Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 166

Semi AI article review

I decided to see if it would be possible to use an AI to co-write an article. Please review User:Fr33kman/deep learning and tell me what you think on the talk page. If the consensus is positive ill finish the article with citations etc. I think the current Deep learning article is too complex and doesn't contain useful info on how it works and examples of what it can do. Thanks, fr33kman 14:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Sentence number three: "Digital learning is made up of core units of programming in languages like Python and C++ containing many millions of lines of code."--Not a clear idea, one might say.--For now, it seems like a looser of an idea - to have A.I. write stuff (or 'generate' stuff) for the lede of this article. 2001:2020:311:F266:69C0:7359:28F3:C54B (talk) 23:30, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

It's much easier to rewrite the whole thing taking bits of content from enwiki than fix that. Not encyclopedic at all in the later sections. BRP ^ever 10:01, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Of course, user:BRPever. However, humans are slowly finding out more, about the dream in regard to 'pressing a button', and then good and encyclopedic text (in Simple English) is supposed to be generated by software-and-a-machine. 2001:2020:333:C37D:F0FF:D7EF:7C3D:1FDA (talk) 16:39, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

I would like to share something else regarding AI and writing articles. Well, some models can be taught to write articles really well (here's an example and a chat). You can test it here. Should this be forbidden? I invite you to share your feelings. Best regards, BZPN (talk) 10:06, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

The example from User:BZPN, had at least 'two good sentences/lines' for a lede.

Please see 'How to approve sentences/lines (for an article), out of an AI-generated text',

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABZPN&diff=10083894&oldid=10077691

. Good for you, for picking (the subject of) a ' physical thing ', and one that is easy to describe (for both man-and "-model").--Note: I am guessing that many LLM-whatever-models would have done just as, uh, not-too-bad. 2001:2020:325:D0A7:45DE:19F:A519:E090 (talk) 17:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

i have made an 'article', out of some of the text, that was harvested by user:BZPN. See,

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tatra_National_Park,_Poland&oldid=10084261

. I have checked that the two numbers in "my" article, match the infobox at En-wiki. 2001:2020:325:D0A7:B94A:A4E9:C707:A8CB (talk) 20:17, 17 February 2025 (UTC) / 2001:2020:325:D0A7:45DE:19F:A519:E090

Brand recognition

I have become aware of a problem: It is almost impossible to tell if you are on English or Simple English Wikipedia when reading an article on mobile. People sometimes end up here by accident and are surprised when this project doesn't have the pages they want, or they are too simple. In other cases, they might edit the articles to make them more complex without realizing where they are. Can we try to find a solution for this? 2607:F140:6000:802A:34CB:4958:DA33:888 (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm simple english wikipedian, i readed article in my mobile, what's your problem right now? Raayaan9911 06:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Did you read my comment? 2607:F140:6000:806A:F899:5FEB:BA0D:8E1C (talk) 02:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes i readed it but i'm difficult to understand what's your problem. Raayaan9911 02:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

It is almost impossible to tell if you are on English or Simple English Wikipedia when reading an article on mobile. 2607:F140:6000:806A:F899:5FEB:BA0D:8E1C (talk) 02:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

What's your article when you reading article on your mobile? Raayaan9911 03:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

If you read any article on mobile, there's nothing on the page that says "Simple English". So how will people know they're not on the regular English Wikipedia? 2607:F140:6000:806A:F899:5FEB:BA0D:8E1C (talk) 03:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Movies by decade

Was there some reason there wasn't many categories for movies by country by decade (i.e. Category:2010s American movies currently doesn't exist), or is it just that these categories haven't been created yet? 205.154.244.130 (talk) 22:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Simply a category that has not been created apparently. Griff (talk) 00:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

New page (February)

Biomarker. It is a disambig page (and arguably important). Note: i generally do not start articles (unless disambig page or template). I will start none of those red-linked articles.--Thoughts about if the article should be kept?

Copy: simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sandbox&oldid=10086232
. 2001:2020:339:A818:1942:2790:ED08:C1A4 (talk) 22:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

And of course, it simple explains "Biomarker", in one line/sentence. 2001:2020:339:A818:1942:2790:ED08:C1A4 (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:339:A818:1942:2790:ED08:C1A4 (talk) 23:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

The article did not meet the precise definition of A3, but I see little value in a disambiguation page with one blue link in a sea of red. Griff (talk) 00:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia-users will be glad to read "Molecular subtypes" (article), and be able to click for an explanation, "Biomarker". 2001:2020:339:A818:D8D9:777A:E4AB:83CA (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Redirects to Wikitionary

I've noticed this category of articles: Redirects to Wiktionary. What is the point of these if you can just directly words to Wikitionary? Seems like an extra step for nothing. Etoza (?) 23:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

The way it works is that if someone entered a word into the search bar here, they would get a result. It also makes things easier for those who don't know how to use interwiki links (and we have a lot of articles where there are no interwiki links to Wiktionary, but should be there), and to replace redlinks in links to important words. Remember that we are in simplewiki, where people usually come to learn English, and here everything is made easier ;). Best regards, BZPN (talk) 00:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@Etoza: It's also easier to find them so that we can either create an article, or find the places where they're used and simplify the article so that no link to Wiktionary is needed. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:13, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Help with simplifiying

Hello guys i have a question:could you please help me simplifiy the VinFast and Tatra (company) articles? because i think they are complex i hope you all understand that anyways good luck with all your contribuitions best regards. 179.109.143.137 (talk) 16:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

You should always first take the problem to the talk page, of each of those articles. (Can admins or others in the know, say, if one should wait half a month for an answer, before one goes to Simple Talk page.)--I am thinking that if the pages are correctly tagged, then there is no need to go to Simple Talk, 'after tagging or informing at the article Talk-page'. Thoughts? 2001:2020:351:CADD:4C47:E218:C1B7:C556 (talk) 21:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

i think its a better idea ask for help on simplifying the articles on the talk page of the articles 179.109.143.137 (talk) 22:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

VinFast. I have now asked for QD: "qd|Not ready for publishing. Not okay. Does not have the bare minimum of what is needed, to stay published. Partial copy already given back to s/he who started the 'article' ".--You really should have started that article, with only, say, 4 lines/sentences.--Then you should have asked on that talk page: "Are the 4 lines/sentences, good enough, to STAY published?".--Then, MAYBE, someone could have made THAT version, okay to stay published.--Anyway, have a nice day. 2001:2020:351:CADD:1488:F14D:720:8DFF (talk) 01:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Ok no problem anyways good luck with your contribuitions best regards. 179.109.143.137 (talk) 01:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Correction: "Then, MAYBE, someone could have fixed made THAT version, so that it could become, okay to stay published". 2001:2020:351:CADD:1488:F14D:720:8DFF (talk) 01:20, 20 February 2025 (UTC) / 2001:2020:351:CADD:4C47:E218:C1B7:C556

Reliable sources

Is Newsbreak a reliable source Sign them in (talk) 22:39, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Some context and why you think it might be a reliable source is helpful here. That said, some quick searching finds this story and other information that calls it a news aggregator at best which should never be used as a source. Ravensfire (talk) 22:48, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

No; see en:WP:RSP and Ctrl+F for "Newsbreak" in the table. —76.212.74.243 (talk) 06:27, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

^ This, Newsbreak is deprecated as per en:WP:RSPSOURCES and shouldn't be used, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

newbreak not reliable i dont think Reatom2 (talk) 16:40, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

My page being removed

Guys i have a quick question:why my page about the Hanteng X8 was removed? I didint add anything wrong to it are the links promotional? I dont know Fusionsub notified me about my page being removed but i dont know what is the reason by the way i am not a vandal anyways good luck with all your contribuitions best regards. 179.109.143.218 (talk) 15:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

