Generations are numbered by male-line descent from Frederick III, Holy Roman Emperor. Later generations are included although Austrian titles of nobility were abolished and outlawed in 1919.
shows the template collapsed to the title bar if there is a {{navbar}}, a {{sidebar}}, or some other table on the page with the collapsible attribute
shows the template in its expanded state if there are no other collapsible items on the page
If the |state= parameter in the template on this page is not set, the template's starting visibility is taken from the |default= parameter in the Collapsible option template. For the template on this page, that currently evaluates to autocollapse.
shows the template collapsed to the title bar if there is a {{navbar}}, a {{sidebar}}, or some other table on the page with the collapsible attribute
shows the template in its expanded state if there are no other collapsible items on the page
If the |state= parameter in the template on this page is not set, the template's starting visibility is taken from the |default= parameter in the Collapsible option template. For the template on this page, that currently evaluates to autocollapse.
TemplateData
A navigational box that can be placed at the bottom of articles.
shows the template collapsed to the title bar if there is a {{navbar}}, a {{sidebar}}, or some other table on the page with the collapsible attribute
shows the template in its expanded state if there are no other collapsible items on the page
If the |state= parameter in the template on this page is not set, the template's starting visibility is taken from the |default= parameter in the Collapsible option template. For the template on this page, that currently evaluates to autocollapse.
If the fixed permalink going to the talk page has a messagebox (saying "there is this content elsewhere") I am also hoping that there is a way to create a redirect.
Catcus DeMeowwy{{
For the tool which checks recent edits to the Wiki for plagiarism, for the page gout (as of today), the recent edits that are likely a copyright violation that I have still yet to fix, is probably because of the language used to describe the things in SOCRATES (C - Characteristics, R - Radiation, O (onset) & T (time)). All of the sources here will say the same thing and it might not be from a website or blog somewhere copy-pasting it from the same source that I am using to add to the Wiki pages. These are going to be the same - and here it can be applied to other conditions - for the condition when describing it: sudden onset, overnight, the words "2-4 hours" as less of a risk; weeks (self-limiting); radiating and tinging.
This might resolve as citations are added, from a good source. Linking to a reliable and authoritative or old source - if it is what the plagiarism checker wants - might then ignore the thousands of other internet pages with the exact same words on them. The only thing to do is to find a good source then. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 11:06, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
It looks like you are in an change war. Take care, because the three-revert rule does not let users make more than three reverts on a single page in a single day. Any user may still be blocked for being involved in a change war and disruption, even if they have not broken the three-revert rule. When you disagree with another user, you should first try to talk about changes in order to work together to improve Wikipedia and reach consensus. If you continue to disrupt the page, you may be blocked from changing Wikipedia. Please stop using complex words, Please also read WP:Simple English and Basic English#related pages, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk17:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The complex words were links to tbr revelant simple.wikipedia pages. The words were in brackets () to help lead the reader to more if they want more
The reverts take out a lot of information and put back in confusing and wrong information.
My version is better than because it follows the common term, and is in brackets, linked to the correct article, is fine and makes the article (that he wrote) more helpful. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 17:44, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Catcus DeMeowwy! Here at Simple English Wikipedia we use the section heading "Related pages" instead of English Wikipedia's "See also", which you used in "Blood lead level". This makes it simpler and easier to read. Please remember to use "Related pages" in articles that you create in the future. Thank you for your help! MathXplore (talk) 06:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make helpful changes to the encyclopedia. You may not know that Wikipedia has a Manual of Style that should be followed to keep the encyclopedia looking neat and professional. Using different styles in the encyclopedia, as you did to "Blood lead level", can make it harder to read. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about changing this encyclopedia. Thank you. MathXplore (talk) 06:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
I'll do that. And thank you, I've been wanting to make all of the pages look the same W;ChangingUsername (talk) 10:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to make helpful changes to the encyclopedia. However, please do not attack other editors. If you disagree with changes, please talk about the changes and do not insult the editors who made them. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about changing Wikipedia. Thank you. –Davey2010Talk
I did but considering you left this it was thoroughly deserved but either way it was 2 days ago, If you want me to "stay the fuck off your talkpage" I would suggest A) not posting that and B) not pinging me,
Also I don't understand the rage - You inserted content that was disputed by myself and an admin ..... Respectfully I'm not the problem here but still I'll happily not to post here again, Cheers, –Davey2010Talk16:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you spamming that? I sent you a barnstar you idiot W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Hi, W;ChangingUsername. I noticed that part of your change to this article linked the word "French" to "France". When "French" refers to a person, we usually link it to "French people" instead, like this:
[[French people|French]]
The same is true for other nationalities; we seem to have equivalent articles for the people of many countries. Please keep this in mind when adding links. Thanks! -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi again, W;ChangingUsername. One more thing I noticed in your changes: you're linking years, as in the first part of this change. Please don't link dates in most cases. Dates are mainly linked in chronology articles such as articles for a year or day of the year. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
They used to be linked, but it was determined to be unhelpful in most cases and most such links were removed. The manual of style says this:
It is not necessary to add wikilinks to all dates, like this: "[[25 March]] [[2004]]" or "[[February 10]]"). Only add a wikilink if you think the reader will find useful information at the date-related article you have linked to.
