User talk:Hoary

If I've posted something on your talk page, please reply there rather than here. Any new question or comment at the bottom of the page, please. If you post something here, I'll reply here.

A barnstar for you!

		The Userpage Shield
		Great shielding! By the way, hope you notice that the image in the barnstar is from your userpage! Welovecontributors! [talk] 03:35, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Request for independent review of an Afc-approved article

Hello, I was wondering if you could take a look at the article I created. Igbo regalia and headdresses Someone is claiming it's all original research particularly the paragraph on headdress (Ichafu...) and practically reverting my edits and removing some of the Images despite revising the article to conform to his request. Please look at the article and help resolve the issue. Also check the edit diffs for my last edits before it was reverted to it's current form with non-verifiable information and the talk page Talk:Igbo regalia and headdresses where I've explained my sources. Thanks. Dreune (talk) 17:27, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation, Dreune. I looked quickly at the article. I didn't get the impression that editing it would require any unusual skills, but it is about a subject of which I know nothing, so I'd have to be particularly careful if editing it or commenting on it. I then looked at its talk page. This has a dismayingly large quantity of (polite) argy-bargy and I suppose I'd have to read and digest that before adding to it.

Portions of it jumped out at me. Here's one:

The next source is Style and Substance: Why What We Wear Matters, edited by Gay Garnett, a book on fashion. In the chapter “Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie on Making the Right Impression,”

“As a child, I loved watching my mother get dressed for Mass. She folded and twisted and pinned her ichafu until it sat on her head like a large flower. She wrapped her George—heavy beaded cloth, alive with embroidery, always in bright shades of red or purple or pink—around her waist in two layers. The first, the longer piece, hit her ankles, and the second formed an elegant tier just below her knees. Her sequined blouse caught the light and glittered. Her shoes and handbag always matched.”

I used this source for the following content:

“Ichafu (also recorded as Ichafo and Icafo in historical sources) is a traditional Igbo women’s headdress fashioned from a fabric folded, twisted, and pinned into elaborate shapes until it sits on the head like a large flower.”

But the source doesn't mention ⟨ichafo⟩ or ⟨icafo⟩. It says neither that the ichafu is Igbo nor that it's traditional. It doesn't make it clear whether ichafu only describes the result of folding, twisting, etc; or whether the word also covers the (more or less) flat textile even when this isn't folded, twisted into shape. (Cf the Japanese term Sankakukin, which encompasses a square cloth folded once, corner to opposite corner, to make a triangle, as well as a headscarf [or bandage] made from this triangle.) The child doesn't distinguish between conventional and unconventional -- between what women normally do, and what they can do if they feel like it.

You cite more source for the same description; but among them, there's still no mention of Igbo. (Only "Nigeria(n)".)

Some way below, you do say that The 1923 CMS dictionary documents ichafu as an Igbo term for a headdress. Hathitrust doesn't make this century-old dictionary available to me (or perhaps to anyone outside the US). Perhaps a better resource would be page 107 of the newly (2025) revised Igbo dictionary here, which says that ⟨ị̀chàfù ̣⟩ means "head-tie; handkerchief".

Thus you could say that ichafu is an Igbo term, citing the dictionary. Then provide a fuller (but not fanciful) description, based on and citing Melie. Then provide extra bits (if there are any that merit addition), based on and citing Adichie/Garnett. Then likewise for Butticci. If X is attributed to source A, Y to source B, and Z to source C, this will be easier for another editor to verify than if the sum of X, Y, and Z are together attributed to A, B, and C. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 06:15, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Hoary, thank you so much for taking out time to review the article. I've been able to get accessible platforms for the sources. These are the sources:

[https://archive.org/details/dictionary-of-ibo-language-english-ibo-cms-1923 Head-dress: Ichafu - isi]. Page 72

[https://archive.org/details/englishibofrench00holy/page/291/mode/1up Sulu Ichafu (Ichafo) = put on a head-tie] page 291

[https://archive.org/details/englishibofrench00holy/page/145/mode/1up?q=Kerchief Kerchief: Icafo, couvre-chef]

[https://books.google.com/books?id=iqZbAAAAMAAJ&q=ichafo Melie Edith (1977), Ichafo or Headgear: "…tall turban-like headgear"]: "The Ichafo or headgear is a decorative piece of cloth for covering the head. The headgear is usually a flat piece of cloth (six by three feet) folded conveniently either in a triangle or in a rectangle and swathed round the head. The resultant cover looks like a tall turban with a bow."

