User talk:Jen KRT

Edit on People's Action Party page

Hi, Jen KRT, I've undid an edit you made on the PAP page as there was no edit summary given and I couldn't see what the point of the edit was. Dawkin Verbier (talk) 18:16, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on Singapore pages

Hi Jen KRT, some of your recent edits on the pages of people in Singapore are being reverted as I think some editors feel that they add a number of Chinese names that are not relevant to those Singaporean people. Before you make further additions, I think it would be good to discuss them on the talk pages of the respective articles to see if a consensus can be reached. Cheers, Dawkin Verbier (talk) 07:59, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To whom it may concern, the purpose of inserting Pe̍h-ōe-jī (Hokkien Romanisation) and sometimes Jyutping (Cantonese Romanisation) into Chinese-Singaporean people's names because it simply doesn't make sense to have Mandarin Pinyin of their names.

Just think it in another similar scenario, we do not change French name "Jean" into "John". Correspondingly, we cannot force Tokyo to be named in Mandarin "Dōng Jīng".

Prior to the Speak Mandarin Campaign launched by Singaporean government, Chinese-Singaporeans speak Hokkien, Cantonese, Teochew, Hainanese, Hakka, and other Southern Chinese languages. Since Hokkien people comprise the most among Chinese-Singaporean community, it was a lingua franca among the community. Thus, simply forcing Mandarin pinyin into their names do not justify at all.

Similarly, those Singaporean places with Chinese names, actually can be read in Southern Chinese languages. Thus, it is also reasonable that we provide Hokkien, Cantonese pronunciations for Singaporean places too.

If you are still not convinced that Southern Chinese languages are essential to the community, please refer to this website by "Speak Hokkien Campaign" for more insights. https://www.speakhokkien.org/about-us

Should I cause any inconveniences, I apologise for my unintentional acts. Jen KRT (talk) 08:34, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to chip in here, just because we can provide Hokkien, Cantonese pronunciations for Singaporean places does not mean we have to. If a place's current name has its etymology based on certain dialect, yes we can add it in. Adding for the sake that we can is wrong. Note that this is the English Wikipedia, we provide the official and common names for people and places. If the person is of Hokkien descent, it is fine we provide the Hokkien pronunciation etc but not Cantonese. In that sense, Malaysian Chinese, provide their Cantonese pronunciation and not Hokkien as it is their common dialect unless it is otherwise known. This is in line with you had said, Correspondingly, we cannot force Tokyo to be named in Mandarin "Dōng Jīng". One of your latest example here, Hakka and Cantonese? You are putting an unknown association (otherwise known as WP:Original Research) to Wong Jeh Shyan.

Tagging @Dawkin Verbier and @Intforce. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:48, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Saw this in my watchlist, Special:Diff/1129077439. I don't mind if it is in the infobox, but it being updated in the lead make the bracketed information excessively long. The information in brackets takes up 1 whole row of text, and this is on the wide screen mode on Vector 2022 skin. My eyes jumped and I had to reread the line several times. Not readable. – robertsky (talk) 13:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jen KRT, as there are quite a few editors who had concerns with your editing, please do follow WP:BRD and discuss here. A response will be much appreciated. Thanks. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Pe̍h-ōe-jī without adding Pinyin

Per MOS:CHINESE, you should also add the Pinyin romanization, if you add other romanizations. Adding Pe̍h-ōe-jī and only Pe̍h-ōe-jī is undue and suggests some close connection between it and the subject of the article. intforce (talk) 14:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've also raised the issue here. Feel free to continue the discussion there. intforce (talk) 15:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit(s) you made to Elvin Ng, did not appear to be constructive and have been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use your sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Please obtain community consensus on the edits to many articles. There are issues which are highlighted on your talkpage which need to be resolved before going forward. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Loh Kean Hean. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

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

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 09:55, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise. However, please allow me to express my view. If we are speakers of a major language like English or French, we may not feel the pain of losing languages because being "majority" and losing languages seem not to be a big deal. However, as for Bân-lâm/Minnan people, they feel pressure to preserve the language because the whole environment does not allow them to have any chance to use it as academic, societal language. Due to the immense suppression of the Hokkien/Bân-lâm/Minnan language in Minnan, Taiwan, Malaysia, Singapore and other places, many Hokkien people have the idea that "Mandarin is superior to Bân-lâm/Minnan language". Thus, it is crucial to allow Wikipedia editors to add POJ on Wikipedia pages so that Bân-lâm/Minnan language can be revitalised. Wikipedia should bear the social responsibility to protect the rights of native speakers of diminishing languages.

If protecting diversity is not essential, why should the European Union give equal rights to 24 official languages, even if some have few native speakers?

I’m afraid I have to disagree with you accusing me of adding POJ on pages with no Bân-lâm/Minnan. I only added POJ on pages regarding Southern Fujian, Taiwan, Chinese-Filipino, Chinese-Thai, Chinese-Malaysian, Chinese-Singaporean, Chinese-Indonesian, and even Hokkien things in other countries too.

Besides, please do not assume that all Chinese people speak Mandarin. Chinese Han has a lot of lineage-based societies, like Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, Teochew, Hainanese and so forth. Mandarin people do not represent the whole Chinese community all around the world. Please do not get shocked if you meet Chinese people who do not speak Mandarin because they may speak other Chinese languages like Hokkien, Cantonese, Hakka, Teochew, Hainanese and so forth.

Thus, please, I beg your mercy. Could all the admins in Wikipedia have a consensus on preserving languages? Could you learn how the speakers of diminishing languages struggle to maintain their languages?

Obstructing any language usage for any reason is not compromised at all because it is a violation of human rights. Don’t the speakers of diminishing languages have dignity too?

Just assume that every sovereign state suddenly implement the law of using one single romanization system, for instance, everyone should only use English phonetics rules to spell their languages, that would be a disaster.

You argue that POJ is rarely used. Then, despite the Welsh language being less used in the UK, should Welsh people get rid of the Welsh language in favour of English too?

The loss of any language is not something worth celebrating at all. Thus, just think about it, do we have the right to obstruct other people from using their native tongues? Jen KRT (talk) 10:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]