It looks like it was quickly deleted under A4 - "The page is about a person, group, company, product or website, and does not claim notability". Ternera (talk) 15:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Also the page was just about a Chinese car the last time i saw the page it had nothing wrong just a car article but i will probably remake it again but i will make sure it dosent get deleted again by using alternate refs since i think the ones i used are promotional and not adding anything wrong 179.109.143.218 (talk) 15:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Look at Hawtai. You must fix "your" article (the parts that you can see).--Maybe i was the one who asked that your other article get QD (Quick Delete). 2001:2020:313:8B04:3CDC:388F:E489:A660 (talk) 00:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Look at Haima Automobile. You must fix "your" article (the parts that you can see). 2001:2020:313:8B04:3CDC:388F:E489:A660 (talk) 00:42, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Wiki in need of more Kurdish users

This wiki needs more Kurdish users to watch pages such as Iraqi Kurdistan, I'm very busy these days and I can't watch these pages myself. Is there any way to get Kurdish users here? Any help will be appreciated, thanks! Kirkuk 20:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

I also forgot to add that experts on the topic of Kurdistan and Kurds are welcomed too. Kirkuk 20:58, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

How to make a redirect to an article

Hi, does someone know how to make a redirect from one article to another like these two: Cowpea and Cowpeas? They could be redirected to the original. Any help is appreciated, thank you! 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 21:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

@Adelaideslement8723 Like this:

# REDIRECT [[Cowpea]] 2601:644:8184:F2F0:4C62:E0B:70C2:2EA1 (talk) 21:24, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

@Adelaideslement8723 Actually, you must remove the space between # and REDIRECT. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:4C62:E0B:70C2:2EA1 (talk) 21:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Oh thank you, I appreciate it! Have a great day and happy editing :) 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 21:26, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Upcoming Language Community Meeting (Feb 28th, 14:00 UTC) and Newsletter

Hello everyone!

We’re excited to announce that the next Language Community Meeting is happening soon, February 28th at 14:00 UTC! If you’d like to join, simply sign up on the wiki page.

This is a participant-driven meeting where we share updates on language-related projects, discuss technical challenges in language wikis, and collaborate on solutions. In our last meeting, we covered topics like developing language keyboards, creating the Moore Wikipedia, and updates from the language support track at Wiki Indaba.

Got a topic to share? Whether it’s a technical update from your project, a challenge you need help with, or a request for interpretation support, we’d love to hear from you! Feel free to reply to this message or add agenda items to the document here.

Also, we wanted to highlight that the sixth edition of the Language & Internationalization newsletter (January 2025) is available here: Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter/2025/January. This newsletter provides updates from the October–December 2024 quarter on new feature development, improvements in various language-related technical projects and support efforts, details about community meetings, and ideas for contributing to projects. To stay updated, you can subscribe to the newsletter on its wiki page: Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter.

We look forward to your ideas and participation at the language community meeting, see you there!

MediaWiki message delivery 08:29, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Should we blacklist IMDb from being added to articles?

Sadly I have seen a lot of articles with either social media sites or IMDb (Internet Movie Database). And we all know that those are not reliable sources for Wikipedia, we need reliable sources of info for Wikipedia, to make the article more readable and reliable. So let's cast a vote, should we just blacklist IMDb all together? Thanks, - Adelaide P. Johnson— Preceding unsigned comment added by Adelaideslement8723 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

As a source, it generally shouldn't be used. There are a couple of areas where it can be considered a reliable source though, see w:WP:CITEIMDB. It does make for a helpful Other website link for movies and actors. I would be against blacklisting. Ravensfire (talk) 19:48, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

No, we certainly cannot do this for two reasons:

1. Although IMDB cannot be a source, links to IMDB often constitute a valuable addition to the content of the article for the reader (in the "Other websites" section),
2. You cannot add any website to the blacklist as long as it appears in the content - you must first remove all links from the articles (failure to remove links and put them on the blacklist means that the pages will be blocked from editing, because the system will detect them as abuses).

BZPN (talk) 19:50, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

IMBd cannot be a reliable source, I have seen what IMDb is like, I know what the website is about. 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 19:52, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Yes, we know that, as Ravensfire mentioned above. BZPN (talk) 19:53, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

IMDB can be a reliable source, but only in a few circumstances (and really only for writing credits).

1. The writing credits marked with "WGA" that are supplied directly by the Writers Guild of America (where applicable). For released films, citations are typically not necessary because the film itself is implied to be the primary source.
2. The MPA ratings reasons, where they appear, that are supplied directly by the Motion Picture Association.

The second one is basically useless, the first can be helpful at times. Ravensfire (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Right... Well I guess that makes sense, but why do editors add IMDb when they know it is not reliable? 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 19:56, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Maybe these editors don't know the rules, or they are new, etc. It's best to ask them yourself. BZPN (talk) 19:59, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Okay, that makes a whole ton of sense, thanks for explaining 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 20:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source, so it should not be used for claims made in articles. I personally avoid using the site in general, but many readers will probably find an external link to IMDb helpful. If we decide to blacklist it, we can still provide external links only via templates, like those listed at Template:IMDb, which can be drawn from entries at d:. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:11, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Okay, makes sense, thanks! 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 20:11, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Not sure if my comment is of any help here but blacklisting it would be mean it couldn't be used in the Other websites section which would be a problem as it tends to be useful there, I won't say the rest because you know the whole Citing IMDB thing :), (If you already knew all of what I've just said then my apologies), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:23, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

@Davey2010:, see my above comment about using Wikidata. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:28, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Good point I forgot about that, Still meh not really seeing a need to blacklist it –Davey2010^Talk 20:38, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I'm advocating it either, just explaining how it could be achieved fairly painlessly. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:39, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Inactive admins

(Originally asked at Wikipedia Talk:Administrators yesterday) With WP:A is there an agreed upon time-frame without actions that would define an admin as "inactive" or is it based on feels?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@FusionSub See Wikipedia:Inactive administrators,

An inactive administrator is one who had made less than 100 changes or administrative actions combined within the past calendar year. Editors who have zero edits in a 12 month period will also be considered inactive.

Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

I know the policy with the removal an inactive admin's rights but WP:A uses a different criteria when categorising the admins into the active-semi active-inactive categories.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

oh, okay Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

@FusionSub: it probably depends on the user's activity in other projects - for example, if someone is a steward, they cannot be active only on simplewiki due to responsibilities in other projects. It is similar if someone is an admin in several projects at once. And that's why such an administrator is semi-active here. BZPN (talk) 14:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

The way I see it: active is when they have tens or hundreds of recent edits/actions in the past few months. Semi-active is when they have some edit/actions in past few months. Inactive is when they have no edits/actions in past few months. BRP ^ever 15:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

But is there any roughly agreed upon time frames? If I take your wording at face value I get the feeling the answer is closer to feels.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 20:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Maybe it's worth just asking one of the people who is listed, for example, as semi-active? @Bsadowski1, could you please help explain this (if it's not a problem for you) as you are listed as semi-active? BZPN (talk) 20:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Bsadowski is a steward, so he has probably a lot of work to do so it very reasonable. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 07:51, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't think I'm gonna get a concrete answer (and to be honest I don't think anybody has a concrete answer) so I'll just use my definition and discretion if/when I edit the admin list.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Which is? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

I will assume you are asking about my definition of "inactive admin" which is 3 months with 0 edits/actions.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:16, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

ok Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:17, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

I think less than 100 edits/admin actions in the last 12 months could be a decent benchmark for activity of admin. It would, however, be significantly higher than the equivalent on enwiki, which is:

1. Has made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period
2. Has made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period.

Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:22, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

That is also tied into the removal of admin rights, but basically it's 100 edits in 5 years, or no actions at all in the last year. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:23, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: Simple English already has a policy for removal of inactive admins (<100 edits/logged actions in one calendar year, or 0 over a 12 month period), see WP:Inactive administrators. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:4C62:E0B:70C2:2EA1 (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

When I used to update the admin pages, my rule of thumb was if their edits on there last 50 edits went back 3 months then I considered them semi-active and moved them over. However, if an admin objected to that I wouldn't move them. Inactive was no edits/actions in 3 months. -Djsasso (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Bugatti Veyron "Hypersonic car" ... What!?

The short description of the Bugatti Veyron is "hypersonic car"... how do I go about changing "Basic information" such that I can remove this tidbit? TheSaturnLover (talk) 03:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

@TheSaturnLover Go to the Wikidata item and change the description there. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:1805:E17C:9F3B:75BA (talk) 03:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, this bothered me a lot... no more :) TheSaturnLover (talk) 03:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Please nominate for Delete

Not ready to stay published (as of February 2025).
Please nominate (first) for Delete /AfD, any of the following 3,
Hawtai
Haima Automobile
M-Hero

Nissan S-Cargo
Nissan Be-1
Nissan Figaro (the last 3 seem fine for redirect to "Nissan", but Delete-talk seems to be the way to go, since redirect has been reverted).

Mitsubishi ASX
Mitsubishi Xforce
Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross (the last 3 seem fine for redirect to "Mitsubishi", but Delete-talk seems to be the way to go, since redirect has been reverted).

The following 5 seem fine for various redirects, but Delete-talk seems to be the way to go, since redirect has been reverted). Haima 7X
Haima 8S
Haima Automobile
Hawtai Terracan
Hanteng X5.

Ford Mondeo Sport, this one is probably easier to fix (for anyone), but Delete-talk seems to be the way to go (while i am busy fixing other articles). 2001:2020:347:A2A3:C87E:75AE:913A:677 (talk) 03:51, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

USERFY or Stubify, are alternatives (while i fix other articles). "Nuke" is last resort.--C. none of the articles are ready to stay published. 2001:2020:347:C6D3:B941:BF97:F8F:D5F9 (talk) 02:40, 2 March 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:347:A2A3:C87E:75AE:913A:677

Tags: Possible Spam... ???

(See: https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saturn_ION&action=history)

I have read the article on what spam is... why might this be getting flagged as potential spam? And how do I ensure that it is known this is not spam? TheSaturnLover (talk) 23:57, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

@TheSaturnLover: I don't know why it was tagged, but you do need to categorize the article and include a references section. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, these are good suggestions and I'll start applying them across all future articles I make, I didn't know to do this and it really brings the whole thing together :) TheSaturnLover (talk) 02:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

@TheSaturnLover: Sounds great! Let me know if you need any help categorizing. Also, you only need a references section if there are references in the article. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Should these pages be merged?

Walking stick, Cane, and Posture cane. If so, what should the title be? 207.62.246.71 (talk) 00:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

At English-wiki, the article is "Walking stick".--The other two, are not articles (there), it seems. 2001:2020:347:C6D3:C915:BE00:AD91:3BC8 (talk) 19:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

IPAc-en

Hi, Just wondering; are articles here supposed to have {{IPAc-en}} in them ?, (Example: Zendaya /zɛnˈdeɪ.ə/;), I would consider these to be complex here but maybe that's just me ?, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Complex - I sort of agree.--In theory, that thingy will be helpful to at least one person, over time..--I never use those, but i sometimes do online searches of "how to pronounce ...".--The question from user:Davey2010, reminds me of a way of doing things, which maybe is okay or maybe not:

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=XPeng&diff=10113689&oldid=9922342
. If the Zendaya article had a similar link, then I would check out (or use) that link.--If my post is regarded as helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:355:AB0B:5D22:233D:8D4:6175 (talk) 19:02, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

I assume there are a lot of non-native English speakers who know IPA and read articles here, so it could be useful? Could anyone confirm this? 24.130.150.141 (talk) 19:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

2001, Exactly but is it helpful to the majority of readers or is it just helpful to say 5 out of 1000 readers? (I'm inclined to go with the latter)

24, I'm British/a Native English speaker and even I don't get it although we all know I'm not the sharpest tool in the box anyway :),

I have in the past ummed and arred whether to get rid but chose not to as I've never knew if these actually serve a purpose to anyone here, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:22, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Infobox settlement

There's a recent error on {{Infobox settlement}}. The settlement_type parameter is supposed to be centred, but on mobile view, it is left-aligned instead. Example: London 166.107.163.31 (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Justin Bieber

We need to look through Justin Bieber and fact check it. It's riddled with vandalism and it's not easy to tell which edits were constructive and which were intentional falsehoods. For example, Braum presented to Bieber to two successful artists, including Billie Eilish who was about 6 years old at the time? TagUser (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi @TagUser, I've since updated the article but I'm not entirely sure if what's there is still correct, I think it is, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:42, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

@Davey2010 That seems good, thank you! TagUser (talk) 21:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

You're welcome TU :), Happy editing, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 22:55, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

I think this category needs fixed

Category:Sonic the Hedgehog
It has two characters like Knuckles and Miles "Tails" Prower in the category, but it leads to the main article: Sonic the Hedgehog
I think they were merged to the main article, but my own article is about Tails, Tails (Sonic). So should those be removed since they were merged by any chance or am I wrong? Thanks! 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 22:40, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

@Adelaideslement8723 It doesn't look as if they are (or were in the past) merged. I think the redirects are just because they have not been created yet at the time. All you need to do is to change the redirect from Sonic the Hedgehog to the article you just created, and it is the same if you wanted to create an article about Knuckles. Happy editingǃ ⯎ Asteralee ⯎ 22:48, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh okay, that makes total sense! Thanks and have a great day! :) 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 22:49, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Comment

Someone known as Queen Of Hearts "blocked" me...Billy Rebel. I am a member since 2008!!! The block is according to " Queen" that l am "advertising"...!!!! Nonsense. I do my best to add information for readers. Unblock me...it was rude to do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Billy Rebel (talk • contribs) 23:29, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

@Billy Rebel: You are blocked on English Wikipedia, not here. This is Simple English Wikipedia. You need to ask for an unblock on the site where you are blocked. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:59, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Account request

Hello. I cannot make an account! It says "this is a precaution against session hyjacking" Please help. 112.204.173.248 (talk) 11:46, 7 March 2025 (UTC) Also, A page called "ARB Gunes" is not written in English and is pure nonsense. ("Gunes" is in a different script.) 112.204.173.248 (talk) 12:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct annual review: proposed changes are available for comment

Please help translate to your language.

I am writing to you to let you know that proposed changes to the Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) Enforcement Guidelines and Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) Charter are open for review. You can provide feedback on suggested changes through the end of day on Tuesday, 18 March 2025. This is the second step in the annual review process, the final step will be community voting on the proposed changes. Read more information and find relevant links about the process on the UCoC annual review page on Meta.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. This annual review was planned and implemented by the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, you may review the U4C Charter.

Please share this information with other members in your community wherever else might be appropriate.

-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) 18:51, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

'Deleting' talk-pages without article being un-hoaxed

An important talk page has been 'deleted',
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_shopping_malls_in_Moscow&oldid=10120288

. (That seems also to have been done without a relevant edit-remark.)--It would not be intuitive for me, to go back to that talk page.--Good luck (while i fix other articles). 2001:2020:343:A0B9:949F:568C:D821:3F8C (talk) 22:30, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

We have IPs who think they're funny randomly creating talkpages and as such I thought you were one of those IPs, Seems I was wrong so I apologise for twice reverting you with the summary "vandalism", nonetheless your edits have been reverted again as your comment here makes no sense as the page isn't up for QD.

The article is tagged as a possible hoax however your comment doesn't really address that and you haven't bothered to edit the page, you're just waffling on about how part of the list is a hoax and that you wish us luck whilst you fix other articles.