[https://archive.org/details/visual-arts-paterson-poppy-and-vaughn-oxford-2017/page/32/mode/1up?q=Ichafu Oxford University Press (2017), *Visual Arts*: Ichafu under "Textiles and cultural signs" – ceremonial headscarves worn for weddings

[https://observer.co.uk/style/fashion/article/hometown-glory-highlights-from-london-fashion-week-springsummer-2026 The Observer (2025), Priya Ahluwalia's Spring/Summer 2026 collection: Jacquard knits inspired by Nigerian Ichafu headwraps and Bollywood motifs

I'll follow this chronology to revise the paragraph so that you can review it.

Thanks Dreune (talk) 14:44, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

I have rewritten the paragraph better sources that support the content, please assist to review it once again. Thanks. Dreune (talk) 15:32, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

about the comment of Draft:Moxy Hotels

an exerpt from the comment u left reads, Moxy Hotels is a hotel chain founded by Marriott International in 2014, in partnership with IKEA. It has 135 hotels as of 2026.

i have a couple things to note here.

1. i accidentally left 135 on there, when there are actually 181 properties (fixed on the draft)

2. the substituting word for locations is properties to be specific (fixed on the draft)

and

3. select hotel brand means that moxy falls under the "select" hotel category; if you think i'm wrong, check . the image shows a list of marriott brands with moxy & its respective category circled, as taken from the marriott bonvoy website. AHR (g • s • c) 22:10, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

ps: i changed select hotel brand to limited-service hotel brand, and most of the sources are reliable + independent, they were just reporting on buisness routines according to this section from the afc help desk. AHR (g • s • c) 22:14, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Our friend at Teahouse

Solid off-wiki evidence of UPE (which you may already be aware of). They've got one shot to respond to the warning. I suspect there may be more going on as well, but not sufficient evidence (yet). ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 11:29, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not aware of it (I haven't looked for it), but I'm not surprised to hear of it. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 11:35, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I wasn't sure whether you had already, or just an easy guess, considering. The related mainspace article appears to have had ongoing issues. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 11:45, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Request for an independent review of Draft:Yan Li

Hello Hoary, I was wondering whether you might be willing to take an independent look at Draft:Yan Li. It is a biographical draft about a Chinese poet and visual artist, based on both English- and Chinese-language sources. I would be particularly grateful for your thoughts on whether the draft’s claims are presented neutrally and proportionately, and whether the cited sources adequately support them. For transparency, I have disclosed my close personal connection to the subject on my user page and the draft talk page. I realize this is a substantial draft, and I completely understand if you do not have time to look through it. I am not asking for any particular outcome; I would genuinely welcome whatever comments or suggestions you may have. Thank you for considering it. YamazakiCask (talk) 06:11, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

"Draft:Yan Li (artist)", I believe. I'll look at it after supper, YamazakiCask; but in the meantime: you can simplify to (Yihang, 一行) (as just one example) -- I mean, no need for《   》-- because both the context and the different script (hanzi) make it clear that this is a title. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 09:24, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Nothing stands out as problematic. However,you say: I would be particularly grateful for your thoughts on whether the draft’s claims are presented neutrally and proportionately... For that purpose, I'd have to judge whether the draft’s claims are presented neutrally and proportionately, and whether the cited sources adequately support them. But I can't do that, as I can't read Chinese, I know nothing about contemporary (or older) Chinese poetry, I know little about contemporary art, and my time is limited. Why not submit it and see what happens? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 11:21, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking the time to look through the draft and for giving me your candid assessment. I submitted it through AfC yesterday, and the notice says that the review may take up to four months. I have to admit that the possibility of such a long wait makes me anxious, which is why I hoped to get an independent editor’s perspective in the meantime. Yan Li died recently, and his family and colleagues are now beginning the work of organizing and preserving his archive, so it feels important to make sure there are no obvious issues with the draft at this stage. I understand, of course, that this is not a reason for the draft to receive special treatment.

