Jump to content

User talk:grapesurgeon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from User talk:Seefooddiet)

Incorrect edit

[edit]

In this edit you edited the {{Certification Table Entry}} template incorrectly. It does not support the |script-title= field.
And the same here. The {{Certification Cite Ref}} template doesn't support it either. Muhandes (talk) 07:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, thanks for catching that grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 13:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yet again Special:Diff/1298892712. I have to run so I reverted you instead of resolving the issue. Muhandes (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
😬 Oop thanks. I may be able to implement an automatic detection or fix for it, will look into it soon grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:56, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok fixed, thankfully was simple. Solution was to search for every use of either of those templates in a page and replace "script-title" back to "title". Shouldn't occur anymore. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 22:16, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AWB script(s)

[edit]

Hi! Can I get a copy of your AWB script(s) please? I discovered this and I am curious. Thank you, Polygnotus (talk) 07:39, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Just a note that it's currently basically only useful for Korea-related articles; when I run it on non-korea articles it often gets 0 matches or minor cosmetic things. In order to make it functional for other topics would need a significant rewrite; almost equivalent to rewriting from scratch. If still interested lmk. Otherwise I could share the broad skeleton of the script (i.e. script has a list of publication names to link, script has a section for unreliable sources to tag, script has a section for general find+replaces in a list format. That structure is generally applicable. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 13:52, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am still curious I was thinking of making my own list of genfixes at some point so maybe it is useful inspiration. Thanks, Polygnotus (talk) 15:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok; I'll send you an email via your profile. If you reply to it I can reply back with the xml profile file as an email. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 19:17, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
it's polygnotuswiki @ gmail.com thanks Polygnotus (talk) 00:04, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sent! grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question

[edit]

Hi surgeon. Can I add translation of places name to infobox korean, say Jirisan, can i add Mount Jiri in the "lk" parameter?103.186.160.39 (talk) 11:27, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm I'm not sure but leaning towards saying "no". We currently don't have guidelines on whether to add those kinds of translations. What we don't want is people to translate the abstract part of place names, like "jiri" in your example. "San" is probably more ok to translate, but I feel like opening door to translating that may tempt a lot of people into translating entire mountain name
will consider starting a discussion on this and adding a guideline grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 14:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Just notifying that I've reverted this, not to be confused with Chung Yong-jin. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 06:12, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm aware they aren't the same person. That list is for people with net worth over a billion. I'm not sure what Chung Yong-ji's current net worth is but if it's still over a billion maybe he should be on that list grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 12:31, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Chung Yong-ji's net worth was not enough to make this list which I believe is what we use for List of South Korean billionaires by net worth. CherryPie94 🍒🥧 (talk) 14:29, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK sounds good grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 14:39, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Global Talk Show

[edit]

Hi there, please take a look at Global Talk Show when you have a sec - your recent edit broke the infobox in a way I'm not sure how to fix. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 03:26, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done; sorry about that! grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 03:29, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please add some references to Draft:March of the Korean Liberation Army? I realize that namuwiki is not a reliable source. Perhaps it could be moved to external links. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 18:13, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will add them. Namuwiki shouldn't even be in external links imo; we don't link to other wikis like that. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 18:19, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with Revised Romanization of Korean from Korean/auto (hongnyeon vs Hongryeon)

[edit]

Hi,

In Special:Diff/1296287045 for the film A Tale of Two Sisters, you changed {{korean|hangul=장화, 홍련|rr=Janghwa, Hongryeon|lit=Rose Flower, Red Lotus}} to {{Korean/auto|hangul=^장화, 홍련|rr=yes|lit=Rose Flower, Red Lotus}} in the LEDE. But the obtained RR is now Janghwa, hongnyeon: in the second word, the "r" has been changed to "n". If I understand correctly, according to Revised Romanization of Korean, this is incorrect (an initial ㄹ corresponds to "r"). The version with an "r" is also what is (almost?) always used on the web. This could be a bug in Module:Ko-translit.

Moreover, what about the capitalization of the word (it seems that a capital H is expected here)?