Personally I don't see your comments as being helpful, needed or even productive. Please focus on editing articles instead of spamming talkpages with random waffle, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 00:47, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

I've also updated the 2 articles you had a problem with ..... something you could've simply done yourself, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 01:00, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

User:Davey2010 had an apology, in post of "00:47, 8 March".--If you are more careful in 'Delete' of Talk-pages, then maybe we will not be re-visiting the topic, this month, and each month (moving forward).--Now, if there is less wiki-lawyering on select talk-pages (including Simple Talk), and more added (truthful) info in articles, then that is a good way to move forward.--(For topics un-related to "'Deleting' talk-pages without article being un-hoaxed", one should start a new thread somewhere.) 2001:2020:343:A0B9:751C:BADA:CC25:87C6 (talk) 08:04, 8 March 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:343:A0B9:949F:568C:D821:3F8C

Happy Women's Day!

Happy Women's Day to all the amazing women in our community! Thank you for your contributions and dedication. Wishing you a wonderful day! BZPN (talk) 07:48, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! Have a great day to you too! <3
@BZPN 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 ^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼)} 07:52, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

These A.I. generated articles (from early March)

Cadillac Sollei.
Cadillac XT6.
The articles are not ready to stay published (and i ain't gonna be fixing those).--If anyone can make those disappear, then fine.--One i.p-user has been 'churning out' those, this evening. 2001:2020:343:A0B9:A046:14CD:E625:D70E (talk) 23:25, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Now also, Cadillac Vistiq.--I have asked for QD ("A.I. generated nonsense"). 2001:2020:343:A0B9:5E7:F2A9:866:E1D0 (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:343:A0B9:A046:14CD:E625:D70E

i think the articles arent aí generated in my opnion also why you cant just fix them you a and i agree they arent perfect but instead of deleting them you can fix them and if they are gonna be deleted i dont care they arent perfect anyways good Lucky with your contribuições best regards

179.109.141.40 (talk) 23:38, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

179.109.141.40 - Please stop creating articles, Yes I have previously hammered the point of "your articles are not perfect" but that doesn't mean "carry on and we'll fix them after you". Please take the time to read WP:Basic English and WP:BE 850, and try and better understand the words we use here.

2001 - For full transparency I've declined your QD as it wasn't AI/LLM generated content (it was a somewhat complex article but imho not enough to meet A3).

In short 179, you need to take a step back, read the links above, and better understand the words we use here. Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 23:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Ok from now on i will only do minor edits like adding categories redirecting and etc so ok i will not make articles anymore anyways good luck with your contribuitions best regards and stay safe. 179.109.141.40 (talk) 23:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay brilliant thank you –Davey2010^Talk 23:58, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Central Auth

I created this account 7 months ago on Wikipedia Simple English. I want to fix some minor error on Wikipedia English (Main Wikipedia) but see that my account was not linked. Other sister WikiProjects like Wikipedia news, Meta Wiki, Wikipedia Urdu, Wikipedia Turkish and many are linked with my same account but Not Wikipedia English (Main Wikipedia). Please help that how to link or can any Wikipedia Administrators can link my account to Main Wikipedia English. Thanks MD Edit 123 (talk) 16:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Please reply to the discussion here

Wikipedia talk:Simple start#Create an article

We may want to change that page. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:2542:D326:DB72:ED19 (talk) 21:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm being accused of copyviolation, is that true?

(I doubt whether I should ask this question here or at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. I'm happy to move it to there)

At my ongoing unblock request at the English Wikipedia I'm being accused of copyviolation here (at Simple Wikipedia). Because its a serious accusation I would like to raise the issue here. If it is copyright violation it is a policy violation and it should be removed and I would like to rewrite it.

I start this topic because 1) its about simple Wikipedia, 2) I would like to improve me edits/works if they are non constructive, 3) I would like to explain here what I did and 4) I didn't start it at the English wikipedia becaue I can't start a topic there.

• Valère Depoorter is "way too close paraphrasing of the source" of this source. (no specific sentences indicated)

The prose from Nieuwsblad van het Noorden after Google Translate translation; next to the article I wrote:

“Depoorter was best known in Avelgem for his 30-year political career,” says mayor Lut Deseyn. “When he first ran in 1964, he became alderman in a coalition with the then liberal mayor André Wymeersch.” “In the 1970 elections, Valère had to settle for a role in the opposition, but in 1976 he served as first alderman for the first 3 years under leader Roger Tack, after which Valère became mayor in 1980. He held this office until 1994. Valère Depoorter was loved by everyone because he governed his municipality like a true ‘father of the mayor’ without making any distinction between his residents.” — Joyce Mesdag (Nieuwsblad van het Noorden) (translated by Google Translate)

Valère Depoorter (c. 1930 – 9 December 2024) was a Belgian politician. His political career lasted 30 years and was for 14 years mayor of Avelgem from 1980 to 1994. Depoorter started his political career in Avelgem in 1964. He was a member of Christen-Democratisch en Vlaams (CD&V). He became municipal officer (in Belgium called "schepen") in a coalition with the liberal mayor André Wymeersch. After the 1970 elections, he ended up in the opposition. In 1976 he was for three years the first alderman under Roger Tack. Depoorter became mayor of Avelgem in 1980. He retired in 1994 and was succeeded by Lieven Vantieghem. Depoorter is praised that during his time he was mayor he made no "distinction between the residents" and that he was was "loved by everyone". Depoorter died on 9 December 2024, at the age of 94 years old.

I used four articles that are stating more ore less the same content. In the Wikipedia article I list the factual information from the four articles. Note that the for articles are short with a lot of factual information. If you start writing a Wikipedia article in a chronological sequence with the factual information from these articles, it is logical that the listing of the data is consistent and the time sequence is the same. But if the content is the same, it is not yet copyrightviolation.

• Piet Zwaanswijk with "Copyvio/close paraphrasing"

It's about one specific sentense in the article. In the article I translated a part of a sentence literally on purpose from what was written; because he is according to that article regarded like that. After rereading I placed de two subjective statements between "" to make that even more clear.

"Piet Zwaanswijk was one of the most respected post-war visual artists of Haarlem. His work had a profound influence on the local art scene" — Wessel van Opstal (haarlem105.nl) (translated by Google Translate)

Zwaanswijk is regarded as "one of the most respected post-World War II visual artists of Haarlem" and his work had a "profound influence on the local art scene" After rereading I added two times "" Zwaanswijk is regarded as "one of the most respected post-World War II visual artists of Haarlem" and his work had a "profound influence on the local art scene"

(Side note: This secion is absolutly not meant for a discussion about my block request. But what in my unblock request, several people have problems with my English prose writing here at Simple Wiki (sorry I'm not native) or article notabilty. Please come to me and let me know as I'm happy to work on it.)

Thanks for your time, SportsOlympic (talk) 14:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

I believe en:WP:LIMITED applies to the Valère Depoorter example. For Piet Zwaanswijk, I agree that the original lack of quotations was a problem, not simply from the copyvio angle, but because it was a statement of the form "regarded as... the most <something>", which generally requires some form of attribution per en:MOS:QUOTEPOV, and that editors need to be careful to not express that statement in "Wikipedia's own voice". Chenzw  Talk  15:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

SportsOlympic, thanks for reaching out. I know it is a lot of work to create all these articles. In my opinion, to avoid influencing the discussion of your unban request at enWP, I believe it would be best if we review examples together with other content editors at a later time and decide how improvements can be made. That being said, although "x is regarded as ..." with a citation is actually somewhat common on Wikipedia articles, it is not supported by MOS. Griff (talk) 15:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

@Griffinofwales: Note the unblock request was unsuccessfull, mainly due to this accusation. There has been silence her since December. Please let me know if my style is an issue and if I should stop writing due to quality reasons? SportsOlympic (talk) 14:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Req for allowing these WP articles to be created

I'm requesting "clearance" to remake articles that I've posted (copied from another website and simplified) which have since been deleted, even though they should stay up. I'll put a lot of effort into taking the feedback and guidance that I got from the main two users that had a problem with them to do it properly and how the community wants it to be. But in putting in this effort and making the articles in my own free time I hope there can be some sort of guarantee that all of them won't be deleted suddenly and en mass.

