help. A professional writer (

Kylohk

01:40, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes. I'm familiar with Tony's style of critique. No doubt the Jackie Chan article is full of "sub-professional" writing with sentences that deserve criticism like "yuck!" Just like the Octopus card article. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 01:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

On first read, it reads fine. However, I'll take a closer look tonight. Luke! 02:01, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I did some copy-editing for all but the last three sections. But I'm not a professional writer, so I can't tell if I've just made it better or worse if the article was judged by Tony standards. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Either way, I'll just write on the FAC that significant action has been taken in an attempt to address his concerns. Especially if asking for another person to copy edit but not giving any examples is hard to take action on.--

Kylohk

07:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

We need to ask Tony for some examples to work on. --

JackLau

08:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Now that the article is near the bottom of the page, looks like people are more likely to read it, and a couple of copy edits have been made, according to is history. As for me, I may run through it again tonight, provided the Netvigator connection is fixed.--

Kylohk

08:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I've just had a pass through this from a proof-reading perspective (knowing very little, before I started, about Jackie Chan) and have made 7 minor edits for spelling, style & wording. Paul Christensen (Hong Kong) 10:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Good job. Let's hope it gets on the main page someday (and not be vandalised!).--Alasdair 10:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Image:Hong Kong coa.png

Hi. I just put a request on Zscout's SVG page, that we need a SVG version for

JackLau

09:09, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I found the page that tells me on how to draw the emblem. However, the question I have is what fonts do I need to use in order to make the emblem look correct (and legal). I started on it now and I am working on the bauhinia now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:44, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't know which fonts the emblem is using, but could you not just copy and paste the characters and letters found on the existing image? I'm not familiar with how to make an SVG, so I don't know what needs to be done. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 22:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

With the English text, I am going with Times New Roman. The Chinese Font, I am having some issues with, since I cannot bold it or anything. I will get the image done, no worry. That is the only thing causing problems now; everything else is done. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 22:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

But when I type words in

JackLau

06:55, 31 July 2007 (UTC)+

I am using the same program as you. Anyways, what you needed to do is put the text on a path (Object to Path), then it will give out text. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:10, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm done. Of course, I and others can tweek/play around with the file, but I generally like the overall result. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:35, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

So, what font did you used for the Chinese text? --

JackLau

08:19, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I forgot, but I can easily check it now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 08:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The font I used was Gungsuh. That was the closest I found that gave me the curves that I noticed. I also added a 1.6 stroke on the Chinese text, but I still feel some minor details are missing. You're welcome to send it to the Commons later once it meets your expectations. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 08:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Good job! Nicely done. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:18, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

The colors have been changed to the official ones used by the HKSAR Government and I modified the Chinese text so it matches. The HKSAR flag colors were also changed to match what the Government uses. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Flag of Hong Kong FAR

A featured article review has been filed for Flag of Hong Kong. Let's tackle this thing and try to keep the article at FA status. Wikipedia:Featured article review/Flag of Hong Kong. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:09, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm having trouble finding sources to reference and verify some of the content of the article. I left a note on the article Talk page asking for help. Please try to find sources if you have the time. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:03, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, the FAR is over and FA status was kept. Good job everybody. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Two new subpages for the WikiProject

I've added two new subpages for the WikiProject and added them to the navigation template - one for FACs and one for FARs.

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Hong Kong/Featured article candidates
• Wikipedia:WikiProject Hong Kong/Featured article reviews

I've added both Octopus card and Jackie Chan to the new FAC subpage. If there are other current HK-related FACs that I missed, please add them to the page. There's only one HK-related FAR right now, the one for Flag of Hong Kong, and I've added it to the new FAR subpage. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:30, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Allegations of Chinese apartheid

A recently-created article,

Allegations of Chinese apartheid, has been nominated for deletion. Comments are invited on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of Chinese apartheid. -- ChrisO

23:13, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Message left at the To-Do list

Somebody left a note at the To-Do list.[7]

There's an error in the description of HKIA's position on Queen's Pier (under way ahead). There was a misunderstanding in the institute's change of stance after meeting with government officials in April but it was all clarified by the institute's subsequent public statement on 29/4/07, which reconfirmed it's stance of in-situ preservation, the latest statement being made on 7/6/07 also reconfirmed this. This can be verified on HKIA's official webpage. Grateful if someone will correct it.

