Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 160

There is a proposal at Category talk:Wikipedia#Proposal to split this category. Please reply on that page. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 21:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

This is a kind reminder that the voting period to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter will be closed on July 9, 2024, at 23:59 UTC.

If you have not voted yet, please vote on SecurePoll.

On behalf of the Charter Electoral Commission,

RamzyM (WMF) 03:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People are copying JavaScript from EN Wikipedia. Is it okay? Cactus ^{spiky ouch} 12:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For user scripts and the like? No reason why not. All content on En-wiki is covered by CC-BY-SA, that includes script. If it's malicious, then that's a problem. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Without attribution? Cactus ^{spiky ouch} 06:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hmm? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 12:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of thing are we talking about? Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:49, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redwarn Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 02:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

there was one more, but I forgot Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 02:28, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

cant you just import the script from enwiki? In some cases it's possible, you'd use something like importScript('W:User:RedWarn/.js'); //Linkback: W:User:RedWarn/.js Added by Script installer.

Someone slightly more adept at redwarn may be able to tell if this works. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:58, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

hmm, okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, there were elections in the UK a few days back, and Sunak's party lost. There are likely many people who do ont agree with his policies or actions. I have therefore semi-protected the page, for two weeks. Eptalon (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

seems reasonable Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:44, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sulphate&oldid=9636526

The current version is dead wrong.--Please have it either QD, or put up for Delete discussion. ASAP.--Alternatively, have the page remain a laughing stock (on the Wikipedia that Jimbo Wales created).--The ball is in your court (and i might not be adding to this thread). 2001:2020:357:A2F3:E82C:920C:6BD0:F92E (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2024 (UTC) / 2001:2020:357:A2F3:C5A3:205D:48AE:EE45 (talk) 22:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@2001:2020:357:A2F3:E82C:920C:6BD0:F92E: Exactly which QD criteria does it meet? "I don't like the content" isn't one. You should review Deletion is not cleanup rule on Wikipedia. You are proving to be a very severe and on-going WP:CIR concern. Operator873 ^connect 22:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note that it is "your" version of the page, that I have mentioned specifically.--A third wikipedia-user has not been militant about "his" version that has been shot-down (and that does not have consensus).--I have pointed out which versions are dead wrong (and the community has been advised to get the wheels in motion (ASAP), for Delete of the article , if the current version is going to stand).--This Master class is a freebie (and i might not be adding to this thread).--Other master classes might be available from other "purveyors". 2001:2020:357:A2F3:C5A3:205D:48AE:EE45 (talk) 22:42, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's my version of the page... but I didn't write it. I agreed with the edit from another administrator and restored it. You know what that's called? Consensus. YOU do not determine the content of the encyclopedia. Inaccuracy or problems on a page are not criteria for deletion. Finally, you hold no authority to determine what gets "shot down" and what remains. I'll remind you that you're on final warning for conduct and behavior. :) Operator873 ^connect 22:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with you adding parts that are dead wrong.--(I am not going to go back and see if you did that twice, or only once.)--I have made my recommendation to the community (and i might not be adding to this thread).--About this thread, an option might be "Humble pie". Someone else will likely come along and fill in the details. Bye, 2001:2020:357:A2F3:C5A3:205D:48AE:EE45 (talk) 23:10, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you want - you ask others to nominate for deletion. If you believe an article either needs fixing or deletion, you should be the change you need. See this essay on it on enwiki - W:WP:SOFIXIT. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many languages of Wikipedia allow fair-use pictures. But we don't allow them in Simple English Wikipedia. So I want to deprecate the File namespace. That is, we want to declare the namespace to be obsolete in this language. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • changes) 08:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbb1413: I'm not sure what form that would take, but we do have a few files here. The ones we have are administrative and are mostly recordings of Simple English articles -- remember that not all files are images. Therefore we couldn't completely eliminate the file namespace. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There should be an article for creation on this wiki, like EN Wiki, so that there won't be so many nonsensical pages created, and the backlog would decrease significantly. Thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:44, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cactusisme An AfC-like process has been rejected by the community many times so I doubt that this proposal will go anywhere.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:11, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should read through the archives before proposing such thing. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • changes) 09:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh, my bad. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

then closing Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:52, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cactusisme: Also, that wouldn't stop people from creating bad pages. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:48, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean it would not show up in mainspace Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 22:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

A special election has been called to fill additional vacancies on the U4C. The call for candidates phase is open from now through July 19, 2024.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members are invited to submit their applications in the special election for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

In this special election, according to chapter 2 of the U4C charter, there are 9 seats available on the U4C: four community-at-large seats and five regional seats to ensure the U4C represents the diversity of the movement. No more than two members of the U4C can be elected from the same home wiki. Therefore, candidates must not have English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, or Italian Wikipedia as their home wiki.

Read more and submit your application on Meta-wiki.

In cooperation with the U4C,

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 00:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Bloggs

Joe Bloggs in 1987 [example of a free picture]
Birth	July 4, 1969
Death	May 16, 2021

Sometimes, we try to add a non-free picture in subjects without any free pictures. But we don't allow them here. So we should make changes to the infoboxes to add a parameter to add a website to a non-free picture. I'm showing its example at the right. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • changes) 08:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oppose Thank you for suggesting it, but I do not see the point in this. It does not look very good in the infobox and you can simply search for the picture on the web. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 10:08, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we try to keep many of our templates the same as enwiki's to make maintenance easier, and such a change would conflict with that. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Given Simple and EN Wikipedias are generally the same it's a shame we can't use EN images or at least upload images locally like EN, I know we're Simple and all but it's still never made sense to me why we can't, Anyway like above I don't see the point of having placeholder images either so oppose, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I've been flogging that horse for years. I've forgotten how many times I've asked the community to allow local images. :-| fr33kman 09:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Fr33kman Ah okay I didn't know that, that makes me sad now I know you tried and seemingly got nowhere :(,

  Given article layout, templates, navboxes, modules... virtually everything goes back to EN you'd think they'd have the sense to say "Images uploaded to EN can also exclusively be used on Simple" or as I said upload locally .... guess this is all hot air and forever will be, shame really, –Davey2010^Talk 19:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should we, like enwiki, have a Draft namespace? It might encourage greater cooperation to edit articles. fr33kman 04:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is that how it works on enwiki? I thought people write their drafts and then they got either approved or denied (by whom, I don't know). -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:50, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well...anyone can write a draft on enwiki. Users not autoconfirmed can't create articles in the mainspace. In order to get a draft published to mainspace, an autoconfirmed user can just move it. A non-autoconfirmed user can submit it for review through AFC, where it is reviewed by an experienced AFC reviewer.