Taking the feedback and WP rules in with these articles will involve: writing my own articles, in simplified English; following the same structure to include all of the information, but from lots of different (cited) sources and in my own simplified words; and not putting (the) Wikipedia at risk with the articles, wherein Wikipedia is NOT a medical institution, and I am NOT a doctor.

The articles I hope to make are all of the pharma/drugs articles for medications and medical alternatives that are both/all used by doctors to practises of the same alternatives which are more common, old, or perhaps used often used by some in the same countries that simple:WP targets. I will also be interested in Chinese medicines and herbs soon and would love to share that with the wiki if it would be appreciated.

The (first batch of articles) medications I would create are the same as the now deleted articles. My highest priority with these are the medications info that supports other simple wiki articles such as beta blockers (i am just making you aware here that i posted that article.) as an example, which is supported with links to these articles with more information on them for this topic such as [[labetalol] and propanolol, for example. These articles are useful information for the website for free information and should stay up, in my opinion. The example page is what I would like to do, the article linking to some articles on medication, a certain amount, and a certain amount of articles on others. I think it is important that other countries that are not as well off, or people that are not as well off or don't have access to the same education as other people do, have access to the information because they may be future doctors in their country. Conversely, patients using these drugs need to be fully aware and informed to not actually do something dangerous, so that having a simplified and English version from Wikipedia will make them safer.

The articles following that will hopefully be after I ask the government for some kind of help, to further improve the usefulness and reliability of my contributions or make sure the quality stays consistent. I also hope to create or edit articles in other medical fields and edit some of the speciality ones where it is relevant, make them about organ failure, bacteria, air pollution and so on.

By doing so, I hope to make more information freely accessible in simplified English not behind paywalls, for the readers of this sub wiki to have access to it. I believe that knowledge should be like this, by the way, for any use the reader has for it (from feedback about dangerous information). The spreading and absorbing of knowledge should be unbounded. My long-term goal would be for the subject (and subjects) to be complete with information and connected together properly (such as with the beta blockers page with links out to an article on some medications in the article). Another big goal would be to have government help so these countries would benefit as a whole from this small or small-scale effort; and this includes putting correct information to those without the facilities to properly learn or train people. That would include making the information accessible to places without training in roles because of reasons that may be there. I would also like to gain employment or funding to then work for the government as a doctor after getting a medical license.

(This is not the final draft of this post and I will probably edit it later. I will be following this article and hope to see discussion on how to be able to create these articles without them being deleted) W;ChangingUsername (talk) 09:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

On the talk-page of user:W;ChangingUsername, i have today asked two questions.--(If the user can answer those 2 questions, on that talk-page, then those two (new) threads, might give some ideas on 'where we might be heading'.)

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AW%3BChangingUsername&diff=10127446&oldid=10054810
. 2001:2020:351:B494:F4DE:870:DF65:17F6 (talk) 14:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Is this article too complicatd?

I translated this from english wikipedia about 2 days ago but I don't know if its simple enough. I feel like it is fine but i'ts better safe than sorry. Metro Transit (Minnesota) Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 21:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Readability is good, so well done. Using an online readability checker (such as Hemingway) will help you find issues that could make it even better. Peterdownunder (talk) 22:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Let go of the rope ('non-specific' tags in chemistry articles; March 2025)

Regarding a small selection of chemistry articles:

I will be adding "citation needed" tag, and at the same time removing "no sources" tag.--The first mentioned tag, is 'non-specific'; The second tag is specific, about where citation is needed.--If those edits of mine, can be left alone, for say a number of months, then fine.

(There is a 'new user', who is doing a lot of good work regarding Chemistry articles.--Now, if someone can whisper words of advice, to anyone who is 'cluttering up' articles (with non-specific tags), by that 'new user', then fine.--If we do like we always do, in regard to treating those who do some of the best work in regard to chemistry-articles - then we will lose those users relatively quickly, like we always do. Just saying.--Another thing: If some or many do not understand this post, then "don't worry, because likely there are other subjects of concern on wikipedia, which might be easier to understand".--Good luck (while i fix articles). 2001:2020:345:F2D9:ED9A:E250:54A5:2F25 (talk) 23:36, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Example,

http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Equivalent_%28chemistry%29&diff=10131208&oldid=10131189

. 2001:2020:345:F2D9:ED9A:E250:54A5:2F25 (talk) 23:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

An improved dashboard for the Content Translation tool

Hello Simple English Wikipedians,

The Language and Product Localization team has improved the Content Translation dashboard to create a consistent experience for all contributors using mobile and desktop devices. Below is a breakdown of important information about the improvement.

What are the improvements?
The improved translation dashboard allows all logged-in users of the tool to enjoy a consistent experience regardless of their type of device. With a harmonized experience, logged-in desktop users can now access the capabilities shown in the image below.

Notice that in this screenshot, the new dashboard allows: Users to adjust suggestions with the "For you" and "...More" buttons to select general topics or community-created collections (like the example of Climate topic). Also, users can use translation to create new articles (as before) and expand existing articles section by section. You can see how suggestions are provided in the new dashboard in two groups ("Create new pages" and "Expand with new sections")-one for each activity.

In the current dashboard, you will notice that you can't adjust suggestions to select topics or community-created collections. Also, you can't expand on existing articles by translating new sections.

Does this improvement change the current accessibility of this tool in this Wikipedia?
The Language and Product Localization team acknowledges your concern with exposing the Content translation tool. So, be rest assured that it will remain in beta, ensuring that only logged-in users who activated the tool from the beta features will continue to have access to the content translation tool. Also, if the tool is only available to a specific user group, it will remain that way.

When do we plan to implement this improvement?
We will implement it on your Wikipedia and others by 24th, March 2025.

What happens to the former dashboard after we implement the improvement?
You can still access it in the tool for some time. We will remove it from all Wikipedias by May 2025, as maintaining it will no longer be productive.

Where can I test this improvement and report any issues before it is implemented in this Wiki?
You can try the improved capabilities in the test wiki using this link:https://test.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ContentTranslation&campaign=contributionsmenu&to=es&filter-type=automatic&filter-id=previous-edits&active-list=suggestions&from=en#/. If you notice an issue related to the improved dashboard in the test wiki, please let us know in this thread and ping me, or report it in Phabricator, adding these tags:BUG REPORT and ContentTranslation. Please ask us any questions regarding this improvement.

Thank you!

On behalf of the Language and Product Localization team. UOzurumba (WMF) (talk) 18:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Your wiki will be in read-only soon

Read this message in another language • Please help translate to your language

The Wikimedia Foundation will switch the traffic between its data centers. This will make sure that Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis can stay online even after a disaster.

All traffic will switch on 19 March. The switch will start at 14:00 UTC.

Unfortunately, because of some limitations in MediaWiki, all editing must stop while the switch is made. We apologize for this disruption, and we are working to minimize it in the future.

A banner will be displayed on all wikis 30 minutes before this operation happens. This banner will remain visible until the end of the operation.

You will be able to read, but not edit, all wikis for a short period of time.

• You will not be able to edit for up to an hour on Wednesday 19 March 2025.
• If you try to edit or save during these times, you will see an error message. We hope that no edits will be lost during these minutes, but we can't guarantee it. If you see the error message, then please wait until everything is back to normal. Then you should be able to save your edit. But, we recommend that you make a copy of your changes first, just in case.

Other effects:

• Background jobs will be slower and some may be dropped. Red links might not be updated as quickly as normal. If you create an article that is already linked somewhere else, the link will stay red longer than usual. Some long-running scripts will have to be stopped.
• We expect the code deployments to happen as any other week. However, some case-by-case code freezes could punctually happen if the operation require them afterwards.
• GitLab will be unavailable for about 90 minutes.