I'm not familiar with this so if anybody knows about this and is interested, please make the edit. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Mandarin Oriental, Hong Kong

Hello. Could someone from the project look at Mandarin Oriental, Hong Kong. It needs a complete overhaul: it currently reads like an advert and would actually be a speedy deletion candidate were it not for the fact that the article has a long history involving many contributors. Help would be appreciated. Pascal.Tesson 19:25, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Octopus card now FA

I'm happy to report that Octopus card has finally bounced back from being a formerly FA article to currently FA article. It looks like Jackie Chan is almost ready to be promoted, and progress is being made at Flag of Hong Kong (FAR). Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:24, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Indeed a very nice job everyone! Luke! 04:26, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I've put in a request for the article to be featured as Wikipedia:Today's featured article. Don't know if it'll get selected though. The decision rests soley with the FA Director User:Raul654. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 04:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the Today's featured article request was denied because the article had already been featured for that once in 2005. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 00:39, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

History of Colonial Hong Kong (1800s - 1930s)

was promoted to GA

It looks like

History of Colonial Hong Kong (1800s - 1930s) was promoted to GA over a month ago. Good job to all who worked on it! Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs

) 00:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Kylohk is now User:Alasdair

Hello,

This is just to tell everyone that I have usurped the username Alasdair, since it's my real English first name. So, I used to be Kylohk, now I'm Alasdair. Thank you for your attention.--Alasdair 00:31, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

cool Benjwong 16:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Portal image

Check out the Hong Kong footnote section. The image is missing on the Hong Kong portal? But when you go to Template:Portal Hong Kong, it seems to be there. How can that be? Benjwong 16:11, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Not sure what happened with the rendering of that image. But the article wasn't actually using that template. I've fixed it and the image should now show up. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 17:02, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Chan is now FA!

Jackie Chan has passed its FAC.[8] Congratulations to all editors who worked on it. The class rating of the article has not been updated yet, but I believe a bot will be doing that soon, so we don't need to manually do it. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• Finally, I've waited soooooo.... long. After all, Raul seems to be busy with some dispute on global warming.--Alasdair 00:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Qxz

I've made a Qxz ad for this project! It's here. Æetlr Creejl 17:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Well, it may be a good idea to use a GIF animator to make one that cycles. It'd meet the eye more.--Alasdair 00:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I will do this later this week. The ad link is kind of breaking the template.

Miranda

04:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

.

Updated version.

Miranda

03:53, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Can I tag it on my user page? (Addaick 13:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC))

Can you place it on your userpage? Yes, I will do it for you.

Miranda

19:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. A thought, instead of the plain red background, how about using the Hong Kong skyline during the Symphony of Lights as the background? It would be a little more convincing. Luke! 03:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Agree per Luke, but make sure the audiences are able to read the words. --

Jackl

07:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I am kind of busy to make "minor touches" to an already done project. The pic has to be free licenced/public domain. Not clashy, etc. For now, this will do.

Miranda

19:03, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I changed my name too.

Hi everyone. The username, Jacklau96 has been changed to

User:Jackl

. It is much shorter and it hides my last name.

This is my alternate account. --SafeJackl 09:44, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Rob-B-Hood on peer review

The film

Wikipedia:WikiProject Hong Kong/Peer review to list any articles that are currently reviewed. Feel free to go there and comment.--Alasdair

06:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Wan Chai need alittle help

I am in the process of getting Wan Chai to GA. I think if someone can help expand the Wan Chai#Administration paragraph we are ok. The reviewers are looking for constituencies or representatives of Wan Chai. You can also see the talk page to continue the discussion. Benjwong 21:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)