The Draft namespace (at least on enwiki) isn't for editing, just for eventually bringing a not fully complete article to mainspace. I actually do think that a Draft namespace would be helpful (for all those half-baked, unsourced pages to be in a for a it), but the issue that we would need some way, like enwiki, to get non-autoconfirmed user's articles out of draftspace (and AFC would be really annoying to implement here as there's much less users). @Auntof6@Fr33kman Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 16:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i think this would add a lot of overhead, with little to no benefit to this wiki Eptalon (talk) 17:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Ideally, we could have it such that non-autoconfirmed users could move it form draftspace (in which case I think draftspace would be helpful), but otherwise I think it would do more harm than good. @Eptalon Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 17:25, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Me Da Wikipedian Non-autoconfirmed users can't move pages at all. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know that, that's my point. It would only work if they could move pages from draftspace. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 02:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the page All About That Bass#Certifications, citation 122 has an error that says that the reference has no access date or url. This should not be an issue. The issue seems to be in the template, since the reference itself in the article does not show any url or access date, however I do not know what the issue is. Is there any way to fix this? MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 01:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried updating the templates regarding Template:Certification Table Entry, but nothing seems to have worked. (sorry if I broke something) It looks like this happens at every instance of an ARIA chart, and it has something to do with Template:Cite certification, but I still do not know why there is an issue. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 01:55, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, if an IP wanted to create the page TFYUIGYIYIOPHBOUYDIVGHDGIOUDBY on simple.wikipedia.org, they would be able to, but if they wanted to create the page on English wikipedia, they can't. Why is that? 24.115.255.37 (talk) 22:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On en wikipedia, you need to submit the article for review and an reviwer will take a look at it if it is acceptable to be on mainspace. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 01:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But why isn't that the case on Simple? 24.115.255.37 (talk) 02:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simple do not have articles for creation Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 02:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also please do not create the page as it would be nonsense Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 01:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't going to I was just using it as an example 24.115.255.37 (talk) 02:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 02:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The rules on different languages Wikipedias are different. We don't have any requirement to go through Articles for Creation. Enwiki only enacted it a few years back. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:18, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In very short terms: This community is much smaller than EnWp, and it believes that deep down most IP editors are good people who create useful content. There's no reason to keep an IP from creating an article. Note: there are quick dleetion criteria, a few of them let us delete articles that are nonsense. Admins regularly delete such articles. IP editors who create a few bad pages may be bloked. First the blocks are short, later the blocks are longer. In short: there is no need to prevent IP edittors from creating (hopefully meaningful) articles.

Creating an account isn't necessary, but it has benefits:

• You can vote in elections
• If your account has a cetain age, and you have done a number of edits, you will be able ot edit semu-protected pages.

Eptalon (talk) 12:40, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On Simple English Wikipedia we do not create pages, we start them, so I am asking if we can move Wikipedia:Do not create hoaxes to Wikipedia:Do not start hoaxes. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 13:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would also suggest moving Wikipedia:Why create an account? to Wikipedia:Why make an account?. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 23:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 23:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These pages are a mess, mainly caused by not being clear about their historical sequence. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:49, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment: discussion at Talk:Herakles Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are discussing the introduction to this article (Plaxton Pointer), and would appreciate opinions and suggestions. Kdammers (talk) 22:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment: discussion at Talk:Plaxton Pointer Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People who committed suicide is very bulky and not simple. Perhaps we ought to move this category to either Category:Deaths by suicide or simply Category:Suicides? MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 21:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support Seems like a better category Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 01:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suicides Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 03:08, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support Suicides as the simplest one. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 02:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Suicide victims'? Would allow to also have a category for those who survived Eptalon (talk) 12:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon I do not understand what your mean. Sorry Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 12:22, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not all people are successful committing suicides. The wording I proposed would allow to keep track of people who survived an attempt Eptalon (talk) 12:38, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon oh okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the exact figures, but I heard that some people who jump in front of a train actually survive. Don't ask what they look like afterwards, but still. Also, manufacturers of sleeping pills have made it more difficult to commit suicide that way. In that respect, it would perhaps make sense to have a cattegory to hold both those that were successful, and those that weren't. Eptalon (talk) 13:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon Not all people who died by suicide are "victims" though. Think about Cato the Younger. "Victims" is a bit POVish as well, because not every culture sees suicides as victims. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to actually vote, sorry. My vote is   Support Category:Suicides ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 11:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support Suicides as per above, also matches EN (en:Category:People who committed suicide redirects to en:Category:Suicides), –Davey2010^Talk 12:10, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support More simple. Cyclonical (talk) 18:05, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MrMeAndMrMe seems like the community approve this idea Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:46, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am an editor from Wikipedia and I am interested in also editing in Simple Wikipedia. Is there anything different about editing Simple Wikipedia that I should know besides to make it in simple English? Zabro29 (talk) 16:14, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! Some things here are different from how they are on English Wikipedia (for example, anyone can put new pages on the mainspace), but most of it is similar. I would recommend checking out Wikipedia:How to write Simple English pages - it has great info on how to write in Simple English. If you need any help, feel free to ask! 🤘🤘 DovahFRD (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When you say “Anyone can put new pages on the mainspace”, does this mean that I can create a new article without having to go through a process? Zabro29 (talk) 22:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can publish new articles immediately. 🤘🤘 DovahFRD (talk) 22:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Can’t wait to contribute to here Zabro29 (talk) 22:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zabro29 I add a welcome template to your talk page, User talk:Zabro29. There are some useful links there. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 11:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome here! You may be interested in reading Wikipedia:An English Wikipedian's guide. Hope you choose to stay and help us :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:42, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving me the guide, that helped me Zabro29 (talk) 22:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to help   ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 23:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Zabro29: Welcome. In addition to the things mentioned above, you might be interested in this list I maintain of some things that are different here. The list is not a policy or guideline, but it links to some relevant policies and guidelines. If you have any questions about it, feel free to leave a message on my talk page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:19, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, Good Aruicles, and Very Good Aricles were a nice idea at the time. They are flags that say that a given article has a better quality than other articles. There's just one problen though: Except for me, no one has been promoting these articles, and if they sit in the queue for too long, it is clear that the proposers lose interest. If one month from now (mid August), there are no other people promoting, I propose we do away with the idea. Our community is small already, and getting an article to meet GA or VGA criteria is a huge effort. What do other people think? Eptalon (talk) 08:36, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more than happy to go through any I haven't commented on and give them a promote/fail if there's a consensus. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:59, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The GA/VGA process has been slow for a long time, but I think it's good to keep it around. It's a nice way to motivate people to make pages that stand out in quality (I know that the thought of getting a page to 'Good Article' status has at least made me put my best work into translating & writing, I wouldn't like to speak for anyone else).

Maybe we should change the process to be more similar to how English wiki does it? The biggest obstacle I've noticed is simply getting enough users to vote for an article to have a consensus. Having one user do a much more involved review might help with that - right now, it takes months for something to pass, even if it has a clear consensus given by a small number of editors. 🤘🤘 DovahFRD (talk) 15:51, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe a system of fewer, more in-depth reviews would do good in helping get more GA/VGA's through. LV^✉✎ 15:55, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will always be supportive of the GA/VGA process. I think the idea of elevating articles to VGA statuses and having them on the front page is essential for Simple Wiki. I'd be happy to promote articles :) Is there like a guideline/instructions on how to do so or is promoting articles an admin-only thing? I also think that even if you voted to support a promotion, you could still promote the article given the little active users we have on this project. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:50, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recently confirmed that it isn't an admin activity and can be done by anyone. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My reading of it: If you (as an established editor) thin that there is enough support for promoting it, and that there are no major issues left to solve, then you can promote the article. I read "enough support" as 3 supporting votes, and ideally no oppose votes by established editors. Promoting entails updating the tag from pga/pvga to ga/vga, and updating the listing. In the case of VGAs, a blurb to appear on the main page needs to be there as well. Eptalon (talk) 15:38, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. I already promoted one article. Could I also promote an article that I nominated, in this case Christopher Plummer? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you judge it the same way as you would judge another article, I honestly don't see why not. Oh,I forgot: after promoting or denoting, you should also write a message in Simple Talk... Eptalon (talk) 06:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Would the message on Simple Talk basically be: "I have recently promoted x article to good article status"? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likely yes, or something similar Eptalon (talk) 06:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On some pages of the article wizard, there are tabs with redlinks. They are pages such as:

• Wikipedia:Article wizard/Redirect
• Wikipedia:Article wizard/Category
• Wikipedia:Article wizard/Disambiguation
• Wikipedia:Article wizard/Advertising
• Wikipedia:Article wizard/Content

There are links on the tabs that say "Introduction", "Subject", and in some cases, "Notability" and "Sources". But are these necessary? 2607:F140:6000:806A:755A:8FB:CCBA:6EB4 (talk) 04:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment: moved this from User talk:Ferien to simple talk. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blood on the Clocktower and Christopher Plummer have recently been promoted to Good Article. Thank you to all who contributed, good work... Eptalon (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I emptied Category:Pages needing to be simplified from April 2012 and the quick-deletion template automatically appeared on the page, automatically categorizing it inside Category:Quick deletion requests. However, I cannot find it inside Category:Quick deletion requests. It happens with other empty monthly clean-up categories as well. Is this a problem with the template inside them? Should I manually tag them for quickly deletion? (I am not taking about mantainance categories that should not be deleted even if empty, of course.) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 14:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dream Indigo: I think it's a cache thing. I think if you just do a null edit, it will show up. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6: Such an easy fix, thank you very much! It shows up now. Thanks a lot. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 15:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dream Indigo: Yes, I did a null edit. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone help to simplify the wording in this infobox: Enumclaw horse sex case? Or should it just be left as it is? I don't think "Acute peritonitis caused by traumatic perforation of the colon" or "Laws passed criminalizing bestiality and zoophilic pornography" are simple. 2607:F140:6000:802A:4E1:5FBE:B05:C96 (talk) 22:57, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about:

• Instead of the first: Peritonitis because of a hole in the colon
• Instead of the second: Laws passed making sexual intercourse with animals and human/animal pornography illegal

What do you think? -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 That wording seemed better, so I updated it. Thanks. 2607:F140:6000:802A:71C2:27F0:2F59:CC3D (talk) 21:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_suboxide states that carbon suboxide is produced in the human body from malonic acid and by heme oxygenase-however I could not find any more info on this!

Is this simply false or is there some source that states this? If neither are true, then that would make this a primary source and therefore inappropriate!? Harry (talk) 10:31, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LevelMeasurement6553 Why are you asking about an EN wiki article on simple wiki? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:34, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because primary sources are not allowed on Wikipedia Harry (talk) 00:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LevelMeasurement6553 It would be best to bring it up on en rather than simple as the wikis act essentially separate.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 08:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 07:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, I brought over part of the page, now at Carbon suboxide. I am not a chemist, so likely the page needs looking at/copyediting. Eptalon (talk) 08:36, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

After carefully tallying both individual and affiliate votes, the Charter Electoral Commission is pleased to announce the final results of the Wikimedia Movement Charter voting.  

As communicated by the Charter Electoral Commission, we reached the quorum for both Affiliate and individual votes by the time the vote closed on July 9, 23:59 UTC. We thank all 2,451 individuals and 129 Affiliate representatives who voted in the ratification process. Your votes and comments are invaluable for the future steps in Movement Strategy.

The final results of the Wikimedia Movement Charter ratification voting held between 25 June and 9 July 2024 are as follows:

Individual vote:

Out of 2,451 individuals who voted as of July 9 23:59 (UTC), 2,446 have been accepted as valid votes. Among these, 1,710 voted “yes”; 623 voted “no”; and 113 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral votes don’t count towards the total number of votes cast, 73.30% voted to approve the Charter (1710/2333), while 26.70% voted to reject the Charter (623/2333).

Affiliates vote:

Out of 129 Affiliates designated voters who voted as of July 9 23:59 (UTC), 129 votes are confirmed as valid votes. Among these, 93 voted “yes”; 18 voted “no”; and 18 selected “–” (neutral). Because the neutral votes don’t count towards the total number of votes cast, 83.78% voted to approve the Charter (93/111), while 16.22% voted to reject the Charter (18/111).

Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation:

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted not to ratify the proposed Charter during their special Board meeting on July 8, 2024. The Chair of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees, Nataliia Tymkiv, shared the result of the vote, the resolution, meeting minutes and proposed next steps.  

With this, the Wikimedia Movement Charter in its current revision is not ratified.

We thank you for your participation in this important moment in our movement’s governance.

The Charter Electoral Commission,

Abhinav619, Borschts, Iwuala Lucy, Tochiprecious, Der-Wir-Ing

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Karangasem Kingdom (started 4 July 2024) mas moved in the wrong way to Kingdom of Karangasem (started 10 July 2024). The user who "moved" it, erased the page history in the process, because they started a new page, they did not move it. What should we do? ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dream Indigo en:WP:history merge. I'll do it. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fehufanga: Thank you so much! ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 22:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I copypasted the episode table from en:SpongeBob SquarePants (season 1)#Episodes to SpongeBob SquarePants (season 1)#Episodes however the summaries here don't show, I don't suppose anyone would know why ?

{{episode table}} and {{episode list}} are up to date but I'm assuming there's an out of date template/module somewhere?

None of the summaries will be used due to complex issues but It's just bugging me as to why they're not showing, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 17:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved, For whatever reason Simple doesn't like "#invoke:Episode list|sublist|",

For future reference anyone coming across this issue in future should replace "{{#invoke:Episode list|sublist|PAGENAME" with "{{Episode list" (example), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 11:10, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article Masakaki has no article but it's wikimedia commons page commons:Category:Masakaki has a lot of images Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 17:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Done @Immanuelle: I chose the picture I liked the most, it was taken by you :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 20:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kiwi_Farms#%22linked_to_three_suicides%22 Hello, I have created a section on the KF talk page regarding whether we should remove the suicides bit at the lede. I have presented my case, and am willing to listen and discuss with others' cases. Thanks, 3a23e (talk) 17:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I semi-protected the articles on Joe Biden and Donald Trump, as they will be the likely candidates for the presidential election end of the year. They are now semi-protected, only autoconfirmed users can edit the articles. This was done, because there was an increasing level of vandalism to the pages. The protection is for six months, it will expire after the election is over. Editors who aren't autoconfirmed can still suggest changes on the respective talk page, and autoconfirmed editor will then do the change once there is agreement. Eptalon (talk) 08:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon Joe Biden is not running for presidential election, I think you can remove the protection, unless you want to keep it for other reasons. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 02:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t particularly see the point of unprotecting the article just because he isn’t running. He still is the acting president until January and still is relevant in cases of vandalism. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 04:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MrMeAndMrMe Oh okay, thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 07:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The protection will expire somewhere in January next year. Eptalon (talk) 14:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 00:10, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Does this Wikipedia have any user scripts? Apollogetticax (talk) 22:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find some here: Category:Wikipedia scripts —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The criteria for rollbacker permissions are quite confusing. They say I must be confirmed or autoconfirmed, but what are the requirements over which I will likely be accepted?

