Talk:The Bus Uncle

message: This article may be an exelent example of how writing articles... but it contains nothing! This isn't an encyclopedia article, because:
*The theme of the article isn't severe.
*There's no science that studies the theme of this article.
*There's no permission from the people casting in the "bus uncle" to redirect in their video in youtube! This is a type of advertisement and maybe it humiliates them.
*It's not a part of human knowledge.
*There's no bibliography, nor an extended work concerning this article from an expert scientist, never in human history.
*It doesn't serve the purpose of Wikipedia "access knowledge from everyone and everywhere", rather it's an obstucle to it.
*The article can be transported in uncyclopedia without changes.
The article should be decharacterised from all wikiprojects and featured articles.--Περίεργος (talk) 13:37, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Take it to AfD then, Amber Lamps. Lugnuts (talk) 15:57, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article?

message: Did you know that this article is longer than the one on Monet. It really shows that you have your priorities straight when we have more to say about some fad video than Monet. Wikipedia even had an overlong article about Slashdot trolling phenomena. 
Adamv88 22:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure if you're aware of this, but anyone may edit Wikipedia. Feel free to expand the Monet article as you see fit. MaxVeers 03:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That Monet article IS pretty pathetic, at least in terms of length and depth of coverage.  Ichormosquito 05:16, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, I'm really shocked, that such crap is here on Wikipedia. Should I start to insert a description of all the videos of incidents alike from Germany? Get sober, guys  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.53.33.3 (talk) 00:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good work! 

message: IN TRANSCRIPT IT SAY 'IT ISNT SETTLED' BUT IN CAPTION IT SAY 'IT NOT RESOLVED'. FUCK THEY SAYING DIRECTLY TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH? SETTLED OR RESOLVED? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.195.132.253 (talk) 10:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First, turn off your caps. Then let me tell you that basicly the two means the same, so either settled or resolved would work.70.176.207.164 00:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TRANSCRIPT VS CAPTION 

message: I have removed the WPBiography banner, because this is not a biography. Since useful comments were made at the Biography project peer review, here's the link to that page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/The Bus Uncle. Errabee 22:25, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal from WikiProject Biography 

message: As the pretty little  tag at the top of this page indicates, I've initiated a featured article review on this article, due to the comments made here as well as elsewhere.  The subpage for the review can be found at Wikipedia:Featured article review/The Bus Uncle.  Comments regarding the quality of the article and its suitability as a featured article are welcome. -- Jonel | Speak 20:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The recent general application of Wikipedia: Biographies_of_living_persons to maybe twenty articles is under Wikipedia:Arbitration at the inadequately titled Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff. Specifically, I put these events at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff/Evidence#Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons_meets_Wikipedia:Featured_articles.2C_with_a_loud_crash but suspect much of the rest of the case is also relevant. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 15:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article review

message: While there is a clear copyright violation in this revision last year and it should be deleted from the history, is there any valuable information from these articles those can be cited? –Pomte 16:27, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In search for more sources 

message: I was looking at this ages history and saw that the article was "promoted" to GA status by an anon. Proof. Does that have any effect of what's going on right now? (The Placebo Effect not logged in ) 66.82.9.108 03:57, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The anon changed the talk page only (he did not close the GA nomination by himself). The GA nom can only be closed by an admin, but after it has been closed anyone can change the status at the talk page as long as the new status corresponds to the result of the nom. --:Raphaelmak: [talk] [contribs] 04:41, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Err...  I'm pretty sure any editor can "close" a GA nom, meaning to promote it or fail it officially.  I've done it myself and I'm not an admin.  Maybe I wasn't supposed to and nobody caught me?  I don't see anything on Wikipedia:Good article candidates that says that you need to be an admin to promote or fail a nomination.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 05:19, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good articles are supposed to be award through an open process. Any user that has not contributed significantly to the article can promote it when it's nominated.--Kylohk 09:25, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Was this really a Good Article?