I’ll also simplify the Chinese title formatting as you suggested. If you happen to know of an editor or WikiProject with relevant expertise in contemporary Chinese art or poetry who might be willing to take a look, I would be very grateful for any suggestion. Thank you again—I truly appreciate your time and help. YamazakiCask (talk) 14:13, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi Hoary,

I wanted to let you know that the draft was accepted through AfC and moved to mainspace today. I honestly did not expect the review to happen so quickly. Hooray!

Thank you again for taking the time to look through it and for your helpful feedback. I really appreciated your independent perspective. YamazakiCask (talk) 19:08, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Congratulations on the acceptance, YamazakiCask! So what's the next stage? No other article seems to link to the new article. ("Seems to link" rather than "links", because I perhaps sleepily fail to notice one or two. But if Yan Li (artist) isn't what's called an "orphan", it's very close.) You can, and I think should, link from a small number of other articles to "Yan Li" (achieved via [[Yan Li (artist)|Yan Li]]). Where he's already mentioned, linking the mention is easy, and you can do this freely. If he isn't already mentioned where he might be, then you can add the mention; however, you should do this sparingly: you have a COI, and a bad-tempered editor could interpret the addition of many links as promotion. At a minimum, add a link to Yan Li (artist) from the "disambiguation page" Yan Li. (Another good idea would be a "hatnote" atop both the article Yan Li (artist) (of course 严力) and the article Li Yan (artist) (李演), avoiding confusion of the two; I'll happily add these myself, a little later today.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 21:54, 30 July 2026 (UTC) I've struck out what I've already done. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 23:02, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi Hoary,

Thank you again for all your helpful suggestions, and for adding Yan Li to the disambiguation page and setting up the hatnotes—I honestly would not have known how to handle either of those myself. I’ve now linked Yan Li’s existing mention in The Stars Art Group to his new article, consolidated the duplicate member names, and added supporting sources from the British Museum and the University of Vienna. I’m also checking related articles for other appropriate places to add internal links, so the article becomes better connected.

As a complete newcomer, I’ve found your clear and practical guidance incredibly helpful. Your patience and willingness to share your experience have made the whole process much less intimidating, and I feel very fortunate to have had your help.

YamazakiCask (talk) 23:49, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Good. The Stars Art Group led me to Li Shuang (artist), an article whose content is obviously problematic. (Sample: "her family was deteriorated by the Red Army".) Slightly less obviously, its sourcing is terrible. If you were interested in doing a little work on the occasional article with no COI, I'd suggest ameliorating Li Shuang (artist). Now, thoroughly improving a feeble article usually takes a lot of time and effort; but chores such as checking that what an existing reference attributes to a source really is written in that source needn't be so hard. I've even made a very small start. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 03:51, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi Hoary,

I’ve made a small start on Li Shuang (artist), revising the opening of the Life section and the early-career paragraph so that they more closely reflect the cited sources, while removing details that the sources did not appear to support.

For transparency, I’ve heard some stories about members of The Stars Art Group, including Li Shuang, through the family, although I don’t know her personally. I’m glad you pointed me toward this article—it has been a helpful way to start learning how to check sources more carefully!

YamazakiCask (talk) 04:13, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Just remember to forget those stories! En:Wikipedia requires sober summaries of reliable, independent, secondary, published accounts. But don't get too despondent: such accounts aren't always boring. But back to Yan for a moment. Some of the descriptions you provide of his books don't have ISBNs. Try looking in WorldCat for ISBNs. Any book listed in WorldCat has at least one OCLC number: if there's no ISBN, then consider providing the OCLC of what looks like an accurate description of the book. (Many books have multiple descriptions, of varying informativeness and accuracy; each description has its own OCLC number.) -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 11:34, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi Hoary,

Understood-I’ll leave the family stories with the family and stick to the published record here.