Also, I'm not asking because I want to. I know I need a lot more practice. Apollogetticax (talk) 22:53, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Apollogetticax Here are the criterias:

• You should meet the requirements for autoconfirmed user (registered for 4 days with 10 edits) when requesting. User rights cannot be given to IP editors.
• You should have made a lot of changes, with experience in anti-vandalism work. If you have rollback elsewhere, or admin rights elsewhere, the threshold for meeting this requirement is lower. So if you are already a rollbacker or admin on another Wikimedia Foundation project, please mention it in your request and it will be taken into consideration.
• If you have been blocked recently, it is unlikely that you will be given rollback.
• If you have vandalized before, you may not be given this tool for a long time. Administrators can choose if they want to give it to you, but only if you have shown a clear change in your behaviour. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 07:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This can be found at WP:Rollback feature on the section 'Getting rollback'. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 07:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This new user, User:NorCremer says that Mauricio Umansky is jew but I am not really sure. Can someone more knowledgeable in this topic take a look, thanks. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 07:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cactusisme: That user isn't saying that Umansky is Jewish. They're saying they're of Jewish descent. Being of Jewish descent doesn't necessarily mean you are a Jew. (Note that you capitalize "Jew".) I would look at the references given and see if they mention Umansky's descent.

As for whether he is actually Jewish, see the guideline en:WP:CATREL for info on when it's okay to say someone is a member of a certain religion. The guideline is about categorizing people under religions, but the same requirements should be followed for statements in the article text. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 10:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What should be done if a cited source doesn't mention the topic being described? There is a template for this on English Wikipedia, but not here. Cinnasaur (talk) 09:38, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinnasaur I guess delete them as they may be spam links? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I discovered that the reference cited on Nanotyrannus does not discuss Nanotyrannus at all. It's not a spam link, but it's not relevant to the article. Should I delete it and add an "unreferenced" tag, since there are no other citations? Cinnasaur (talk) 09:45, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinnasaur I did it for you, thanks. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cinnasaur I can't say much without an example. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

I am writing to you to let you know the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open now through August 10, 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community members were invited to submit their applications for the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, please review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

In cooperation with the U4C,

RamzyM (WMF) 02:48, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there help for Jamaicans, schooled in English but speaking with a strong Jamaican dialect? 2001:56A:6FE0:8BF5:144E:4AE4:3C2E:93EE (talk) 22:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dialects are not languages so we'd expect people to use normal simple English. There isn't anything specific to do for a Jamaican editor as written English is the same. There may be a Jamaican patois Wikipedia. fr33kman 19:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

English is spoken in many countries. I expect there to be some regional variation. The vocabulary of South African English, English form Ghana, English from Belize, English from Guyana, English from Pakistan, English from India, from Malta... will be slightly different. In itself, that is not a problem. The main idea of Simple English is to explain well, and to use shorter sentenced, perhaps with an easy-to-understand vocabulary. So, use your terms from Jamaican English. If you think the word isn't common, you link it, and create an article. Look at Springbok, to see what I mean. And yes, that English has many different varieties is certainly a plus. So, be bold, and create articles. If they aren't perfect, other editors will fix them. Eptalon (talk) 08:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, we currently have over 200 hooks in the queue. I propose we do a weekly rotation, we currently have hooks for 34 weeks. What do other people think? Eptalon (talk) 07:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still think every week is too risky to jump straight up to. As I said last time, I think updating 3x a month would be best – 1st, 11th, 21st for consistency. I also think it'd be better if the queues were changed back to 5 each as this is a more convenient number to work with, and while we have a lot of queues right now, it is very easy to get to a point where we burn through them all and then end up going like 6 months without an update as we did when I started editing here in 2021. --Ferien (talk) 18:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The last discussion was at Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 157#DYK update frequency. I'd argue we also need to focus more on having a variety of hooks in each queue, as four of the six hooks on the main page have some sort of relation to the American continent. When we have 200 hooks, the queues should be as varied as possible. --Ferien (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good fr33kman 18:51, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can we have fewer TLAs please? Rathfelder (talk) 22:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, as clarification for all people reading, DYK is Did You Know --Ferien (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simple Wikipedia uses "related pages" instead of "similar pages", "other websites" instead of "external links." "Further" is not very simple, so why not "more reading" instead of "further reading"? Or maybe "related reading"? What are your thoughts? MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 18:29, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Related reading", is a hard No, from me. Now if "Further reading" is not good enough, then maybe "More reading-material", or something like that.--Another thing, "Related pages" is a sort of "Related reading", or so it might seem. 2001:2020:335:9257:5CDA:626F:26F4:72A9 (talk) 18:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Does anyone know how to fix the issue at Category:AllMovie titles with invalid value, For context none of the articles that are listed at this category show at en:Category:AllMovie titles with invalid value,

All AllMovie links work so I'm not sure what or where the invalid part is and as I said none of the articles listed here show at EN, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 15:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010: It looks like the template might need an update from enwiki. Their template is has different code from ours. I just copied their code into the sandbox here, so you can test it out if you want before doing an update. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:40, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Auntof6, I think I was looking at it at around the same time so apologies if I stepped on your toes slightly. I imported the template from enwiki as it looks like the format of the AllMovie website has altered from the format of some movies being under the form of v(number) to vm(number) and our template did not originally allow for that. Even now, it appears all the articles in the category are in the correct format – either being linked to Wikidata or using m(number) – yet all those eight pages are appearing in the category as of right now. --Ferien (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien: No problem. I wasn't planning on fixing myself because it looked like Davey was interested in doing it. I did try just removing the template parameter from one, and then it worked with no error. Maybe that's what we need to do, at least for movies that are linked in Wikidata. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:06, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Auntof6 and @Ferien, Many thanks for both of your help it's always greatly appreciated,

I had updated Template:AllMovie movie a few days ago but it didn't do anything so reverted back (I had force-purged the articles (clicked edit source, hit publish)),

Like yourself Auntof6 I've just removed the value from an article and the issue has gone - So should I remove this value from those 8 articles?,

Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:22, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010: If each of them is linked in Wikidata and removing the value makes it work, I think that's the way to go. I like to see the templates getting their info from Wikidata whenever possible. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:24, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6, Okie dokie I'll remove them from those articles, Thank you both again for replying and helping/solving this issue it's very much appreciated, Have a nice day/evening, Warm regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is that okay information about a person (with a wiki-article, where the article does not say if the person is Christian)?

If more of the wiki-articles (about persons) were to write that person X married person Y in church Z - then that would be information that i would not find odd and disturbing.--If there is no information (or source) about any of the married people being Christians, then i (also) would not have any problem about mentioning that the wedding was "a church wedding". Thoughts? 2001:2020:335:9257:5CDA:626F:26F4:72A9 (talk) 17:10, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

as also outlined above, completely unproblematic in my opinion Eptalon (talk) 18:35, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Eptie. It's good. There might be some circumstances under which it's irrelevant or inappropriate, but I cannot think of any. There are many reasons why a non-Christian might get married in a church, including but not limited to their spouse being Christian. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:51, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please, please, please, help me. There isn't copyright infringement here. I wrote the contents. Me, only me Wyellowgreen (talk) 10:44, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Done User blocked per WP:CIVIL. MathXplore (talk) 11:21, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wth is this about Harry (talk) 12:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. When considering a request for patroller permissions, do administrators take into account experience and permissions in other language versions of Wikipedia?  BZPN (talk)   17:23, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-administrator observation) @BZPN Yes Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain why do you think so. MathXplore (talk) 08:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore me? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:45, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm asking to you. You are responsible for your answer. MathXplore (talk) 08:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

done Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:48, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I meant if you have on another Wikipedia, it is more likely you would get them. Account experience is to show how experienced you are and if you your changes are suitable for the permissions. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Patrollers doesn't clearly mention that (have I missed something?). MathXplore (talk) 08:49, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, I think it is same as rollback? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:50, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your opinion, but if you want to say your thoughts, then please clarify with {{nao}} rather than a simple Yes/No in this case. MathXplore (talk) 08:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Patrollers says that this can be given to "trusted users who regularly create articles and have demonstrated they are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (especially Wikipedia:BLP, Wikipedia:Copyright, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Notability)."
Trust may be evaluated with global contributions (blocks in other projects, etc.), but local edits should come first. Also, different versions will have different Wikipedia:BLP, Wikipedia:Copyright, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Notability rules. For example, every nation will have different copyright/privacy rules. Understanding rules in other places doesn't immediately prove familiarity with simplewiki rules.
Please also note that we are a simple-language project unlike other versions, so all patroller candidates should prove writing skills in Simple English.
If I were you, I would answer "maybe", but local edits should take precedence.
If you think administrators must consider experience and permissions in other language versions of Wikipedia when judging patroller requests, please send your suggestions to Wikipedia talk:Patrollers. MathXplore (talk) 09:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, we must note that the technical settings of patrollers are different among Wikimedia projects. Meta-Wiki patrollers (m:Meta:Patrollers) and English Wikivoyage patrollers (en:voy:Wikivoyage:Recent changes patrol) include rollback, but our patrollers are completely different from rollbackers. MathXplore (talk) 09:10, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore, Thank you for the clear explanation. Referring to your observation, I think that if patrollers in other projects have more opportunities (e.g. rollback), it gives them more experience not only in checking new articles, but also in other situations (e.g. fighting against vandalism). Here you just need to adapt your experience and skills to the rules of Simple Wiki, but this is just my opinion.  BZPN (talk)   09:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I posted my suggestions to the Wikipedia talk:Patrollers.  BZPN (talk)   10:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Joe Biden has about 11-12k hits this month, Donald Trump is at about half that number; compared to that Kamala Harris is at only 2-3k hits. I am just saying: it is important that we have good pages on these people, as they actually get read... Eptalon (talk) 00:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What improvements do you recommend, Eptie. Also, you're right. The truth is behind a paywall, and propaganda is free. We have a chance to do some real good. Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not involved in the presidential election It won't be "my president". All I am saying is that likely many people use SEWP for information on the candidates. So, whoever the candidates will be: Look that their articles are unbiased, watch out for vandalism, and if necessary use protection (until after the election). I expect the number to be about equal. Eptalon (talk) 14:00, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"In 2024, he was found liable of sexual assault in a court of law and is a convicted felon," - according to Simple-wiki (at this time).--Suggestion: move that to Talk page (partly because it sounds like 'a verdict about sexual assault, was all that was needed for a felony verdict', and/or partly because the reference is not saying that).--The wiki-article's sections about the various court cases, explains all of the cases (with dozens of references').--Good luck (while the article is semi-protected), 2001:2020:325:DFB9:C554:979A:6815:C9FA (talk) 15:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You might be interested to know that Kamala Harris' article shot up to 14,000 views on the day after she became the presumptive nominee. [1] While they have fallen somewhat, the average views for her article in the last week is still at 3,000 per day, far above Joe Biden, Donald Trump, or JD Vance. This means it's an important article and needs work, although I haven't seen any evidence that it needs protection. OurRisingTide (talk) 19:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"It occurs when sulfuric acid loses two proteins. If it is only loses one, a hydrogen sulfate ion is made.".-- Please remove from Sulphate (article).--That is the most simple way to fix the article. Good luck!

Now, if one (or more) are waiting for chemistry lessons to fall from the sky, then please simply tag the excerpt as "dubious" (or "false" or "allegedly false" or "dead wrong").--The very best chemistry student at most high schools, can quite possibly explain why the statement is false.--If one wants to see a high-school chemistry-teacher cringe or sigh? Show those c. twenty words.--I expect to be busy looking for other articles with false statements in the lead (but with chemistry-articles, i have only hit jackpot with this article). 2001:2020:355:86DB:6C44:216D:4D10:685 (talk) 01:38, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you elaborate why you want this remove, you did not explain why it is false. thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 01:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the problem was that it said "proteins" instead of "protons". I changed it. 2607:F140:6000:802A:70B3:2758:5BDF:FD (talk) 01:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, now the sentence can be kept right? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 02:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed a seemingly false statement that has a citation-please review it https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iron&action=edit&section=4 “ This happens because the orbitals of those two electrons (dz2 and dx2 − y2) do not point toward neighboring atoms in the lattice, and therefore are not involved in metallic bonding.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by LevelMeasurement6553 (talk • contribs) 04:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LevelMeasurement6553: Is this relevant to Simple English Wikipedia? If not, it should be asked on English Wikipedia, possibly on en:Talk:Iron or at en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry. 2607:F140:6000:802A:F484:3AD6:9C25:AF32 (talk) 04:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

why are you asking a user who didn't take part in this discussion? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:40, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely that it (or, this quote) will be needed (or wanted) on Simple-wiki: "This happens because the orbitals of those two electrons (dz2 and dx2 − y2) do not point toward neighboring atoms in the lattice, and therefore are not involved in metallic bonding.”" 2001:2020:319:DAC0:F80E:F3EE:7935:99FE (talk) 15:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have permission to edit those pages, sorry — Preceding unsigned comment added by LevelMeasurement6553 (talk • contribs) 05:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear IP editor, anyone can change pages here, the page isn't protected as far as I can see, why not try and change it?--Eptalon (talk) 15:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As that text is on the English Wikipedia, not Simple English Wikipedia, and this is not a likely place to find an educated chemist, it seems pointless to discuss this here. 2601:644:9083:5730:C91:A0FA:9209:A54B (talk) 04:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article for Oggy and the Cockroaches: The Movie is filled with 90% misinformation and is lacking actually relevant information, it's been like this for years as it's been constantly sabotaged by anonymous editors. I think the article needs to be completely redone or be removed, and if it is redone, editing should be locked to users only to prevent further sabotage and trolling SpaceCowgirlFluttershy (talk) 00:51, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have yout tried starting a discussion about deleting it? - See WP:RFD Eptalon (talk) 16:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me the 'misinformation'. I do not see any in the article. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 03:19, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Am I allowed to move a DYK to the holding area that been here for three days? 2601:402:4402:61F0:E2DA:D876:6031:1D80 (talk) 20:01, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey All We at meta:Wiki Project Med Foundation have been running a health related translation effort for more than 12 years. We relaunched our work in 2021 with a new dashboard to track work completed. [2] The tool integrates with the Content translation (CTX) tool maintained by the Wikimedia Foundation.

Basically we are creating fully referenced 3 to 4 paragraph overviews of key health topics in easier to understand language on MDWiki.org. We are in need of a work space to stage this material before it is loaded into CTX. Have been in discussion with User:Eptalon regarding this.