This project may be postponed if necessary. You can read the schedule at wikitech.wikimedia.org. Any changes will be announced in the schedule.

Please share this information with your community.

MediaWiki message delivery 23:15, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Oxford Comma

Should we or should we not include the Oxford Comma in wikipedia articles? Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 16:48, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I'm in support of what en wiki has Wikipedia has no preference between the two styles, but requests that the chosen style be used consistently within an article from w:WP:Oxford comma. The holy wars over which comma style to use are only slightly less well known that Star Wars vs Star Trek and vi vs Emacs. Ravensfire (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

We have the situation that hopefully, an article gets edited by many people. Thee people check the article, they fix things, make it simpler, perhaps they add content. As I read it, the Oxford Comma (or Harward Comma, or perhaps a few other names) is the comma before the last part of an enumeration/list of things. The focus of this wikipedia is to be simple, and in that context getting consitenct use (or non-use) is probably hard to get between different editors. Also keep in mind that the lvel of English of these people is probably different. Oner of the things that makes this Wikipedia interesting is that all the editors have a different background, and there are several varieties of the Engiöish language. Eptalon (talk) 08:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Need translation of Second Cold War

Hey there. I just now replaced this problematic revision of Second Cold War with the full copy of this revision from en:Second Cold War. I really hope a mere Simple English translation is made, not some full rewrite or something like that. George Ho (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi George, please do not simply replace the content with the Enwiki article. This is against our rules, and because of that I have reverted your change. The old version maybe problematic, however it was in Simple English which is the language used on this project. If the articel needs improvement, then please fix it, but you can not just overwrite and then expect someone else will do it. I often use the Enwiki version as a basis for creating a translation into Simple English. The best way to do this might be to copy the article into your own sandbox, and work on translating it. Many editors here would be happy to advise and check your efforts. When ready it could be then moved into the main space. We even have templates here to credit the original Enwiki article as being the starting point for the Simple English version. Peterdownunder (talk) 10:17, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Created User:George Ho/Second Cold War. You're more than welcome to edit/translate the page if you can. I just don't know which any other template than {{user sandbox}} honestly. George Ho (talk) 01:51, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

A opnion on promotional text

hey guys look i am here to say my opnion in promotional texts:i think any articles in Wikipedia should say information about a product of neutral way but when i was gonna add categories to the Baojun Yunduo article (because i am doing minor edits here like adding categories and etc) i saw someone added a sales section there is no problem with adding it.

But the editor included promotional reasons of why the car was the best s uelling EV in India (since its called MG Windsor EV there) which are these "its many features, comfort similar to a business-class flight, affordable price, and unique design" i think the text is very promotional i removed it and left only this "The MG Windsor EV became the best-selling electric car in India just one month after it was launched, selling over 3,000 units each month"

So yeah i am not a big fan of articles that have promotional text (and i know spam links are bad and etc) like the example i showed anyways i hope you all understand and what do you think about this let me know that best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Many editors who come here have no understanding of what Simple is, No one's a big fan of promotional text and we do our best to combat it, Please be bold and fix the articles]], Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 16:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

this is what i did i removed the promotional text lefting only this part The MG Windsor EV became the best-selling electric car in India just one month after it was launched, selling over 3,000 units each month. also i am doing minor edits like adding categories and etc anyways good luck with your contribuitions best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry I thought you were here complaining about it, Thank you for removing this :), Happy editing, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:22, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

No problem also i was just telling my opnion on this and best regards 179.109.143.22 (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

The thing people need to know about advertising is all ads are opinion only and not facts. For instance adding that a brand of hot dogs are the best in the world is just an opinion whereas saying that the brand is the best selling hot dog in the world is asserting a fact and needs references to back it up. The first can't be added to a page whilst the second can as long as its proven. We don't allow any advertising, spam, promotional content whatsoever. It is one of the core principles on all WMF wikis. So please do remove promotional matter when you see it. No need to ask if it's okay, it's always okay. Regards fr33kman 20:17, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

ok i was just saying about what is my opnion about this but yeah i agree that advertisement and spam and etc is not allowed in this wiki also good luck with your contribuitions best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 21:00, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

You did good: promotional text should be either removed or changed the way you did. For me, it's a question of what's fact and what's opinion, as well as what do we have a source for. If a general authority on cars, such as Motor Trend, says something that's opinion, we could have a sentence like, "Motor Trend said the car has a unique design," and have a reference for it. If it's an advertisement or the manufacturer's website saying it, that's different. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi

Hey all I have started a discussion here and would like your valuable feedback and any suggestions you have on this matter (move). Thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:58, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Football seasons sounds more simple. also it has some things like "

• 2013–14 Luton Town F.C. season" Which is a football time season

207.157.127.91 (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion started at the link on my talk page that Cactus mentions, but should continue here, not on my talk page. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:32, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Opnion on ai-generated content

hey guys i have a question:what are your opnions on ai-generated content in this wiki? in my opnion i kinda dislike it because its:complex no sources promotional words with so many excessive praise to a product airline car city etc and it also has false info i think its better to write manually.

But for some people who wanna edit Wikipedia for the first time its maybe good for them receive help from a ai on how to edit what do you guys think? let me know best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 21:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Properly using AI is a lot of work, and getting an AI to write something that is usable in this wiki is almost as much work as writing it yourself. In addition, the current AI models have the problem that they sometimes invent a link when there is none, and they cannot tell you where a generated snippet is from. Also adding references to such an article is a nightmare. In short: you are better off not using it here, in my opinion. Eptalon (talk) 06:22, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I somewhat feel like we should have something like w:WP:PROD for AI generated pages. It's too much of a hassle to handle a large volume of them. See how the progress came and delete at the end of the week if sufficient improvements haven't been made. Not sure if the volume right now is too hard to handle; so this could be a future solution. BRP ^ever 06:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Question: How do we know that content was created with AI?

I was neutral on this at the beginning, but now I've seen enough AI-generated articles with issues that I'd like not to see any more. I don't know if we can ban them within the spirit of Wikipedia, but I wouldn't be sorry if we did. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:38, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Most AI generated articles are pretty easy to spot, with oddly formal phrasing, sections and either a lack of sources or poor quality sources. I'm not a fan of those, as the "writer" often doesn't do much of a review, just cut and paste. Throwing the whole "can AI's retain copyright" out, does the article itself have copyright issues from the content, especially close paraphrasing? Have the sources been checked out to make sure they are reliable and actually refer to the topic at hand? Do the inline sources support the text where they are added or just added at the end of sections without care? Often, the language is not simplified at all.