I’ve now checked several of Yan Li’s books against the physical copies. I added verified ISBNs where available and corrected a number of publication details and language descriptions. In a few cases, the information online was inaccurate or appeared to refer to a different edition, so I relied on the books themselves rather than guessing.

For Poet’s Life and the two art catalogues, I could not confirm an ISBN or find a matching OCLC record, so I left them without identifiers. This was a useful lesson in how much care bibliographic checking actually takes, and I really appreciate the suggestion!

YamazakiCask (talk) 20:12, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

YamazakiCask, we don't need a reference for the existence of a book (strictly, an edition): a copy of the book (edition) itself can attests to its existence. But it's unusual that a book by somebody notable hasn't found its way into WorldCat. The books of course aren't Japanese, but consider Japan for a moment. Most university and reference libraries in Japan don't bother to feed information into WorldCat; instead, they use CiNii. For anyone who wants to get hold of an unremarkable book that's in Japanese and published in Japan, WorldCat is useless for library holdings in Japan, CiNii is useless for those outside Japan. So for the (few) "Books largely devoted to [Teikō] Shiotani", I provided an ISBN for any book that had one, and both an OCLC number and the CiNii number for any book that lacked an ISBN. I wonder if the National Library of China or (for Taiwan) this have similarly useful OPACs. There certainly are some oddities, notably a book that seemingly (i) was published in Tehran (and has an Iranian 964 ISBN), (ii) has Allen Ginsberg in its title, and (iii) is in Chinese (and only in Chinese): can all of these be true? -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 09:14, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Draft feedback

Hi Hoary, You kindly reviewed Draft:Bas Aarts and added comments. I followed your suggestion and added links to reviews of my books. However, your colleague Sulfurboy has now declined the submission. Could you have another look and see if the article can now be approved? Just to add, I looked at the Wikipedia entries of many of my colleagues of similar seniority and their Wikipedia entries are very similar to mine and have long been approved. Many thanks in advance. ~2026-43040-95 (talk) 09:48, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Bas (if I may), with "have long been approved", you've partly explained the double standard. Creating articles, even articles about living people, used to require truthiness and perhaps a sprinkling of references but not much more. After abuse of such permissiveness, we clamped down on attempts at creating new articles. But as for feeble old articles, it takes time and effort either (A) to argue over whether they should be deleted or (B) to bolster them so that others don't call for their deletion. And therefore they tend to linger, feebly. ¶ Let's look at the boilerplate that Sulfurboy has attached. This draft lacks inline citations. Wikipedia's verifiability policy requires that all content be supported by reliable sources. We require inline citations (footnotes) to show which source supports which specific statement. / You must place an inline citation directly after: [i] quotations; [ii] any material whose verifiability is likely to be challenged or is contentious; [iii] any material about living people. Within that, [iii] is the problem. And for most purposes the reliable source must be independent of the article's subject. (The enjoyment of perusal of maps isn't an achievement and so we can take the subject's [published] word for it; if the subject went on to describe his collection of copies of Stielers Handatlas, no, that would need a source that was independent as well as reliable.) ¶ I intend to work on the draft, improving it. I'm a slow worker and my "real life" has its demands. Better not resubmit the draft until I (or another "reviewer" posts a comment suggesting you to do so. Please be patient. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 12:04, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, that's very helpful. ~2026-43040-95 (talk) 15:32, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Have resubmitted. Thanks so much for your extensive work on this article. Very much appreciated! ~2026-46450-70 (talk) 11:11, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Happy to infer that you don't dislike it. I think the said "extensive work" has led the article to wobble oddly between uninformativeness and verbosity -- but that though it's not a "good article", it's passable (or "standards compliant"). It should survive, and I hope that over time it will be improved. ¶ Sometime soon, please read, or reread, Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. ¶ Know somebody with both a taste for article creation and some free time? There are worse options than Draft:Hendrik Poutsma. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 23:33, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