Currently we are using a userspace of User:Mr. Ibrahem. We are open to a discussion regarding if we can make this material in simple enough language to be suitable for mainspace here. Wondering if members of this community will be at Wikimania in Poland next week and would be open to an in person discussion around this topic? Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Examples of this material include:

• User:Mr._Ibrahem/Lenacapavir (FRE score 54, 10th to 12th grade)
• User:Mr. Ibrahem/Anthrax (FRE score 49.2)
• User:Mr. Ibrahem/Lunate dislocation (FRE score 62, 8th to 9th grade)

We can generally reach 50s or 60s on the FRE, but easier than that might be difficult. Our work also includes updating infoboxes from technical numbers such as you see here at anthrax to human relatable information.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:01, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can I ask for a clean Start? Amary🪷 ^{talk edit} 13:52, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Amaryllidinae: Please see en:Wikipedia:Clean start, particularly the section "Notification and permission". It describes who you can contact for this if you need to discuss it. (It's not someone you would contact on this page.) -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:43, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are Template:Compact election box no change and its doc page categorized as soft redirects? Are they transcluding something that's a soft redirect? (If so, maybe that transcluded page shouldn't be a soft redirect.) Maybe we can just get rid of the template since it doesn't seem to be used, but where is the soft redirect category coming from? -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 It might be because Template:! is a soft redirect. VirusDontKill (talk) 21:10, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Over at User:Davey2010/sandbox1#Third_generation_(2018–present) it currently says;

"Citroën, Peugeot, Fiat, Opel, Vauxhall and Toyota also made leisure activity vehicles; the names are: Citroën Berlingo Multispace, Peugeot Rifter, Fiat E-Doblò, Opel Combo Life, Vauxhall Combo Life and Toyota ProAce City Verso.",

Does anyone know how I can simplify this as it sounds a mouthful ? Should I just keep it to Citroen and Peugeot only and have the rest as efn notes?, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 19:36, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010: You could put it (with some of the other content of that section) in a bulleted list. Each bullet entry could list a model, and mention the manufacturer if it isn't obvious from the name. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Auntof6, Do you mean as in:

Citroën, Peugeot, Fiat, Opel, Vauxhall and Toyota also made leisure activity vehicles; the names are:

• Citroën Berlingo Multispace,
• Peugeot Rifter,
• Fiat E-Doblò,
• Opel Combo Life,
• Vauxhall Combo Life
• Toyota ProAce City Verso.",

If that's what you mean then that's actually perfect, Not sure if I've misunderstood you though, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:06, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010: I think it would be better like this:

Other leisure activity vehicles include:

• Berlingo Multispace by Citroën
• Rifter by Peugeot
• E-Doblò by Fiat
• Combo Life by Opel
• Combo Life by Vauxhall
• ProAce City Verso by Toyota

That way you aren't listing the manufacturer names twice. HTH. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:15, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6 Ahhhh I seeeee, That's even better, Brilliant thanks so much for your help it's always very much greatly appreciated :), Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:25, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Dear all,

The voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is closing soon. It is open through 10 August 2024. Read the information on the voting page on Meta-wiki to learn more about voting and voter eligibility. If you are eligible to vote and have not voted in this special election, it is important that you vote now.

Why should you vote? The U4C is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. Community input into the committee membership is critical to the success of the UCoC.

Please share this message with members of your community so they can participate as well.

In cooperation with the U4C,

-- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 15:31, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Marriage isn't working correctly. You can see it here: Special:PermanentLink/9686745. Although the date is listed as January 22, 2005, it displays as 2022. VirusDontKill (talk) 01:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is related to Category:User ain-1 and babel templates in general. I look forward to hearing from any expert of this subject. MathXplore (talk) 01:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In all of the Summer Olympics Events categories, there seems to be some kind of Lua error. Ex., Category:Athletics at the 1896 Summer Olympics. Does anybody know what is going on here, and how to fix this? MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 02:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welp, there's another project closure involving Simple on Meta-wiki, here. Derpdart56 (talk) 02:37, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

4th one so far, I think. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 08:47, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the message here, from a new user: Talk:Isaiah Joe Trammell#Moderation. VirusDontKill (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just read it. What about it? Maggie🌺 ^{talk edit} 14:55, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that Wikipedia states the religion of people who are Jewish and Muslim but doesn’t mention religion if the person is Christian. I find that odd and disturbing. 2603:7000:9500:3C2D:A506:A2D7:A2CB:A5CD (talk) 01:54, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't as simple as all that. Many people who are "Christians" in one sense are unbelievers. In fact it may be that nowadays most are unbelievers or, in T.H. Huxley's word "agnostics". Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:43, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also "Christians" is a very generic term. Besides the three or four common groups (Roman Catholics, Eastern rthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Protestants, Anglicans) there are many groups that say that they are Christian, but where other groups say they aren't. One such example are the Mormons. So the question should also be according to whom? - Them seeing themselves as Christian is different from members of other Christian churches seeing them as Christian. I also think, that unless we are talking about a religious leader, specifying religion is not that important. Eptalon (talk) 08:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon this is actually an issue with every religion (more or less). For example are Kariates jews? Are Ahmadis muslims? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 04:34, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wrote (and sourced) today that a record-holder for "my" national team, married in a church.--We have some articles that tell about a person being Christian (and some articles about people that have other faiths). 2001:2020:335:9257:5CDA:626F:26F4:72A9 (talk) 18:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then add that he is Christian, if you like (likely church of Noway, Lutherans/protestants?).Be bold, it can always be adapted later.. Eptalon (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Indenting here, but I am not replying to anyone in particular) We have to be careful: just because a couple got married in a church, it doesn't mean they are Christian. There are many people (in Italy at least, I don't know about Norway) that get married in a church because it's traditional or cultural, because they don't want to disappoint their parents, because only one of them is Christian or simply because churches make very beautiful venues, but most town halls are ugly and boring. For example, my parents got married in a church, but my father is 100% atheist. In the alternative universe where he is on Wikipedia, he would never want to be described as Christian. We can't guess people's religion basing ourselves on their wedding venue (place). We always need a source telling us that they are actually Christian :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 23:26, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Church of Norway does not demand that one or the other or both who marry (in Church of Norway), is a Christian. Source,
www.kirken.no/nb-NO/bryllup-i-den-norske-kirke/hvem-kan-gifte-seg-i-kirken/#:~:text=Alle%20par%20er%20velkomne%20til,en%20vakker%20feriring%20av%20kjærligheten.
--That football player married in a Church, and that is sourced.--To say more than that, one would need a source that says: 'confirmation (in a Church)' or 'is a Christian'. 2001:2020:30B:C47E:E1B2:6561:99EF:8820 (talk) 00:04, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly, you are right. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are many articles that say their subject is Christian. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Religion is relevant to some articles, but not all of them. Rathfelder (talk) 20:37, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I personally think that we should only state the religion if it is somehow relevant. It is not neccesary for every BLP (for any religion) to state the persons religion. Most articles, you probably don't need it. If they are someone committed terrorism over there religion, spend their life trying to convert people there religion, etc, then definetly do mention it. But, yeah, if it is really targeted mentioned of just Jews and Muslims, thats wrong. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 04:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I figured I would inform the community of the Simple English Wikipedia, that I have opened a new WikiProject, WikiProject Denmark. I would appreciate it if the community worked together to expand and help my new project. Sincerely, Wheatley2 (talk) 03:50, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a (sort of) interest, that something gets done with Chemistry articles.--Two things that are not high on the "helpful scale": Odd (?) ways of 'asking' people to work for free.--Another thing, one IP can not find (IP) revisions of the Carbon Suboxide article. (Some helpful figures, were added to that article, plus some changes. Those revisions have been deleted/merged or whatever.)--As things stand, i know of one IP which has zero plans for editing Carbon suboxide (because relevant 'earlier versions' are not available).--If this post was helpful, then fine. Not sure i will be back to comment (cuz i will be fixing articles). 2001:2020:347:91E1:A103:ABB3:21DB:4B3F (talk) 16:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another thing: if you're not 'good' at chemistry, you can help on Talk pages, by saying: 'I have tried to read this-or-that article, and the first line/sentence where the English is not simple, is "Atoms doing this-or-that blah-blah."--If this post was helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:347:91E1:A103:ABB3:21DB:4B3F (talk) 16:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore Are there earlier revisions of carbon suboxide (the version of the page you deleted? VirusDontKill (talk) 16:39, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are revisions deleted per QD A3 (special:redirect/logid/2786281), but I did not delete the page. MathXplore (talk) 00:39, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that, that article (special:redirect/logid/2786281) gets re-published in some form.--The current article does seem to lean somewhat on parts of that version; i seem to recognize some of its focus and 'experimental formatting': "carbon with the chemical formula O=C=C=C=O. Its four cumulative double bonds make it a cumulene."--I seem to rembember that i added a 'more normal' chemical formula, without removing the above formula.--I also seem to remember that i added at least one reference.