message: Shouldn't the quotations from the clip include the original, untranslated words as well (in brackets at least)? —Pengo 00:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotes in Chinese/Cantonese 

message: 我有压力，你有压力，你做乜挑衅我呀？
Ngo yaw ngadlek, ney yaw ngadlek, ney jowmat tiuyant ngo a?
(我有压力,你有压力,你干甚么挑衅我？)
唔渣手即系未掂啦？未掂即系要搞到掂啦！系咪啊？
M ja saw jek'hay mey gaudim la? Mey gaudim jek'hay yiu gau dow dim 
la! Hay m'hay a?
(不握手便是还没妥当，没妥当便要弄妥当啦。)
未解决！未解决！！未解决！！！
Mey gaikeud! Mey gaikeud!! Mey gaikeud!!!
你好好打咩你！屌***！
Ney how howda me ney! Diu ney lowmow!
(你打架很强的吗？***的！)
老母唔屌屌边个啊？
Lowmow m diu diu bingo a?
(娘亲不操操谁?)
我屌***我条野系咪系***果度丫？
Ngo diu ney lowmow ngo tiu ye haym'hay ney lowmow godow a?
(我***的，我那东西是否在你妈那里吗？)
搬人出黎就搬人出黎，你钟意小就小. 我钟意小就小，小人呢就唔系，冇害既，小丫小丫打你两鎚咩？
Bun yant cotlay jaw bun yant cotlay, ney jonkyi siu jaw siu. Ngo jonkyi siu jaw siu, siu yant jaw m hay, mow hoi ge, siu a siu a da ney leong coy me?
(搬人家出来就搬出来，你喜欢操就操，我喜欢操就操，操人家这不是，没害的，操啊操啊打你两拳吗？）
你警告我做咩？你警告我我唔捻惊拿人家出来。
Ney genkgow ngo jow mat'ye? Ney genkgow ngo ngo m lant geng na yantga cotlay.
(你警告我干啥？你警告我我不他妈的害怕搬人家出来。)
事实证明香港D阿叔级人士系几咁大压力  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Penkyamp (talk • contribs) 02:13, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 阿叔金句摘录

message: It's very confusing when the same person is referred to by different names throughout the article. For example, the Bus Uncle is called Roger in some places and Chan in others. The same name should be used everywhere in the article. Mkeranat 15:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  Very poorly constructed article in my opinion.  I am amazed this got to FA status.  I'm a regular watcher of the Pearl Jam page and have been watching that article go through some INTENSE scrutiny.  It has already failed FAC status once, and was at that time a much better put together article than this one(IMO).  It seems like the system failed allowing this article to get this far. Not saying that there isn't some significance to this article at least within Hong Kong culture, but the quality of the editing and importance neither seem to be there to qualify this as an FA.  --MattWatt 16:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that whatever problem you're referring to only appears to have been after the article was TFA. For reference, here is the article before it was TFA . In it, he was only referred to as either Roger Chan or Chan from searching. The current version is also the same. Also as I keep saying, importance is irrelevant when deciding whether an article is FA Nil Einne 07:29, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names used 

message: It's pointless to complain about the FAC system in general unless you're actually an active participant in the system.  How much do any one of us contribute to reviewing articles under FAC or peer review?  Most FAC articles don't nearly get as much reviewing as they need.  If you think the FAC system is lacking, go check out the FAC page, see what articles haven't been commented on very much, and review and comment on the articles.  Contribute to the system if you think bad articles are being passed.  There's no point in complaining about articles being passed when you don't contribute to the system to begin with.  In the past few months, this article went through a Peer Review, an FAC, and then a FAR.  That's three peer-assisted processes that helped improve this article.  For those editors that complain about this article not deserving of FA status - did any of you participate in those processes?  If you think the FAC system is lacking, then go contribute to make it better.  Peer review some articles, comment and vote on FACs and FARs.  Experienced editors should know by now that there are a lot of areas in which WP needs improvement, and all that improvement is up to us editors because this beast runs entirely on a volunteer basis.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 21:45, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is unrealistic to ask people to spend hours checking every dud article. A simpler technique would be to give front page articles an additional screen, to check that they are FA status and to check that they are important enough to represent wikipedia. A quick, simple policy change is much better than telling off people who don't have the spare time to do what you ask. Sad mouse 03:18, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That solves the problem, but not the origin of the problem. It would mean that the rest of the FA articles would be left unchecked and perhaps inferior compared to those that have appeared on the main page - which is not an ideal solution to the problem. Hong's comment is understandable (the successful nomination for this article had but one suggestion of improvement for the written content), but, as Sad mouse has stated, those of us who have some understandings of the problem probably do not have the time to work on the entire FA. The major obstacle, I believe, is that few actually know about the peer reviews or FAC system, and fewer actually wants to contribute to it. Perhaps the best solution would be for Wikipedia to start an awareness campaign on the things appearing in the front page, especially the FA and the DYKs. Aran|heru|nar 06:43, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: While I'm not saying that things are perfect as they stand, I personally don't really see any major problems at the moment. The reality is although we get some complaints when people don't like the subject as far as I'm aware there have been few TFAs which have either succeeded FAR a short time after being TFA or have had very major problems which have only been worked on after the article has been TFA. To me this suggests the problem is that people either don't really understand or don't agree with the FA criteria rather then the FA system not working. Nil Einne 07:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