I do like the article. Thanks again for your very valuable input! I'll think about Poutsma. He certainly deserves an entry, if only for his massive 4-volume English grammar. They don't write them like that any more.... ~2026-46729-39 (talk) 09:45, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

By contrast, there is an article about Kruisinga -- in reality not so much of a contrast, as the article somehow manages not to mention Kruisinga's giant Handbook. Jespersen's Modern English Grammar -- the only one of these three monsters that I've actually seen -- has an article to itself; and for each of the "parts" (volumes), the article has a list of chapters. The lists are there because I put them there; and, ahem, one motive for putting them there was my own convenience. Hardly "convenience", though; more "reduction of inconvenience". The only antique I look into more than very occasionally is Hans Marchand's Categories and Types (1969), which, refreshingly, is a single, well-ordered volume. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 11:05, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

You're a linguist? ~2026-46729-39 (talk) 13:24, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Just a nobody with an internet connection. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 22:06, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Organized Labour September Editing Event

You're invited to join the Organized Labour community editing event, a cross-wiki event taking place throughout September 2026!

The campaign brings together Wikimedians interested in improving coverage of organised labour, workers, trade unions, and labour history. We have confirmed collaborations with Wikipedia language editions in English, Dutch, Persian, Serbo-Croatian and French. If you want to add other language editions or other wiki projects you are strongly encouraged to do so! This event spans geography and languages!

This is a one-time invitation. You're receiving it because you previously signed a petition related to Wiki Workers United (WWU). We hope you'll join us!

Regards ~ Shushugah (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Revdelete

Hi, I noticed you deleted a revision on the sandbox. Can you also delete and because it is also a BLP violation and contains a disgusting joke? Beyoncé and Rihanna's navy 🐝🪖 13:11, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Done. Thank you, Beyhive Navy. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 21:24, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

Request for guidance

Hi Hoary, please, I’d like to ask for some guidance regarding a situation that has been going on for a while.

I’ve had to deal with repeated confrontations from a particular Wikipedia editor, Dolpina, regarding articles I have created, including on the relevant talk pages:

here

here

For example, on the Jioji cloth article, she added a “citation needed” template even though the paragraph already had a citation supporting it: "diff" here

I have raised this issue on your talk page before. She also went to the talk page of the AfC reviewer who approved the article and challenged him to the point that he eventually complained of harassment on her talk page: here

I opened a content dispute regarding the matter, but she declined to participate: "Dispute Resolution Noticeboard" here

More recently, after I spoke with another AfC reviewer about a draft I had submitted where the original creator was suspected of using an LLM, something I was not aware of she went to the talk page of another editor whom she frequently involves in disputes and tagged another AfC-approved article I had created as potentially LLM-generated, apparently based only on suspicion: here

I understand that articles I create are open to improvement, scrutiny, and legitimate content disputes. However, I am becoming concerned about the pattern of repeated confrontations involving articles I have created, particularly when they appear to be coming from the same editor. At this point, it is beginning to feel as though I am being specifically targeted. How about neutral editing?. This doesn't seem like it.

My question is whether there is an appropriate venue or process through which I can raise this issue. She declined the content dispute I opened, but the behavior regarding articles I create have continued. I had also observed in her talk page before she blanked out everything that there's a pattern of such confrontations with articles regarding the same ethnic group that I mainly write on. I can provide the diffs via edit history if necessary.

I would appreciate your guidance on how best to handle this situation and whether there is anything I can do to address this situation that seems to me to be a continuos pattern

Thank you. Dreune (talk) 02:37, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

I see what you mean, Dreune. I'm thinking. Meanwhile, I've commented at Talk:Jioji cloth. -- Hoary (talk)^WWU 👍︎ 08:04, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the intervention. I'd provide the required further sources for the assessment. Dreune (talk) 08:52, 28 August 2026 (UTC)