If someone were to ask if the current version is more simple, than "my" ('untraceable' version), then i am not sure if i can find a diplomatic answer; However, i doubt that I have let anything that looks like the following quote, stand in the lede: "part of a series of "oxycarbons" with formulas C_x+1O_x, i.e. C, C ₂O, C₃O₂, C₄O₃, C₅O₄, ..., and having identified the last two;"

If this post was helpful, then fine.--The good news, is that one (other) chemistry article was fixed earlier this month. 2001:2020:309:D647:2D2F:BE93:4170:D57 (talk) 04:22, 11 August 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:309:D647:2D2F:BE93:4170:D57 (talk) 04:24, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore See above. Can you find and restore the revisions the IP is asking for? VirusDontKill (talk) 05:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think restoration should be discussed with user:Macdonald-ross, please feel free to use WP:DRV. MathXplore (talk) 05:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sent talkback (Special:Diff/9694803). MathXplore (talk) 05:12, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since we do have En wiki for a fuller story, this wiki is meant for younger readers, and readers whose normal language is not English, etc. It is a valid to edit so that our pages are accessible to these audiences. That's all I try and do. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:32, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i think that you should really consider having the article that you deleted, '''re-published'''.--The Talk page, too.--Maybe, maybe, maybe you have made a (mistake or) judgement of error (such as not noticing if a lede had been made simpler).--Anyone can make an honest mistake.--I seem to remember that part of 'someone's ' arguments were ''also'' that the ''topic'' was too specialized (or something like that). That might be a fair point. (I can not recall Chem 100 or Chem 101 textbooks, at college level, having ''pages'' about Carbon suboxide.)--Another thing: to my knowledge, this wiki is not meant for any particular age groups. But one might get confused by hearing that the ''reading level'' of the English here, should be ''fifth grade'' (of elementary school). 2001:2020:353:9F53:C4A9:4563:5C1F:173F (talk) 12:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:347:91E1:A103:ABB3:21DB:4B3F[reply]

Hi, Quick question does anyone know how one links to Simple Wiktionary?, Can't seem to find anything on EN as to how to link to it ?, Just shows the normal one, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:36, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010 It's wikt:word. VirusDontKill (talk) 19:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@VirusDontKill, My mind is blown- how does that work when English Wiktionary and Wiktionary are two different sites ?, I'm impressed yet absolutely confused, Anyway thank you much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:28, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010 It appears that wikt:word always links to the Wiktionary in the corresponding language, while wiktionary:word always links to the English Wiktionary. VirusDontKill (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@VirusDontKill, Wow I'm actually impressed, never even realised that was a thing, You learn something new everyday :), Anyway thanks again for your help it's much appreciated, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 19:45, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@VirusDontKill@Davey2010: That's how to do an inline link. If you want the kind of sister project link that usually goes in the other websites section, there are templates for that, for example {{wiktionary}}.

While on the subject of links to Wiktionary, please avoid using inline Wiktionary links in articles. Better options are:

• Use different wording, especially if the term in question is complex and/or not likely to have its own article sometime in the future.
• Link to a local article, if there is an appropriate one
• Link the term (even if the link is red), but explain it (sometimes done in parentheses).

Reasons for not using inline Wiktionary links include:

• The reader has to go to a different website to get information.
• Many English words and phrases have multiple meanings. A reader looking at a Wiktionary entry for one of those might not be able to figure out which meaning is intended.
• Using a Wiktionary link instead of a red link hides the fact that we could use an article on a subject.
• If an article is later created on the subject, we could be left with Wiktionary links that should be local links. I've seen this happen: when someone creates an article, they usually don't look for everywhere it could be linked in other articles.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:43, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You raise very valid points, my assumption was that readers would know what meaning applied but I guess not, I'll remove the link and try and find a simpler word, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

อยากเเก้คำผิด อยากเรียนรู้ ศึกษา 1.20.169.213 (talk) 04:46, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please use (simple) english here. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 04:48, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I translated to English. 2001:569:7C55:9000:910:2D97:DDED:BBD1 (talk) 21:29, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where? Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 03:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google translate. 2001:569:7C55:9000:ECFA:321A:4920:2F78 (talk) 16:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please visit Special:CreateAccount and create an account or stay as an IP. up to you, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:35, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great, please post said translation and future things in simple english. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP 1.20 and IP 2001 are not the same user. IP 2001 translated the original comment, but I undid their translation, because they completely changed the original comment instead of writing a new one. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to note that Davey2010 reverted it as well (and I agree with his revert), but I didn't know it until now. I wasn't trying to take credit for it. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:36, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone
is a disambiguation page.--Maybe we should continue to do the same?

Drone (bee) and Drone (ant) are drones.

With the existence of
Land drone and
Sea drone, then it might not be obvious the title "Drone" should only be about aircraft. Thoughts?--Another thing: it is not my feeling that "aircraft drones" can be neatly divided into sub-categories. 2001:2020:347:B44D:34F0:3CD2:765:6EB8 (talk) 19:16, 11 August 2024 (UTC)/ 2001:2020:347:B44D:34F0:3CD2:765:6EB8 (talk) 19:20, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion#Category:Unmanned_aerial_vehicles
, is a relevant discussion. 2001:2020:347:B44D:34F0:3CD2:765:6EB8 (talk) 19:27, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We should use the easiest to remember term. As you point out, 'drones' are also the usually short-lived males of several social insects. Eptalon (talk) 19:41, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In light of what user:Eptalon is saying, then maybe "Drone (aircraft)" should instead be the title of Unmanned aerial vehicle. 2001:2020:347:B44D:892C:2A9C:8B5D:3EBA (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While at first I supported Unmanned aerial vehicles being moved to Drone as the most common name, I agree with this point more. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 22:16, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Please rename the article/title Drone (aircraft), and at the same time have the categories changed to Drone, and sea drone and Land-drone. 2001:2020:30B:B726:7111:436F:B339:F9C2 (talk) 00:52, 14 August 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:347:B44D:34F0:3CD2:765:6EB8[reply]

  There is no "rename". The only thing you can do is move the article 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 00:55, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Be bold (and just do it)? 2001:2020:30B:B726:702F:3244:8EA0:7277 (talk) 01:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I can't. I am not auto-confirmed (and neither are you). To do so I'd need to wait for another 39 hours or so. 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 02:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for the storm of comments, but I have a question and you are the only people who can help.