When we run into those articles, there's a question of volunteer time and "fairness". Is it fair for the "creator" to spend 30 minutes and then expect a volunteer here to spend 4 hours cleaning up their mess? Now repeat that multiple times. But ... content is good, so a QD criteria for AI material is not where I'd want to go. I like the PROD suggestion, but PROD is seven days, so it RFD, so allow "Appears like AI generated content" as a valid RFD reason. The article can be saved by rewriting or stubbing if it's really bad. Ravensfire (talk) 02:10, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

And the content that is based on generated text but then rewritten and reviewed? It means notability? Written decently and in simplified language? Good for them, I'm probably okay with something like that. Lot of "ifs" there though. Ravensfire (talk) 02:12, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

If you generate the article or section using AI and then spend the time to clean it up and make it meet the rules and guidelines of this wiki, then likely we can't say much. The problem is just that if you don't and we are left with some AI generated content. Eptalon (talk) 12:03, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, LLM-generated content has no place on Wikipedia. It is unreliable, unsourced, badly formatted and lazy. Most editors and I do not want to fix an article that nobody wanted to write, I don't even want to read it. We will only end up with many bad articles full of allucinations (fake content created by AI). What's worse is that AI is demotivating. Why should we spend our time writing a simple article, when somebody else can just ask an AI to make the article in a few seconds? An article made with words stolen from human writers. Either way, AI fans do not read Wikipedia anymore, they just ask chatgpt for answers. People go on Wikipedia because they want to read human-written content. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

well i prefer reading articles written by humans for me the biggest problem with ai-generated articles are the promotional text with excessive praise to products like cars (mainly electric and hybrid ones) airlines cities and etc also it has fake info as well so yeah but as i said people who wanna edit Wikipédia probably ask to ais how to edit and create pages on there. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 19:35, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Change filter/Mistakes

I am not sure if If it warns you or stops you from making a helpful change, please don't report it here. is correct. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 09:51, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Special:Diff/10045039 was vandalism and it needs to be reverted. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F8AE:4783:30B2:16C3 (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Impressive that nobody spotted that edit when it happened. Yeah, that needs to get changed back. Conflicted edits in the mean time, so I'll work on a manual revert. Thank you for calling out the specific edit. Ravensfire (talk) 16:41, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, reverted the changes in a series of edits, if any of them are wrong hopefully it's easy enough to revert back / change as needed. Diff of my changes. Ravensfire (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Good although there may need to be a 'd' after '(counter)'. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F8AE:4783:30B2:16C3 (talk) 16:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I went back into late 2024 when the bot was archiving and the counter just had a number. Reading through the config template docs, the counter just gets appended to the end of the archive name, and when the bot determines it is time to rollover to a new archive, it updates the counter value. In the template docs Variables section, it does have %(counter)d, but the d there means this should be a decimal value. Short version, I don't think it needs a d at the end. Ravensfire (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thanks all. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 11:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Mourning dove

There've been some edits to the page, such as moving all but one sentence out of the intro. It's a VGA, so can people please check if these edits are good? 2601:644:8184:F2F0:9063:3662:C192:4BB0 (talk) 05:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

They seem okay. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 09:40, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Isn't it kind of strange to have only one sentence in the intro? 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F8AE:4783:30B2:16C3 (talk) 16:34, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

@Steven1991 what do you think, since you made those edits. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 11:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I've reordered the lede a bit. It is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article, so could probably have a bit more from elsewhere too. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:42, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Now Steven1991 has made similar changes on Sun, for example a section with only one sentence. Also, I don't think a heading for "Overview" is needed unless the introduction is quite long. Can you explain this? 169.229.202.227 (talk) 17:14, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. You can rewrite it in a way you see appropriate. I initially made that change as I felt that the article was somehow disorganised. Steven1991 (talk) 17:19, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

How do I do recent changes on mobile?

Hi, this is Adelaide but this is my mobile account, I don't have my PC on me so it is not a sock puppet. But how do I view recent changes on mobile or is that a PC thing? AdelaideMobile542 (talk) 23:58, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

PC, because mobile doesn’t have recent changes. Nassiv64 (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh, okay AdelaideMobile542 (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Nassiv64 (talk) 00:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@AdelaideMobile542 and Nassiv64: That's not true; you can view recent changes on mobile. Just go to Special:RecentChanges. 166.107.163.247 (talk) 00:04, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Ah got ya, thanks! AdelaideMobile542 (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I’m iPad not mobile. Nassiv64 (talk) 00:06, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Just an FYI but at least on Chrome you could use desktop version which takes some getting used too but I found all of my scripts worked, Hope that helps, (Tick desktop version and then change the url from simple.m.wikipedia.org to simple.wikipedia.org ), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Recent changes is available on mobile. Go to settings page and select "advanced mode" and it will appear. Jdlrobson (talk) 19:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

If you have any issues using the mobile view mode of Wikipedia, drop me a line. I edit almost exclusively from mobile and can probably give you a few tips. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:11, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Someone left a message that's a bit strange

Can I remove the message from my own talk page? What should I do with this user? Justjourney (talk) 04:13, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

I already left a warning template Justjourney (talk) 04:13, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Looks like it's gone, but, yeah, you can remove anything from your own talk page. Just be aware if you remove things like warnings or the like, they still apply. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:21, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Reinstate List of goat breeds on Simple Wikipedia

I want to reinstate this article in Simple English Wikipedia. Can someone help me in solving this problem here now? 2409:40F4:A8:2BD9:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 15:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I've been reverting as per Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/List of goat breeds although that RFD was in 2021 and consensus does change, An IP did remove all of the redlinks in this revision but I'm not so sure that this is any better?,

That being said we do have List of bus routes in London which is also redlinked/unlinked so seems unfair to have that page exist and not this one (something up until now I didn't think about when reverting), Anyway I'd have no objections to the goat breed list article existing but felt consensus should be sought, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 16:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

No. That IP who removed all the red links is me only. I am telling that you should reinstate and expand the article by yourself now itself here on. 2409:40F4:A8:2BD9:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Davey2010 That RfD said "since the entire list of goat breeds is missing it don't really makes sense", so I don't think the reason applies anymore. 169.229.202.227 (talk) 17:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Indeed, The article was only a short stub when it was nominated, Duly noted, Apologies for the unintentional disruption, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:32, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

No, other editors can help out too, it's just not @Davey2010. ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 16:41, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Considering there is a (admittedly poorly visited) RfD, it's wise to see if an article now meets the criteria (for a list, that is W:WP:NLIST). I do think there's nothing inheritedly wrong with this article existing. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:46, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment @Lee Vilenski, Indeed I agree I don't think there's anything wrong with this article existing either, I just thought because of the RFD that it had to stay as a redirect but yeah consensus changes all the time, I've reverted myself, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 17:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! 117.231.194.236 (talk) 08:12, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

Some one Guide me please

We can create article on a topic that have article on English Wikipedia. If such article are not present on simple Wikipedia? Bensebgli (talk) 15:28, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Bensebgli, Yes you can but you need to simplify words and sentences, Please Wikipedia:About and BE850 to get a better idea, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

I want to tag this page for quick deletion what is the right tag for this page to delete? Bensebgli (talk) 22:05, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

 Done - tagged, You can use {{QD}} or you can install WP:Twinkle and it'll do everything for you :), Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 23:14, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

What would it take to start a project here?

I would like to start a project here to help grow the coverage of Minnesota. Is there some way I could do this (I don't know if this is a good example, but similar to 50,000 Challenge On the English Wiki) I've been working on doing this myself but I just wanted to know if I was able to turn this into a proper effort. You can see some pages i've created for this already (See Hennepin County Library, Metro Transit (Minnesota), Minnesota Star Tribune). Thanks, Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Ieditrandomarticles, We generally host Wikiprojects in userspaces (ie User:Ferien/WikiProject United Kingdom) but generally speaking Wikiprojects here aren't a big thing here and probably won't help with your goals. The best way I can think of of growing the coverage of Minnisota topics is by adding those topics to Minnisota related articles or topics overall but in a way where you're not just spamming those articles everywhere,

You could create list articles or taking Metro Transit as an example; you could check where the Metro Transit's linked on Enwiki and sort of bring the layout here if that makes sense (So if there's a section at en:Minnesota then you could copypaste that section to Minnesota and then simplify it), Hope this makes sense, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:16, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, Thank you. Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 19:30, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Disambig pages (March 2025)

BYD / BYD.--I think that should get kept. Thoughts? 80.67.37.2 (talk) 13:50, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Isn't the content entirely copied from en? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 23:32, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

@Cactusisme: That's only a problem if there is complex text. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I was just curious since almost all the pages are red links. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 01:33, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

There can be red links in articles that aren't copied from enwiki. In addition, it's common for comprehensive dab pages to have a lot of red links: it's good to list all possibilities even if we don't have the articles. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 01:40, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

You need to give attribution though? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 01:43, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

How do I remove this?