Regards, — Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 00:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for the message. "Hongnyeon" is actually correct per Revised Romanization. This is due to linguistic assimilation, which is reflected in this case in RR.
See the official explanation of RR, the section where it says The case of assimilation of adjacent consonants. The "Jongno" example is similar principle. You'd expect it to be spelled "Jongro", to match the Hangul spelling. However, due to assimilation and reflecting how Koreans pronounce the word in practice, it'd be "Jongno".
On how other romanizations online use that spelling, they're simply just wrong. See WP:ROMANKO#Background; other than linguists, basically nobody really understands romanization of Korean. I notice incorrect romanizations constantly in Korean studies academic books and peer-reviewed papers. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 00:27, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh forgot to address the capitalization question. We're less sure on what to do there. To my knowledge, RR has no official recommendations on whether/how to capitalize titles of works. In East Asian studies, it's widespread practice to use sentence case.
Similarly, and adding to the capitalization hairiness, it's relatively ambiguous how RR should be spaced. Should words "created" by additional spaces added be capitalized as well? Not straightforward answer I think.
We're currently pondering if/how we could systematize capitalization and spacing, but not straightforward. So for now, we're defaulting to mostly sticking with original spacing of Hangul and using sentence case. This is relatively close to practice in academia. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 00:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
After I've found some time to look at this more closely...
About the assimilation of adjacent consonants:
About the capitalization in this particular case, the words need to be capitalized because these are the names of the girls from the original folktale.
Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 20:56, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Replying bullet by bullet:
  • Yeah, the official explanation is pretty bad. There's a bunch of supplementary essays we've relied on to understand the system that are, to my knowledge, only available in Korean.
  • I'm not an expert on this topic (someone else was the primary author of the automatic romanization module; I just implemented the code on enwiki and refactored it). I think for a fuller guide may help to look at linguistics books.
  • The Revised Romanization article is still pretty bad. I've been working on cleaning it up, but I'm currently juggling dozens of projects rn. If you'd like to help out that'd be appreciated.
  • Oops the Tale of Two Sisters film romanizations was a mistake; I forgot to set name mode using %.
    • The pronunciations have changed, but we don't ask for romanization to reflect the original pronunciations. This is pretty standard for other languages too; e.g. "Beowulf"'s pronunciation has drifted but that's not really adequately communicated in current spelling. Per WP:COMMONNAME, we use whatever spellings are widespread in the present for topics. Academia uses modern romanizations for these topics, so we follow them.
grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 21:10, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can't help as until the beginning of July, I knew nothing about the romanization of Korean and the pronunciation. I could just look at contradictions/inconsistencies or if explanations are missing.
FYI, I came to this because on the IMDb, "Hongryeon" was changed to "Hongryun", while the IMDb also uses the RR. So I compared with the Wikipedia article (the current and older revisions), and I also looked at the Revised Romanization of Korean article. So it appeared that the "yun" on the IMDb was wrong, and I submitted a correction (which was accepted), just to revert this change. And there was still the change of "r" to "n" in the Wikipedia article, which I did not understand.
Regards, — Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 21:49, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For that film, this is how the romanization situation should work. While the correct romanization is "Hongryeon", the film may officially prefer another ad-hoc romanization. Such an ad-hoc romanization may be appropriate for IMDb, but not appropriate in our templates (which require strictly correct romanization). The ad-hoc romanization could go in Wikipedia article's lead as prose, and not in any templates.
Note that "Hongryeon" and not "Hongnyeon" is correct. The latter reflects assimilation, but RR officially asks you not to assimilate in given names. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 22:04, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. In Janghwa Hongryeon jeon, both 장화 and 홍련 are given names (so no assimilation between syllables). But in the film A Tale of Two Sisters, neither 장화 nor 홍련 are given names (so assimilation should be reflected between syllables).
(Blame the creators of RR for this kind of issue.)
IMDb can do whatever it wants, and that has nothing to do with Wikipedia. In fact, IMDb really does whatever it wants. For example, 없는 is variously romanized as eobtneun, eomneun, eopneun, and eobsneun. 172.56.232.228 (talk) 23:24, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh oops ur rite on the first part.
I think IMDb should develop a standard similar to ours, but that's a separate topic. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 23:45, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why they are not given names in the film. As I understand, this is a reference to the given names from the folktale (thus should keep the same writing). If this means something else, this should be explained in the article. — Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 23:58, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pun names are very common for Korean works (I just went through like every SK film/tv show), where nouns are homonyms with people names. Unfortunately it's subjective what can be interpreted as a person name or not.
In this case, I think there's a relatively clear answer. Nobody in that film goes by the names of "Janghwa" or "Hongryeon". This is unlike the original folk tale, which had two characters by those names.
Instead, the terms are interpreted as flowers, and the names of the lead characters carry the meanings of those flowers. In the original Korean folktale, the sisters' names are Janghwa and Hongryeon (Rose Flower and Red Lotus). In the film, they are Su-mi and Su-yeon (though the names still hold the meaning, Rose and Lotus).
So in this case the most plausible interpretation is that the film's title is about flowers and not people names. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 00:05, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But these flowers never appear in the film! So I don't see why the film title would be about these flowers rather than the obvious reference to the names from the folktale. — Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 00:13, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's subjective, yes. But I'd argue the names are being used as symbols first and people names second. There are other titles of works where I'd argue differently, but this work has the above traits I mentioned. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 00:39, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming that they are used as symbols, do you have sources explaining such symbols in the film? (There are no explicit references in the film itself.) — Vincent Lefèvre (talk) 00:49, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In that film, there are no characters named 장화 or 홍련. So I don't know why you are insisting that they are given names in that film.
Also, a reference to something does not have to use the same name or spelling as that something; it can even use a completely different name.
If your concern is about what IMDb uses, you need to go to IMDb and have a discussion there. Wikipedia has nothing to do with IMDb. 172.56.232.193 (talk) 01:26, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have sources; I could look up but I'm working on other things. Fairly minor movie in grand scheme. I think the important thing is the principles here; they should be general grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 03:03, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

romanizationredirectcreator

[edit]