Hope that helps. -- Auntof6 (talk) 16:53, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Cool
I was doing it so that all autobiographies would link to at least one year, to help increase the bounce rate of pages. So to get people to see more pages - ans even if its a small amount it goes to the year and then everything all links together. I was also planning to link either the birth or death year for what the person is 'famous' for W;ChangingUsername (talk) 20:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
It's good to add links, but not to dates, at least not in general articles. In fact, I routinely remove those links when I'm doing any kind of mass changes. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Also, you don't really mean "autobiographies," do you? Maybe you meant biographies? -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Also: ive been trying to link all of the countries people, occupation next to one another and think it looks good. Another thing to do when i get on a computer is linking the country of birth near that by writing in 'born in country' which might be a good format. Maybe you agree with this format and most of the articles can be made to follow the same style. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 23:09, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't know about making it a requirement, but I'd be interested to see an example of what you mean. Can you give me an example of an article where you've made this kind of change? -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Don't go looking or anything but you will probably see it around :) W;ChangingUsername (talk) 12:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
If the article has references (and they all should), include a References heading with a {{reflist}} template after it, instead of letting Wikipedia decide where to put the references.
When creating an article about a drug, do not include information on how to take the drug, who should take it, or any other information that is instruction or advice. Stick to information about the drug itself, not how people should interact with it. Wikipedia is not a "how-to" for any subject.
Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:37, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't know how to do reflist. I've been adding the references header at the bottom though. And I don't know how to do categories and should probably wait until I'm on a computer to do any that aren't done. But I'll do that later (and could make some mistakes...)
I think that sections for 'who should take it' - and especially who shouldn't, and how it's taken, like tablets and liquid. They're copied from thr NHS website. And simple.wikipedia 'might be someones only source of information' so simplified instructions are useful I think. Especially vrcause it's straight from the source and the reference is healthcare. So long as simplification doesn't put words in their mouth, it should stay, because the 'how to' is from doctors.
Maybe you thought of posting this concern vecause i was thinking about puttijg information in yhr article about abusing the drugs and dosages for that (on drugs like especislly the antihistamines, and those you can abuse). And with all due respect i think a simplified way of looking at how to tske the medicine is good, even if the NHS already puts most things simply. They might not go to the website to learn about taking medicine safely. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 18:15, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
And what if skipping doage info makes people take too much, take two doses to make up for a missed one, or they dont know what to do about a missed dose? :( — W;ChangingUsername (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
It's not Wikipedia's job to give them that information. They should be talking to their doctor about that, but we also don't need to say that. Wikipedia is not a medical provider, so it/we is/are not qualified to give that kind of advice or direction. If they have a prescription drug, it's unlikely that Wikipedia is their only source of information. Even if it is their only source, that doesn't mean Wikipedia has to have everything.
Don't get me wrong: I think all that information is important. It's just that Wikipedia isn't the place for it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:35, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
The references section will usually look like this:
==References==
{{reflist}}
If you don't include the template shown on the second line, Wikipedia decides where to display the references, and it might display them in the wrong place.
As for categories, that's kind of a specialty of mine so I'd be glad to help. I can give you some guidelines (in the general sense, not in the sense of Wikipedia guidelines) on what categories are needed for different kinds of subjects. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Consensus at the moment is leaning towards having a banner on these articles and reinstation of the content with it being reworded etc - There is no consensus to include the entire content back, If you want to reinclude it back please reword it and remove the instructions, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk13:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there, please turn off your caps-lock button since submiting edit summaries all in upper case is considered shouting in internet jargon. Thanks in advance. Best, A09 (talk) 21:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
Hi, sorry. I just REALLY dont want them to miss that one whej they come. Getting the 3 notifications scared me too
Some of your recent edits are violating en:WP:Incivility/ WP:Be kind. Actions such as giving sarcastic "barnstars" to other users which insult them, telling an editor that they are worthless, or saying they are on "crack cocaine fumes", are not acceptable on Wikipedia and may lead to being blocked. Please be courteous in the future. 73.170.137.168 (talk) 19:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Tag an admin I disagree with this change. You've tagged them before, so please take it up with them in a proper challenge to the edit so we both can speak with them. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 15:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
I (commentor, editor) am a researcher at the University of Washington conducting a study about health-related information on the Simple English edition of Wikipedia. We looked at your edit history and saw that you are an active editor of Simple English Wikipedia.
We are very interested in your experiences with editing simple English articles and how we might improve the coverage of articles in the Simple English edition. Your help will make a great contribution to our research.