Every few minutes, I am suddenly logged out of my account. I've tried Microsoft Edge, Chrome, and other browsers, and also incognito mode, and the problem persists. It happens most often when I am recent changes patrolling, or when I visit a page in userspace. 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 00:07, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Haumeon Trying clicking 'keep me logged in' Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 09:16, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do redirects also count in total pages? 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 23:07, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Haumeon: What do you mean by "total pages"? -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not, when it comes to the few cases where the powers that be, scrutinize who is here to build an encyclopedia.--I am assuming that the question is in regard to 'edit count'/'page count'. 2001:2020:30B:B726:702F:3244:8EA0:7277 (talk) 01:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The general consensus in Simple Wikipedia is that we use the term "other websites", rather than "external links" in section headings. It has come to my attention(see my talk page) that this does not necessarily apply to categories. In particular, the category tree Category:Wikipedia external links has many templates and category names that use "external links". Fixing this is not difficult, and most of the work is already done(although the work can easily be reverted if there is not consensus). I therefore ask for a consensus for the following:

1. All instances of "external link" in categories be replaced.
   1. If "external link" is used as an adjective in a category, it is replaced with "other website".
      1. Ex., Category:External link templates is replaced with Category:Other website templates.
   2. If "external link" is used as a noun in a category, it is replaced with "links to other websites".
      1. Ex., Category:Articles with dead external links is replaced with Category:Articles with dead links to other websites.
2. All uses of "external links" in templates and template documentation relating to categories should be replaced with the renamed category.
3. All uses of "external links" in templates and template documentation not relating to categories should be replaced with the appropriate english equivalent.

I am sorry if this sounds convoluted. Unfortunately, "other websites" and "external links" are not a direct 1:1 translation. In some places, we would have to use "links to other websites". I derive this term from Wikipedia:Links to other websites. These 3 rules, however, are catch-all rules that would allow for a seamless transition. Please read through this and put in your input. Thank you. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 21:08, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with every point, let's see what other users think. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 01:25, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the same for 'See Also' and 'Related Pages' 2001:569:7C55:9000:A099:30F7:BE87:7691 (talk) 03:23, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

However, we don't have a lot of infrastructure related to those that potentially needs changing. Let's stay on topic. If you think those other terms need discussing, please start a separate discussion. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ouch} 07:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed fr33kman 05:31, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:54, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I too agree. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 12:26, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who are you agreeing to? 2001:569:7C55:9000:910:2D97:DDED:BBD1 (talk) 21:25, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are agreeing to the idea presented above by MrMeAndMrMe Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:32, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i thought that was a No-no??

See Algoritm and a lot of others which have popped up over the last hours. 2001:2020:30B:B726:702F:3244:8EA0:7277 (talk) 01:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adres. 2001:2020:30B:B726:702F:3244:8EA0:7277 (talk) 01:26, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look. There is a list of common typos that are in the WP namespace. I know that a lot of wiki-searchers would end up making typos that are like this and listing in the Wikipedia list. Algoritm is Algorithm. A person typing fast would type this. Really, I should do this. The article wizard says it's a good thing to do so. 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 02:06, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where is it said that it is a no-no? Also see Help:Redirect🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 02:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you're supposed to do it as it helps people who are looking for something to get to it quicker. Also Adres is "Address". They included it in the list. 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 02:11, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Common typo redirects are not prohibited and in fact encouraged since it accounts for people who type fast or helps with people who do not know the full spelling or common spelling of a word. – Angerxiety^! 17:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. For example, my "adres" page has already been used multiple times already (My beginner homepage says that). Thanks for clearing that up, @Angerxiety. 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 17:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

👍 :) – Angerxiety^! 17:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that any of those pages can get nominated for Delete.--Maybe one should not put more effort into a redirect project, than one can afford to lose, even all at once. (That would take more than one or two people getting bored with 'heavy-handed redirects etc'.)--Let me try to look at things from another side: redirects that i think might suck, but which others might like: Norwegia, Algeers, Wikipaydeea but not Mohammed Dali (world champion boxer), and not Salvadord Ali (painter).--If this post was seen as helpful, then fine. 20:31, 14 August 2024 (UTC)/2001:2020:30B:B726:702F:3244:8EA0:7277

Another thing, if the community gets bored with one of the things that the Article Wizard might be saying, then it has happened previously that the community overruled a previous position.--That is my understanding.--(Now, time for my to fix some "reel"-like-an-eel articles.) 2001:2020:315:AB3B:99BA:A06E:2047:B62B (talk) 20:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read Help:Redirects. Even this type of redirect shouldn't get nominated for deletion, (read the help article), as they are still more helpful than they are not. Also I only make redirects that people are sure to use. I have proof that people have already used my redirects. 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 20:51, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plus why don't you have an account. You do know that everybody knows your IP Adress. Also you can fix more and do more if you just create one? 🪐 Haumeon the Adventurer 🪐 20:52, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a Simple lede, about one (or many) oblasts?

"This-or-that Oblast is a part of Russia, an oblast. Sometimes it is called a region (in English).^[1] It is headed by a governor, and it is a federal subject of Russia. Its administrative center (capital city) is the city of Belgorod. Population: 1,532,526 (2010 Census).
Its name in Russian: Белгоро́дская о́бласть, Belgorodskaya oblast."--Thoughts? 2001:2020:315:AB3B:E1C9:7676:AC87:6978 (talk) 14:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My comments:

• First sentence could just say "is an oblast of Russia" because "oblast" is linked.
• Remove the sentence about it being called a region. That information belongs in the general oblast article.
• Divide the 3rd sentence (the one that starts "It is headed by a governor") into two sentences.
• Change the statement about population into a complete sentence.
• Put the Russian name in parentheses right after the English name in the first sentence, like this:

[[This-or-that Oblast]] ({{lang-ru|Белгоро́дская о́бласть}}) is an [[oblasts of Russia|oblast of Russia]].

Any questions? -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:45, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This-or-that Oblast (Russian: Белгоро́дская о́бласть) is an oblast (or region) of Russia.^[2]. ...

This-or-that Oblast (Russian: Белгоро́дская о́бласть) is a Russian oblast (or region).^[3]. ...

The word region, was (my) main point of making the change (followed by governor being more down-to-earth than the additional (important) thing about "federal subject").--The other stuff you mention, is just fine.--If i hear no more, then i will move slowly (with the version from this last post), and do the Belgorod article and then the Kursk Oblast article, and then wait a few days.--If anyone removes the source, then i intend to not re-insert the source.--Thank you for your (previous) reply! 2001:2020:315:AB3B:E1C9:7676:AC87:6978 (talk) 17:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC) 2001:2020:315:AB3B:E1C9:7676:AC87:6978 (talk) 17:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think articles about oblasts should explain that in English it would be called a region. Most English speakers - including me - find it very confusing trying to understand the names used for subdivisions of countries. Rathfelder (talk) 18:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"This-or-that Oblast (Russian: Белгоро́дская о́бласть) is an oblast (region) of Russia.^[4] ... "--Comment: I hope that this version, is Simple and (largely) tolerable. 2001:2020:315:AB3B:99BA:A06E:2047:B62B (talk) 18:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this version. VirusDontKill (talk) 22:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: i have put the 'governor stuff', towards the end of the lede. (Rationale: Details about most of those persons, ends up getting outdated, and (largely) staying outdated.) 2001:2020:331:97B9:30F6:9B23:DFD2:6CFC (talk) 03:14, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2001:2020:315:AB3B:E1C9:7676:AC87:6978 (talk) 14:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]