Hello! Would you please modify User:Grapesurgeon/romanizationredirectcreator.js, prepending // <nowiki> and appending // </nowiki>? In its current state the entire source is parsed as Wikitext and adds categories unintentionally. Thanks! ~ Eejit43 (talk) 02:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Did it, thanks for letting me know. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 02:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, thanks so much! Sorry I originally forgot the forward slash in the closing tag :) ~ Eejit43 (talk) 02:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Kwŏnŏphoe

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kwŏnŏphoe you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Grnrchst (talk) 18:37, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Criticism" section of McCune-Reischauer

[edit]

Hi there, I saw you put in a "criticism" tag for the selfsame section in the McCune–Reischauer article. Thank you very much for this. I don't know your position on MR, but I am currently learning Korean and personally I find MR to be far superior to RR in terms of accurately and intuitively capturing Korean pronunciation.

Of course, with any transliteration system for any language, MR does have its drawbacks, but these are minor compared to the mess that is RR, and they're not hard to understand and adapt to. I understand you might delete the section soon if no credible citations are forthcoming - I might help you to delete it myself! If I have time I will expand the "limitations" section of the article to illustrate MR's advantages as well as disadvantages, for a balanced POV.

If anyone questions your deletion of the section, just know that I have your back. Cheers. Argentsky (talk) 03:16, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for the message! To be clear, my tag has little to do with the ideas of the section. It's purely mechanical concerns. 1. Per WP:CRITICISMSECTION, we should try to distribute criticisms of the system throughout the article, not try to concentrate them all in one place. 2. It's unsourced, and likely the personal opinions of the editor who added them.
If that info had been sourced and wasn't concentrated in a criticism section, I wouldn't have gotten involved at all. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 03:19, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough! Thanks again. Let's give it a week or so. Argentsky (talk) 03:33, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My Fair Lady (2009 TV series)

[edit]

Hi there, infobox error at My Fair Lady (2009 TV series)... I'd be happy to fix it, but I'm unfamiliar with this formatting. I'll watch the page and take a look after you fix it, so I'll know how to in the future. Thanks, Jessicapierce (talk) 21:37, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I just fixed it. Thank you for letting me know. It was missing a set of close brackets; I also forgot to specify that it was the television version of the infobox grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hangul request

[edit]

Hi Grapesurgeon,

Could you please help me write this English text using the Hangul syllables?

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."

For example, other alphabet varieties have been transcribed here. --DaveZ123 (talk) 14:18, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the Hangulized English link. --DaveZ123 (talk) 14:21, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is this for use in a Wikipedia article? Also note that the Chinese characters in the first link are incorrect; they're not a phonetic transcription (which is possible for Chinese) but are just a translation. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 16:25, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, you can be rest assured that it will not be added to a Wikipedia page such as this one. --DaveZ123 (talk) 05:21, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ah I see; I hope you'll understand if I respectfully decline. I'm happy to do things that directly benefit Wikipedia though. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 05:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like they are mainly here to promote their conversion tools. I don't know if they are really here to build an encyclopedia.
And I suspect that JackonLee54 is the same person. See [6] and [7]. 157.131.131.136 (talk) 05:57, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify LLM generated articles

[edit]

Hi. I've participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Connaughton as you may have seen. I wanted to make sure that you knew it was OK to boldly draftify LLM generated articles yourself without recourse to AfD: in fact, the User:MPGuy2824/MoveToDraft.js script (which I highly recommend if you don't already use it) has that as a checkable option/ boilerplate reason for draftifying, per WP:DRAFTREASON. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 16:03, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I didn't know that! Thank you for letting me know, I may go ahead and draftify some of their other articles as well. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome! If the LLM generation has involved hallucinating sources/references, I generally remove those before draftification. If the subject is completely made up, then {{db-hoax}} may also be an option. There's also a WikiProject that's dedicated to dealing with AI rubbish, which you might consider joining if you haven't already. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 17:17, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Didn't I add related articles too? What more do you need? Issue0501 (talk) 05:57, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please post in the discussion; what's important is the articles need to be more than WP:PASSING mentions. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 05:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are many sources of statistics and articles on his playing record. What do you need more of? Tell me. Issue0501 (talk) 05:59, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page mover granted

[edit]

Hello, Grapesurgeon. Your account has been granted the "extendedmover" user right, either following a request for it or demonstrating familiarity with working with article names and moving pages. You are now able to rename pages without leaving behind a redirect and move subpages when moving the parent page(s).

Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Page mover for more information on this user right, especially the criteria for moving pages without leaving a redirect. Please remember to follow post-move cleanup procedures and make link corrections where necessary, including broken double-redirects when suppressredirect is used. This can be done using Special:WhatLinksHere. It is also very important that no one else be allowed to access your account, so you should consider taking a few moments to secure your password. As with all user rights, be aware that if abused, or used in controversial ways without consensus, your page mover status can be revoked.

Useful links:

If you do not want the page mover right anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Thank you, and happy editing! * Pppery * it has begun... 20:07, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]