Betablockers/Betablocker.--Please feel free to write (in this thread), one line/sentence ('the first line/sentence'), for a wikipedia-article.--If one is not 'in the ballpark', with 'the first sentence', then one might be wasting other people's time, with a-second-sentence for a wiki-article. Regards! 2001:2020:351:B494:F4DE:870:DF65:17F6 (talk) 14:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
I've already answered this one - I'm not sure you can see it still. Pretty sure that's why your second talk page message came through W;ChangingUsername (talk) 21:37, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Propanolol--Please feel free to write (in this thread), one line/sentence ('the first line/sentence'), for a wikipedia-article.--If one is not 'in the ballpark', with 'the first sentence', then one might be wasting other people's time, with a-second-sentence for a wiki-article. Regards! 2001:2020:351:B494:F4DE:870:DF65:17F6 (talk) 14:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Is this why a lot of the pages i created were flagged and quick deleted? W;ChangingUsername (talk) 03:47, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
No. The pages that are being quick deleted are deleted because they contain words from the NHS website, which is copyrighted, so we cannot keep those words on Wikipedia (even in the page history of single articles). -- asilvering (talk) 21:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi, I hope it's okay to comment here, W;ChangingUsername you should read en:Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources - no one takes joy from deleting articles however copyright violations is a serious offense and repeats of this can lead to you being indefinitely blocked on any project,
You need to make sure any articles you create on any Project are in your own words, I hope this helps, Take care and stay safe, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk22:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I should add that, while we do have to deal with copyright violation quite seriously, this is a "no hard feelings" kind of offense. Lots of people don't realize that they can't copy words from other places and put them on Wikipedia. Now you know, so please don't do that again, but these past problems are just "water under the bridge", now that they're being cleaned up. -- asilvering (talk) 22:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi again
I'm working on making better articles by learning how to write simple ones in my own words - it will be a process as I make them but, like another admin said, I should be bold in my edits. Going forwards, I hope to learn how to make articles properly (with formatting and the like) with good writing soon. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 10:38, 1 April 2025 (UTC)
Is/not deleted: Chlamydophila pneumoniae has been selected for quick deletion. If you think this page should be kept, please add {{wait}} below the line {{QD}} and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. You can find more information about the reason here. MCGAMER YOUTUBE (talk) 19:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
An editor has requested deletion of Alcohol (disambiguation), a page you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the page meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
You may also change the page during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Rathfelder (talk) 09:36, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Did this page stay up in the end? That's good. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 15:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Hello, WCU. (May I call you WCU?) I noticed that you added some maintenance tags to articles, such as with this edit where you added the {{verify source}} template. Please note that the correct date format for maintenance tags is "<month> <year>". (For example, you could use {{copy edit|date=April 2025}}.) You used "date=05/04/25", which puts the article in the maintenance category Category:Articles with invalid date parameter in template. Please be sure to use the correct format when adding these tags. Thanks! -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:08, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
Hey, my bad. If I don't fill out the date in the future, it might be to add it myself in the following edits (using that as a placeholder). That wasn't the case with these edits W;ChangingUsername (talk) 04:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)
Hello, WCU. I noticed that your changes to Pneumoconiosis added some maintenance tags with the date "19 April 2025". Those templates just need the month and year, not the day. Including the day puts the article into the maintenance category Category:Articles with invalid date parameter in template. Please use just the month and day for these. I already fixed the ones in this article, so you can see what I did to fix it. Thanks! -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
23 July 2025 I changed the wiki page linked here from an old revision of the page I had loaded (the infobox popup was that my "revert" had been successful) on my laptop. I checked the edit history and compared the WPcleaner edits to the latest revision or live version and the "previous" or revision that existed from before the edits. I don't see anything that was deleted in the comparison between these two edits but wouldve put the edits back in if they did exist. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 12:26, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
Hello! Thank you for all your work here; it's very much appreciated. However, categories should not be added if they have not been created yet. Make sure to create the category before adding them. Thank you! ⯎ Asteralee ⯎21:40, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some categories are meant to be created (like in the future) but I will tone it down W;ChangingUsername (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
Hello. When using the {{popcat}} template on categories, please keep in mind that the template only applies to categories with less than 3 things in them (this can include three subcategories, three pages, or something like two subcategories and one page). Thank you. ⯎ Asteralee ⯎21:32, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We like and strongly encourage helpful changes to Wikipedia, but an article you created was directly copied and pasted from the main English Wikipedia. Please do not do that. Such articles are usually too complex. They need to be simplified before or immediately after being added to the Simple English Wikipedia. In addition, be sure to include attribution on the article's talk page. Thank you. ⯎ Asteralee ⯎23:49, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Which page? If it is a bio then I think that is OK, and something to build off as well as linking to other simple.wiki pages. They are a great catalyst for getting people into other topics. I also have to fill out this category, as I am trying to do these right. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 23:51, 22 April 2025 (UTC)
And to-do/backlists for articles to get done. I've seen genres of articles copied over to this wiki from the en. Wiki before, just for content. This also provides a list and base (of information) to get started on as I said W;ChangingUsername (talk) 01:03, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
This is not anything against you, and you are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our guidelines.
