Mawan edit

Hello. I doubt that the etymology of the island in Hong Kong is from Mandarin. The earliest British maps usually referred to it as Mah-wan, and the form Ma Wan first appeared in a 1904 map (and is the modern spelling, hence should be the main form); judging by the date it is very likely this name is from Cantonese, the dominant language in the region at the time. Also, please try to properly cite the form without the space (the last two quotes support Ma Wan not Mawan), or else I might have to send it to RFV. – Wpi31 (talk) 09:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wpi31 Check out Mawan and Citations:Ma Wan now; I will look for Mawan cites. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:30, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

About citing place names in Hong Kong edit

Hi, I've noticed that you added many cites to Shau Kei Wan. Official and common place names like these don't need to be cited IMO given the amount of news articles that mention them probably goes into the thousands. I'm generally more concerned on citing less common alt forms and names of minor features (hills, villages, creeks…), since these are way more likely to be challenged at an RFV/RFD. Of course, any sort of contribution is always appreciated. – Wpi31 (talk) 16:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wpi31 Ok, I added something to Sau Kei Wan in diff. Let me know if you'd like to focus on any areas in particular. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. That's some wonderful work you've done there. I might as well warn you that there are still many, many, many, many place names to be added – I've only went through maybe a fifth of the list of major place names that I could think of without looking at a map, not to mention the minor ones. – Wpi31 (talk) 17:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wpi31 哪裡,哪裡,一般般! Please do add everything you want to that you think could potentially reach Wiktionary:Attestation! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 17:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re:difference between the jyutping and romanisation edit

Generally speaking the place names follow the Hong Kong Government Cantonese Romanisation, which is a incoherent system based on the Eitel and Dyer Ball systems. There's quite a number of exceptions and I don't really bother distinguishing them apart. – Wpi31 (talk) 01:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Wpi31 You have done a lot of good work, so keep doing what you think you can do. Over time, if there are answers, they will become more apparent. As Wiktionary becomes stronger, stronger editors will be attracted who can attempt to answer more difficult questions. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 02:13, 20 April 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Log your contributions? edit

May I log your citation collection at Citations:transgender in the campaign at en:Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Pride/2023? I think a broader audience would like to see this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:26, 13 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Bluerasberry Sure! Sounds good to me! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Incomplete old US Army map for Wikipedia:Tieling edit

I am a native of this area. The old US Army map you have added in May 2020 is incomplete. Namely, in that map, only the county-level subdivision "Tieling" and the district subdivision "Yinzhou" of the prefecture-level city "Tieling" is in that map. Both county-level subdivision "Kaiyuan", county-level subdivision "Xifeng" and district subdivision "Qinghe" is missing. The missing area accounts for more than half of the total area of the modern-day Tieling City. This is a reflection of the fact that this particular map produced by the US Army is directly based on the data provided by Japanese-fascist-militarist invaders. Regards. 13:04, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, in order for people to access the knowledge about the area in English from the period, a map can guide the reader with various terms used and locations identified. We cannot cut ourselves off from the past, the only question is if we allow ourselves to look at it, or if we ignore it. Even any errors or omissions on the map could have unexpected value to a researcher. This is true history, the early interactions between East and West. Geographyinitiative (talk) 14:10, 30 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

o edit

Don't know why we "click" but I sometimes think you're the closest person to me in terms of actual project operation. Now don't get too happy. Poor Equinox will never learn Chinese. Equinox 10:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Equinox For me, editing on this website is an incredible learning experience. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You should be worried by Equinox's comment, GI P. Sovjunk (talk) 16:16, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Equinox, P. Sovjunk One day I will be banned from this website because I am too stupid and foolhardy. Either that or circumstances will stop me. I apologize for my errors. Thanks for working with me. Geographyinitiative (talk) 16:56, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(Then Appendix:Mass Effect happened.) Equinox 04:59, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If that page is really out of scope on Wiktionary, it will need to be deleted of course, and that's no problem. I just thought it was in scope, and I was probably wrong! --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Signatures edit

Hi, following your comments at User_talk:JMGN#user_name, would you be able to kindly point me to "the rules and policies of WMF" that may relate to signatures? In short, is it just a matter of, say, not defaming and not using obscenities? Or perhaps also not masquerading as someone else? —DIV ( 06:57, 6 December 2023 (UTC))Reply[reply]

I can't really remember, but I'm generally on board with this kind of viewpoint: Wiktionary_talk:Signatures#Oppose_as_written --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thanks. —DIV ( 01:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC))Reply[reply]