text: No, I also consider this article is not well enough to be a Featured Article. So it just makes you wonder how the process works. To say that you don't have a right to complain if you didn't contribute is not the point. There should be no difference between a 'quick' or 'slow' FAC review, although admittedly an article can be quick-failed. Ohconfucius (talk) 08:33, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no point complaining here.  If you who wish to de-list this article from FA status, participle in the next FAR.  All users are welcome to contribute. Tavatar (talk) 16:40, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I didn't just complain. I rewrote the article. It also seems that a number of significant changes were made to the article since the laset FA review, which would account for it being a mess. Common with many articles on popular culture, there is a tendency for editors to add all sorts of stuff which is simply unencyclopaedic. For example, the transcript was never there in the reviewed versions, and was one of the elements I removed. You might like to review my changes. Ohconfucius (talk) 01:41, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: FA status

message: This article doesn't really explain what the argument was about. It mentions that Chan was stressed and Ho didn't respond much, but what exactly did Chan say? What were his "catch-phrases?" I'm not asking for a word-for-word transcript, but surely some kind of summary..? Brutannica 23:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the article does not explain WHY the argument occured.  This is a Featured article and should give this explanation.  RB26DETT  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.15.137.77 (talk) 23:54, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The argument occured because the person at the bak (Ho) tapped Chan's shoulder while he was on the phone. Now that it may seem crazy, but it's true. Some people actually go in a rage after such small provocations.--Alasdair 00:16, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: What actually happened?

message: *Ngo yaw ngadlek, ney yaw ngadlek, ney jowmat tiuyant ngo a?
* I have pressures, you have pressures, why are you provoking me?
*M ja saw jek'hay mey gaudim la? Mey gaudim jek'hay yiu gau dow dim la! Hay m'hay a?
*No handshakes? Does it mean it's not finished yet? Does it mean we need to get it finished? Right?
*Mey gaikeud! Mey gaikeud!! Mey gaikeud!!!
*Not finished yet! Not finished yet!! Not finished yet!!!
*Ney how howda me ney! Diu ney lowmow!
*So you are tough huh! Fuck your mother!
*Lowmow m diu diu bingo a?
*Who do I fuck if not your mother?
*Ngo diu ney lowmow ngo tiu ye haym'hay ney lowmow godow a?
*If I fuck your mother, doesn't it mean my dwing is in your mother?
*Bun yant cotlay jaw bun yant cotlay, ney jonkyi diu jaw diu. Ngo jonkyi diu jaw diu, diu yant jaw m hay, mow hoi ge, diu a diu a da ney leong coy me?
*OK fine! Call for your help. Fuck me over anyway you want. I'll fuck you anyway I want. Fucking isn't totally harmless let you know. One more fuck I'll punch you in the face!
*Ney genkgow ngo jow mat'ye? Ney genkgow ngo ngo m lant geng na yantga cotlay.
*You are warning me? I don't fucking care if you warn me. You better show me your gang.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Penkyamp (talk • contribs) 23:02, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: English Translation

message: I was just thinking, looking at the top paragraph. It dosen't give out the sense of how huge this was. Amazingly, lots of it was written by people who don't live in Hong Kong and weren't there to experience it, and still it was a very good article.But still, as I remember, commercials everywhere were using the phrases of Bus Uncle. The phrases were on Tshirts, mugs...etc you name it. I was studying Primary Six at the time and everyone was talking about it in class or at recess, even teachers were laughing about it, younger students acted it out with their friends...etc.
I wasn't sure how to express that kind of "impressiveness", so...can anyone else attempt adding something to the first paragraph [or edit].
Brittanity (talk) 06:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the second paragraph does this. It doesn't really jump out, but can motivate readers to look at the "Social impacts" section. –Pomte 05:48, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lacking that kind of "Impressiveness" 

message: I'm sure in some of the quotes, some of the meaning in the catchphrases are lost due to the absence of an explanation.
I am lucky to understand both Cantonese and English, so I think that someone (maybe I) can add an explanation beside the quotes
If you agree with such actions, post it in my talk
--KelvinHOWiknerd(talk) 13:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What sort of explanation do you have in mind? If the translation isn't self-explanatory in the first place, a further attempt may make it more confusing and may be seen as original research. –Pomte 14:16, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lost in translation...? 