Our username policy says how you should choose your username. Put simply, you should not have a username that people find offensive, advertises a real world group or company, or is confusing (for instance, if it impersonates another user).
If you have already made changes and wish to keep your changes under a new name, you may ask for us to rename your account. If you want to, please go here and ask for a new name. It will be changed by someone once they receive the request.
When you add either a category or text to indicate a person's cause of death, you need a source for it. I doubt there are any sources saying that Louis XIII died of Crohn's Disease, for example. Please go back to the articles you've added this kind of info to, and add sources. If you can't find a source, remove the information until you can. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:33, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
I don't know why it was added to the deaths by me. This might not be a mistake with adding bulk cats (having no sources) but this page going to the wrong cat on accident. There are only 4 (1 red link) deaths from Crohn's on simple. Wikipedia: Deaths(from)
[change source]
{{{1}}} putting the * on red links for this section
The king of France can be found just above that. I'll read the refs later and try to get the cats for deaths from diseases and disorders done by someone else, if you can help with that.
Let me know if there are other kings in France or other French people or bio articles that you need me to help on. And no offense, but I don't want to do deaths from diseases (but have input on format). W;ChangingUsername (talk) 15:37, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
:(
At least this is needed only for the deaths, right
Can the source be the wikidata site? if it says they died of Crohn's, then it can be used as a source correct W;ChangingUsername (talk) 15:03, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply.
On the Louis XIII sources in the enwiki list article: I can't check reference 52, but reference 53 doesn't mention Crohn's. Besides that, strangely, the page used for reference 53 cites the same source as enwiki does for reference 52.
Wikidata itself can't be used as a source. However, if it gives a source for the person having or dying from the disease, that source could be useable.
In any case, we need the reference here, not just on enwiki. And we should have references for anything important -- not just deaths from the disease, but having the disease. Of course, that means that it needs to be mentioned in the text as well, not just indicated with a category. See en:Wikipedia:Categorizing articles about people#Disability, intersex, medical, or psychological conditions for more information on this.
I know this can be a burden, but claiming someone has a disease is one of those things that can be controversial so we have to be careful. -- Auntof6 (talk) 16:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
I agree with getting every possible ref to good sources, using reference 52 twice. Also having even more sources than en.Wiki for things that we can get sources for - and for Wikidata (which uses en.Wiki as a source) it lists TB as a source (en.Wiki) at: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q737533#P509 (cause of death). And thanks you too.
If you look at that link, does it look OK? I like the format and getting an extra reference. I also like getting Wikidata to use the simple.Wiki as a source when we confirm data like these (like how it does to en.Wiki). There is also
This article does not have any sources. You can help Wikipedia by finding good sources, and adding them.
tags and for getting more info, {{stub}}. Look forward to your reply. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:19, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
When Wikidata uses Wikipedia as a source, I assume that means it got the information from there. I'm not sure it's supposed to use Wikipedia as a source. However, Wikipedia can't be used as a source in a Wikipedia article, even if it's in Wikidata. In this case especially, it would be a circular reference, which is not acceptable.
Using the source template can be good, but for certain things it's not enough. Those things include the kind of thing listed in the link I gave you above, and also other things on that page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:03, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
I assume the same thing (so Wikidata can use simple Wikipedia as a source, if it gets the info from here. The rest sounds OK. I agree. Refs should not be a problem from now (again) and just to let you know that for bio stubs there might usually be a reference (and link to a disease) in the deaths section of an en. Wiki page. It is probably true for other topics. See you around, Ao6. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 18:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
Claims can be controversial and also change. It would be important to get it right, in article claims. Categories I am more worried about losing out on new blue links or updates to the list (new entries) to add to our cat/list. By the way, I meant "use ref 52" twice as in use that ref twice, not use as 52 and 53, and those are fun, mostly easy fixes (edits). W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC) W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)
An editor has requested deletion of Viruses/Did you know/1, a page you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the page meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
You may also change the page during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
Please do not create pages like these. We do not have portals and it is not our practice to create such subpage under our mainspace. Also, those are not our DYKs; they are simply copies of en:Portal:Viruses/Did_you_know. If you do want to help out with DYKs, please go through our page. Thank you and happy editing.-- BRP ever06:14, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The most useful template has been template: (not activated) [[Template:Synovial fluid analysis|Template:Synovial fluid anaylsis]]. April 2025: The below is not the template - it is copied from the template page - it does not change automatically.
The template shows the synovial fluid diagnostic for different types (arthritides), shown on the left. The WBC and neutrophils, as well as the other two are useful for (White Blood(s Count) Cells) immune system for example. All of them are useful overall and covered throughout the literature, (in my experience) as I go. WBC is similar to FBC (Full Blood Count). Both are useful diagnostics (that goes for arthritides (types) but FBC is not used in this table)Catcus DeMeowwy{{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151{{{1}}} 07:38, 25 April 2025 (UTC)Catcus DeMeowwy{{
Do not put categories on other people's user pages. In addition, the category was set up as a category for mainspace, not userspace, so it wouldn't belong on user pages even if the users were OK with it -- it would have to be set up as a user category.
Finally, the category was set up with too few entries for a regular category, so I am going to delete it. I suggest not recreating it because it isn't a reasonable category to have -- too many people would qualify, plus we'd have to, yes, have sources for them all. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:51, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I closed this RFD as keep because it was apparently on the wrong page. It looked like you wanted to delete the article-space redirect, but you put the RFD on the talk page. If you want the redirect deleted, put the RFD on that page.
In addition, please note the following:
When you create an RFD, you should notify the page creator. It doesn't look like you did that.
Please do not put unusual formatting or codes on pages that do not belong to you.
Sounds good. Let me point out that the page I think you wanted to delete was created on purpose as a redirect. It has incoming links, and since we don't have an article on it, it's not a bad idea to have a redirect to the section of Pneumonia that mentions it. Therefore, let me suggest that it is valuable and probably wouldn't get deleted. But it's up to you. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would look at changing the links (and take those free edits) but one of the WhatLinks to is a template, copied from en. Wiki with a link to the page. I was wrong. Much to learn, and I have edited around the page to add it to my watchlist and to add more info to the page whilst checking our page to see if the redirect link is correct (goes to the section). I wasn't previously aware of this type of pneumonia (BOOP). { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151 00:04, 26 April 2025 (UTC) { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151 00:04, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem with this, and I want as much information on the articles as possible. Apologies (as I should of used wikiː "good faith edits" to undo) if my edit offended you, but I thought it was vandalism in the state it is in (needs cleanup- use wiki format). signedː { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151 06:03, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Letting the user know that he can talk to me in any of the discussions he is currently taking part in to resolve this issue, or other issues.
sig: User:Catcus_DeMeowwy
Hi Catcus, As per en:WP:CUSTOMSIG/P please could remove the numbers from your signature as this is not only disruptive but it makes conversations hard to follow .... and there's no meaningful use for having a whole bunch of random numbers at the end of your name. If you don't remove the numbers I'm afraid you'll leave me no choice but to go to ANI (which I don't want to do),
An editor has requested deletion of Category:Therapeutic abortion, a page you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the page meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
You may also change the page during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. MrMeAndMrMeTalk17:23, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The {{translated}} template belongs on the article talkpage and should only be used if there's no other {{translated}} or {{enwp based}} there.
The "This short article about medicine can be made longer. You can help Wikipedia by adding to it." templates all belong at the very bottom of the article, not at the top like you did here and other articles,
The feedback request service is a voluntary service to increase awareness of Requests for Comments (RFCs) and other discussions on Wikipedia. This page has a number of lists. Also saving the wikicode format (":" at front) The '''feedback request service''' is a voluntary service to increase awareness of [[:en:Wikipedia:RFC|Requests for Comments]] (RFCs) and other discussions on Wikipedia. This page has a number of lists organized by topic followed by a [[:en:Wikipedia:Feedback_request_service#All_RFCs|catch-all list]].
Hi, Cactus DeMeowwy. I'd like to point out that user talk pages are for users to communicate with each other. They are not for reference, sample code, or other things. Things like that can make it hard for people to communicate with you, and the main user page or user subpages can be used for that. Please remove the things on this talk page that are not communication. Also, if removing that doesn't remove the content categories, please remove those as well. Thanks.
Hi Catcus, Please also be aware that clogging up the talkpage history generally makes it harder for people to find diffs if they need too,
I didn't realise having a note section could make it harder for people to communicate with me and I also didn't think of the talkpage history until I saw Auntof6's message so I've moved everything off my talkpage and would encourage you to do the same,
Certainly not saying that you have but if you have; never follow me as I'm not always correct, my note section wasn't a permanent thing but I was too lazy to bother doing anything about it, Auntof6's message to you has given me that kick up the bum for sure. –Davey2010Talk11:08, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Davey,
This week I have been going around the Wiki looking at peoples talk people, and taking some ideas to apply to my pages (the same with looking at people's edits, for Wiki articles). I clicked the link but don't know what you mean with your edit. I just want to let you know, you can archive the content (by year) - am pretty sure you do that anyway. Remember to archive this (move it somewhere instead of blanking) instead of deleting it. You are reading my mind because yesterday I was thinking of archiving all of my content (more often than once per year)
Are you talking about my talkpage and not the open simple:wikipedia topic? and to fix this one step earlier, can you just tell me how to make collapsible content on the page (the Wikicode) for my talkpage. That just so I can put content here during conversation and for people when it is relevant (without clogging up my talk page) { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy20:08, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am about to nuke and restore my entire talk page. Please make your last edit and no more you two
Do you mean delete your user talk page, the page we're using here? I have to decline. We don't delete user talk pages because the communication history would be lost. You'll need to remove the content. It's better that you archive the actual communication, but it's not required. If you'd like help removing the inappropriate content and/or setting up automatic archiving, let me know. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The page has been created. It can't be created again. It's common for a user's talk page to be created by someone else, because it usually gets created by the first person who wants to communicate with the user.