message: Dear fellow contributors
MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this. 
There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:
Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. I'm seeking feedback about this proposal to remove it from the main text (using a script) in about a week's time on a trial basis/ The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 09:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal to remove date-autoformatting 

message: An image used in this article, File:HK Newspapers.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:HK Newspapers.jpg)
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 19:50, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:HK Newspapers.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on The Bus Uncle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20151130195518/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t45FODsT73o to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t45FODsT73o
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070930030459/http://www.takungpao.com/news/06/05/30/XK-572557.htm to http://www.takungpao.com/news/06/05/30/XK-572557.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070930030350/http://www.takungpao.com/news/06/06/01/GW-573686.htm to http://www.takungpao.com/news/06/06/01/GW-573686.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on The Bus Uncle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013093319/http://thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=15&art_id=35365&sid=11578958&con_type=1&d_str=20070104&sear_year=2007 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=15&art_id=35365&sid=11578958&con_type=1&d_str=20070104&sear_year=2007
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on The Bus Uncle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20150309024537/http://www.thestandard.com.hk/archive_news_detail.asp?pp_cat=13&art_id=19459&sid=8137616&con_type=1&archive_d_str=20060526 to http://www.thestandard.com.hk/archive_news_detail.asp?pp_cat=13&art_id=19459&sid=8137616&con_type=1&archive_d_str=20060526
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060615194259/http://next.atnext.com/template/next/sec_main.cfm?iss_id=847&sec_id=1000853 to http://next.atnext.com/template/next/sec_main.cfm?iss_id=847&sec_id=1000853
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120525192117/http://www.singtao.com/special/unclebus/index.html to http://www.singtao.com/special/unclebus/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090315090859/http://www.wenweipo.com/news.phtml?news_id=HK0606120009&loc=LU&cat=583BS&no_combo=1 to http://www.wenweipo.com/news.phtml?news_id=HK0606120009&loc=LU&cat=583BS&no_combo=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071013102510/http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2006%2F6%2F8%2Fapworld%2F20060608152634&sec=apworld to http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=%2F2006%2F6%2F8%2Fapworld%2F20060608152634&sec=apworld
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:54, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Characters" makes it sound like the video was fictional or staged... wouldn't "Subjects" or "Participants" be more appropriate for a real-life video? Muzilon (talk) 07:48, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Subheading: "Characters"? 

message: Looking at this for the WP:URFA/2020 initiative to check old FAs for maintained quality. I note this article had significant quality concerns at the time of its 2007 promotion, and substantial debate occurred over whether its FA promotion was valid even by contemporary standards.
Personal notes:
*The lead is very spindly and struggles to explain the relevance or importance of the incident. (This was also brought up by contemporary reviewers.)
*The "Social impact" section hasn't been updated. I assume 2006 memes are less relevant in 2022? Would need further contextualization.
*The article broadly appears unmaintained. Text added since the promotion (e.g. regarding Chan's death) is well below FA standards. Work is needed to bring them back up to standard.
Some of the sources also don't look great on my source highlighter script, but this is mostly Youtube videos that are either valid use of primary sourcing, or Youtube clips of RS news shows. These should be converted to  without links. Not as big an issue as the aforementioned, though. (Pinging  and  for their personal expertise with HK culture to see if there's anything they can do for these problems, or any further they can bring up.) Vaticidalprophet 14:57, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I can attempt to do some copyediting and clean up the article using the sources. This is probably WP:OR, but I'm not sure if it had any real long-lasting social impact- I certainly wasn't aware of it prior to your ping. Padgriffin Griffin's Nest 01:25, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, not surprising. The sense I got was that this was a pretty transient meme. The social impact sections would definitely need to be recontextualized for that -- as it stands, they're time capsules of the mid-late 2000s. Any help you can offer would be appreciated, whether great or small. Vaticidalprophet 03:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  URFA/2020