As far as autonomy, I'm not sure what you mean. You would have autonomy over a different kind of subpage, but not complete autonomy over your talk page (or your main user page, either). Your talk page is designated for people to communicate with you. For more information on this, see the guidelines listed below. I'm including some enwiki pages because they have more info than ours.
Ao6, you have left AT LEAST 19 messages (all you having problems with me) this month. Almost every day there is an alert with you telling me off for doing something. That is all my talk page is. There is no discussion. Let me make my own talk page (even if this one has to be moved or backed up elsewhere with revision history and all) - I think at the very least I deserve that, after 19 problems this month (29 in total - at minimum) and with me mostly not getting my own way and my comments not having any influence on the outcome. There is also another topic open (on the simple.wiki talk) about using templates on the talk page that I would like to be supported on (voting for so that it should stay). 19 issues you have taken with me Aunt { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy11:38, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you want it to be created by you so badly, you can just ask for it to be deleted, then recreate it. But, then all the history will be lost. Per QD U1. Cactus🌵spikyツ10:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cactusisme: Actually, the user talk page cannot be deleted. Once there is actual communication on it, we don't delete it. The page can be blanked by the owner (although archiving is preferred), but the page itself can't be deleted -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:59, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Page: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox_chess_player every article (more than 50) is using a template reference that redirects to another template, template:infobox_chess_biography (both templates are shown on the templates used list as it duplicates)
An editor has requested deletion of Template:Eye symptoms and signs, a page you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the page meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
You may also change the page during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Auntof6 (talk) 07:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ː Thanks aunt. Still vote support for the first template mentioned, but can work on the second one in a bit (ASAP)
Would you please add something to this category to indicate its purpose? What qualifies as a simple medical term? Some of the articles in the category have titles that aren't in simple language, so it's not clear what's intended to be in this category. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was not aware that I could. Sure, I can do that (will have it done by the end of the day). I have some thing in mind that answers those questions {
Thanks. It's often helpful to include something brief to explain things like this. Just make it brief. Did I say it should be brief? :D -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, en. Wikipedia sometimes has brief explanations (not templateːshort) for their lists of things too (I think it is list of people with Crohn's disease), which I have dipped my toe into partly on that Wiki.
I was almost tempted into doing the same for this Wiki with all of the other things that can go on there. My main problem which stopped me doing it was that I found the information was often redundant by the time the sentence had finished. Most of the time, linking to the disease (in the list of diseases (people lists)) and letting the user see a preview would include the written (brief) information used on the cat. Just something for you to think about when changing cats to include a brief desc. (even though this cat needed clarification).
It's short enough. I just don't see how we would determine what belongs there and what belongs in the parent category. It seems somewhat subjective. For that reason, I have brought it up at RFD to see what the community thinks. Please feel free to add to that discussion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:21, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will make a brief explanation/description for the page and post it to you when I have a first revision (it will be very brief). Then it can be reworked until usuable on the Wiki
Can you (One would think you can) put electricity on the perineum muscles to make the vagina smaller
Is this how female horses (mares) vaginas act. And now that I think of it all muscles (like the vagina) are voltage-gated channels. I guess the electricity would be non/polarizing, and this info can be backed up and re-used later on in (voltage-gated mechanism e.g. in Opium) drugs (from taking drugs during pregnancy (template:pregnancy link) articles) taking drugs during sex (but not in the aphrodisiac sense), which is linked on the pregnancy template.
Fact: nettles (Urtica dioica are an aphrodisiac (they ^ sexdrive)
And in the news: horses lack a stop codon in the DNA (of muscles) which is present elsewhere, in the animal kingdom, they think for saving ATP and not wasting muscle (via oxidative stress). The horse muscle will simply keep on going so long as it is fed ATP. This is related {
No, I added {{verify source}}, and the comment was taken from a prior edit. Beacuse it is another culture, you and I might be unaware of it but someone else might be able to provide a source.
There is lots of evidence for people (and animals, apparently), eating the placenta. Hopefully the rest of the information that I added is useful and goes alongside the (temporarily) unsourced material.
Someone has removed that content about eating fetuses, but you added it back, so you're responsible for that information. I don't think it should be in the article if you don't know it's accurate.
(and) If it is bad and people have done it, would you not want the information to be here anyway? Forgetting about how if people have done it - or do it - it should be on Wikipedia. It might also be the culture of some other people.
Hi, Catcus. You are still using your talk page incorrectly. It is not for:
Leaving messages for yourself
Reference material
Article text
Template code
A user talk page is for other people to communicate with you, and for replies to the communication. In that sense, a user talk page doesn't belong to the user the same way as either their main user page or subpages of the main page. For the second time, please remove everything else from your talk page. If you would like help moving it to a user page where it would be appropriate, feel free to ask.
For more information, please see the following guidelines:
I also wish that people would [discuss] on the talk page, where it can not go to the talk page of articles (or can it?) because it is too much of a draft, or is not relevant enough. So that if I am wrong, someone challenges me.
Discussions about an article can definitely go on the article talk page. In fact, that's the best place for them. As for possible additions to an article, that depends. I would probably put that in a user sandbox. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:49, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done this now by the way. I have used the sandbox before, it was OK. Is there a user sandbox? preferably one that does not get cleaned every hour? Thanks
There's a user sandbox if you create one, or even more than one. That's what I meant by a "user sandbox". That would be a subpage of your user page (usually the main user page, not the user talk page). You would create it and manage it however you like as long as it follows the various guidelines. It doesn't get cleaned unless you clean it. You can name it User:Catcus DeMeowwy/sandbox, or replace "sandbox" with something else. If you'd like to see some examples, you can look at Special:PrefixIndex/User:Auntof6/ to see my subpages, some of which are sandboxes.
To create one with the name I linked for you above, click on that link and it will take you to the page. Then you can put what you want on it and save it. Just remember that it needs to comply with the various guidelines, such as the ones I linked above.
By the way I have kept what you have said about links in mind. If you change something, it would be helpful to let me know that you did. You could do that yourself when you change it if something else changes at the same time
An editor has requested deletion of Category:Simple medical terms, a page you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the page meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
You may also change the page during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Auntof6 (talk) 00:20, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Was not sure why you would not RfD the article before (the short desc), or why you had me do that if it was going to RfD, but I saw the reason before. If the cat is populated by the articles listed in the template, then it is a pretty full cat, and it solves the issue of what should go there. I was also wondering (before reading the other post) if I had caused this, such as by adding Down syndrome to it with the simple term on the list. { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy00:36, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't RFD the category before because I wanted to try to understand its purpose. After looking at the description you added, I decided then to go to RFD for reasons explained in the RFD. The number of entries doesn't have anything to do with it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:53, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The title of this user talk page is wrong due to some technical limitations. The right title isFunny redirect.
blacklisted URL (custom URL cannot create), i think this would be a good redirect to have. It would be an exception not a rule. This redirect would be humorous. It would also allow for (the example page, example page for A codes) A01 linkage by pasting in the URL to the double s brackets code, or a single sq brackets (linking to the article). I guess the link would look like: Talk:Https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of MeSH codes (A01). I do not have ideas for what that could mean. It would be good to also have the "H" be in lower case.
Hi, Catcus. I noticed that you categorized Therapeutic abortion under both Category:Methods of abortion and Category:Surgical abortion. The category for surgical abortion is under the one for methods, so the article does not need the one for methods. The same is true for Medical abortion, which was under the category for methods and the category for medical abortions; only the more-specific one was needed.
The syntax in this paragraph is making it so that I don't understand what it's about, or what you're asking. Please clean it up, then ask again and be specific about what you're asking. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:01, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Catcus DeMeowwy: I'm still not sure what the issue is, but I can see that the syntax there isn't correct. With a redirect, it makes no sense to put a pipe with text after it. That kind of formatting is for articles where people are reading text, which doesn't happen with redirects. -- Auntof6 (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
True, but what about the rcat page titles being on the redirect page for printers and collections of Wiki articles, or old bookmarks that become redirects? If the page is printable then it can get its title 1 and subtitle for some formatting. I do not think it stops there and it means there could be fun stuff :)
Thank you for your changes to Wikipedia, Catcus DeMeowwy. However, I would like to remind you that when you use certain templates, such as "{{welcome}},you should substitute them by adding "subst:" before the template's name. An example is, use "{{subst:uw-subst}}" instead of "{{uw-subst}}". This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. You also did not sign your post. Please use four tildes (<code>~~~~</code>) Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 13:27, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
substitute for the talk pages or this template? How does this prevent blanking of the template? And I did not know that it had to be used (with welcome, which I guess I use a lot btw), thanks
Hello, Catcus. I saw some changes you made that used incorrect syntax on maintenance tags. An example is this change, which added {{When|date=May 2025 (self ref)}} to the article. That is not correct syntax -- the part in parentheses should not be there. Please don't add this kind of syntax, not only because it's incorrect but also because it puts the article into a maintenance category and it has to be cleaned up.
And speaking of maintenance categories, when you create or change an article, please preview it before saving so you can catch this kind of error as well as other kinds. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did that as a test of my own idea after seeing it in the verify-source syntax, but I guess it was a mistake or just one thing that was an attempt but not right. No harm done (was just one time and I won't do it anymore) (?)
I really had sort of stopped caring so much about the second thing and had fallen off the rails a bit. And I would like to say that, sometimes I do this, because my attention starts to wane. Thanks for the reminder and if you or anyone else sees me starting to get careless, then let me know in that case as well so I can stop.
It has been some time and you still have inappropriate content on your talk page (see the "Talk page use" section above). Having it on the page is disruptive because it makes it harder for people to communicate with you. Please remove it as soon as possible. --Auntof6 (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is going to be fixed at the start of next month.
I have been worrying about it internally for a while (since it first came up). The question that I suppose I should of asked is whether I am going to get (by using the automatic archival tool for talk pages) a subpage of the talk page where the archive goes (/user_talk/archives/*) and how that works as well as what goes in the *, if it can be numbered so that I can archive the page often, or if it is monthly/yearly and the start goes to /year/month or what.
I am hoping that my talk page (and userpage) archives can go to /user_talk/archives/2025 (year)/1, then /2 and /3 whenever I click "archive". Is that a way that the tool can do it? I do have more questions but it does look like I am struggling to know what to ask and I do want to understand how the archival tool is going to work
I am not familiar with archiving where you click something to do the archive. I think there is something called "one-click archive" that someone else could help you with.
The archives are subpages of the talk page. I don't remember how often the archiving bot runs.
The automatic archive tool can be configured to archive however you like. You set it up by adding something to the top of your talk page (the thing you add doesn't appear when you look at the talk page, it's just there to let the bot know it needs to archive something.) As an example, my archiving is set to archive by year -- everything for a given year goes in the archive for that year. If you go to my talk page, you'll see an "Archives" box at the upper right. Click on "Expand" and you'll see the list of archives I have.
Other people set theirs up differently. Options include:
A new archive page every time an archive is done
A separate archive page for each month
Many other possibilities: they're documented at User:MiszaBot/config, which is also what you would put on your user page if you want to use automatic archiving.
However, this will only archive talk sections. The bot works by looking for timestamps in each section on the page. If it doesn't find a timestamp, as it won't in the non-talk things on this page, it won't archive them. You need to remove that manually. If you want to keep it, you can put it in a sandbox (not in the archives, which are an extension of the talk page).
Probably not too much to keep from the undated pile. I will probably blank those. But also can I reply to the talk page topic with a signature to timestamp the whole topic (would that count)? I will let you know later as I continue to prepare for the transition.
Yes, I think it just needs at least one valid timestamp in the section. It keys off of the latest timestamp to tell whether to archive the section.
By the way, could you put your signature either indented the same as your comment or, preferably, on the same line as the end of your comment? Having it indented under your comment makes it harder to follow a conversation because the reply ends up indented the same as the signature. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 16:50, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I can understand that you prefer it that way, but as I said, it makes it harder to read conversations. There are standard ways of indenting things. Help:Talk page shows some examples of how to format conversations, and the enwiki version of that page gives more info. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:21, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Hi, again. The "start of next month" has come and gone. Would you like any help removing the non-talk content? --Auntof6 (talk) 09:33, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The text for the Wiktionary link needs to be in lower case. The case of the first letter matters for Wiktionary.
The link needs to be piped so that "wikt" doesn't show in the article, like "cognitive" earlier in the paragraph.
There is actually nothing in Simple Wiktionary for "paradoxically". Please either change the link to paradox (and maybe add the adverb to that entry) or create an entry for "paradoxically" -- I think there are Wiktionary entries that just point to the base form of a word.
Of course, the best thing to do would be to change the language so that a Wiktionary link isn't needed, but the above steps are needed if it is kept. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:17, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. A lot of these things I was trying to do anyways, and sometimes in the process I slipped up I guess.
By the way, I hope that a lot of the words (unless the wod is required or helps the article in a big way, such as if it is a much-used word) are replaced with simple language translations. There are situations where those words are better to be kept (sometimes for my sanity).
An editor has requested deletion of Category:Surgical abortion, a page you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the page meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").
You may also change the page during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. --Ferien (talk | join TBA!) 21:45, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you are in an change war. Take care, because the three-revert rule does not let users make more than three reverts on a single page in a single day. Any user may still be blocked for being involved in a change war and disruption, even if they have not broken the three-revert rule. When you disagree with another user, you should first try to talk about changes in order to work together to improve Wikipedia and reach consensus. If you continue to disrupt the page, you may be blocked from changing Wikipedia. Please stop using complex words, Please also read WP:Simple English and Basic English#related pages, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:40, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Catcus DeMeowwy! Here at Simple English Wikipedia we use the section heading "Related pages" instead of English Wikipedia's "See also", which you used in "Blood lead level". This makes it simpler and easier to read. Please remember to use "Related pages" in articles that you create in the future. Thank you for your help! MathXplore (talk) 06:36, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
This article does not have any sources.