This is what it looks like

Sorry if I have been using this page too much, but on my article Metro Transit (Minnesota) it says [[File: |200px]] on the photomontage in the public transit infobox. I can't figure out how to get it removed.
Thanks for your help. Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 21:36, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

@Ieditrandomarticles The infobox template expected a filename such as "Cats.jpg", not a collage template. It hasn't been updated since 2013(!) and I've just imported a new version from the English Wikipedia. Let me know if anything breaks. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:52, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

It seems to be working right now, Thanks! Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 00:56, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Proposal - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see, the heading of this post is a bit long. I propose we remove "the free encyclopedia" from the webpage title on pages here. Currently "Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" is displayed in every browser tab. English Wikipedia used to have "Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" there but they changed it to just "Wikipedia", and here it is even longer. To change this, an admin would edit MediaWiki:Pagetitle to say just "$1 - Simple English Wikipedia". Can we get consensus for this change? 192.83.149.205 (talk) 21:32, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

This makes sense if we are trying to be consistent with enwiki, seeing as the edit summary of the last change was "match en.wiki and the tagline here". Ternera (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

We do not think that it should be matched given that every project is run independently, so the proposal for removing the said part of the sentence is not a bad idea. Steven1991 (talk) 14:34, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Weak oppose There is one difference that needs to be called out. The logo for enwiki explicitly says Wikipedia / The Free Encyclopedia, so that phrase which is key to what makes Wikipedia so valuable, still remains on every page on en wiki. Our logo is different, with Simple English below the image. If we remove the phrase "the free encyclopedia" from MW Pagetitle, that phrase is now gone except for the main page. I'm not 100% sure I'm in favor of that. I get the points main on the 2016 VPP discussion, but it gets called out in more than a few comments on the VPP thread that "the free encyclopedia" is in the logo, so duplicating it didn't make sense. Weak opppose at this point, but can be convinced. Ravensfire (talk) 22:45, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Huh, so the French Wikipedia doesn't have the MediaWiki:Pagetitle file at all. German has the file, but it looks like they have that style hidden in a common style sheet. Interesting. Ravensfire (talk) 23:22, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

• I'd support in leu of the logo being replaced as Enwiki's logo has the tagline "The Free Encyclopedia",

Also just to note on Opera, Simples tagline appears differently for each page;

Special:SpecialPages says "Special pages - Simple English Wikipedia, the"

Wikipedia:About says "Wikipedia:About - Simple English Wikipedia, "

Wikipedia:Contact us says "Wikipedia:Contact us - Simple English"

Also I've just noticed Main_Page for me says "Wikipedia" and that's it.... that's weird.... Anyway given the whole tagline appears to show for some browsers and not them all I'd therefore support removing this providing the logo can be updated at the same time to include the tagline, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:55, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Brevity as a secondary and optional objective?

Hello! I understand that the main goal of Simple English Wikipedia is to use basic vocabulary and simple grammar to help people who may find standard English difficult to read for various reasons. I also know that some topics may need longer articles to explain clearly, and I’m not against that when necessary.

Still, I wonder if there has ever been discussion about encouraging brevity — writing more concise articles — as a secondary goal. I am not suggesting that content should be incomplete or overly reduced, just that, where possible, we aim for clarity through conciseness in addition to simple language. In my view, using fewer words can also make information easier to understand, especially for readers who may feel overwhelmed by long texts.

I have written multiple regular English Wikipedia articles, and I am now interested in bringing them to Simple English Wikipedia. In my usual work, I tend to include a significant amount of detail. But here, I feel I can make a more distinct and helpful contribution by not only simplifying the language but also making the writing more concise.

Has this idea been discussed before, or might it be worth considering?

Thanks! Al83tito (talk) 18:33, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Sung-Yoon Lee bibliography (regarding Sung-Yoon Lee) - one or two of these articles, might be okay to have.--If you write simple, but "brief", then i do not have a problem with you doing that.--To me, it takes some extra effort, in trying to write Simple English; I do not add "make an extra effort to be brief", on my checklist of how i write, when i make changes to a simple-english article. 2001:2020:323:C7BB:D15D:E89F:8DCC:4E83 (talk) 01:59, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

@Al83tito: I like to be terse when I write. However, with simple language, you sometimes have to use more words to convey something. There are some specific expressions I see here where I try to reduce the number of words, but other than that I take it on a case-by-case basis. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:19, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

"2025 leak of military plan against Houthi rebels"

Title (at simple-wiki)?--I wrote a paragraph in "Pete Hegseth". (I or anyone else (arguably) have enough to start an article, with that paragraph.)

It is not obvious that we will use the same title as at English-wiki.

My favorite:
2025 leak of military plan against Houthi rebels. However, "U.S." is not mentioned; The controversy is portrayed to primarily affect U.S. politics (and elections in both 2028 and 2026). Therefore, one could argue that "U.S." is not an important part of the title (because it is obvious).

Possible redirects:
2025 United States leak of military plan
United States leak of military plan against Houthi rebels; no year, is questionable.
2025 United States military plan leak; i think the title should say something about Houthi.
Signal-gate (U.S. politics)
Signalgate. That could (arguably) be confused with 'Logic gates' related to Boolean algebra.
Signal-gate (year 2025). Maybe okay, while "2025 Signalgate" sounds like an address, or like a television program "Hollywood 45123".
Thoughts? 46.15.60.62 (talk) 06:10, 27 March 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:323:C7BB:D0BF:35D0:3882:3F (talk) 06:22, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

For now probably a year and what it is. If I talk about the Watergate scandal, most people will probably know, without year. For the moment, likely we need to see the extent of the issue, and if in s few weeks/months a name has established itself. Eptalon (talk) 06:14, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Hmm. That Watergate-thingy was named after a building (or building complex), where a burglary happened.--On the other hand, the leak in 2025 happened on a not-Whatsapp, not-Telegram (software), not-Teams (software) but on Signal (software) or Signal (platform).--My point: it is (arguably) easy to associate "Watergate" with a physical thing.--Not so in the case of the Telegram controversy, uh, Signal controversy /Signal-gate. 2001:2020:323:C7BB:D0BF:35D0:3882:3F (talk) 06:36, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Telegrams are a very old technology, so having telegram in the name is likely a bad idea. Signal-gate might be an electrical component as you say. Eptalon (talk) 06:46, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Please move "my" article to 2025 Yemen attack leak. 2001:2020:323:C7BB:D0BF:35D0:3882:3F (talk) 06:37, 27 March 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:323:C7BB:D0BF:35D0:3882:3F (talk) 07:18, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Please move "my" article to 2025 U.S. leak of its attack in Yemen. 2001:2020:323:C7BB:D0BF:35D0:3882:3F (talk) 07:16, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

2025 U.S. leak before its attack in Yemen? 2001:2020:323:C7BB:B06A:7576:2179:5D07 (talk) 07:46, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

SEWP's UTC

Hi! So, recently, my location changed from UTC -5 to UTC -4 because of Daylight Saving Time. However, SEWP's servers still thinks the time is UTC -5, giving me incorrect time conversions. Is there any way to fix it? ⯎ Asteralee ⯎ 21:38, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Asteralee In Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering, is your timezone set to the correct region? MediaWiki doesn't let you select a time zone manually, rather, it requires you to select a region/locale, that way it can handle DST without the user needing to change anything manually. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 21:47, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Fehufanga It's set to America/New York, which is where it is supposed to be. ⯎ Asteralee ⯎ 21:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

@Asteralee Huh, I tried switching to America/New York only on simplewiki and globally, but it still gives me UTC +7 timestamps on talk page messages. The RC seems to be in UTC -4. I tried purging my cache and it still shows up as UTC +7. It might be worth opening a phabricator ticket about this. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:15, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

A thing i noticed

Guys did you realise that ai-generated content here on Wikipedia is made mainly by ip users? i have a theory:they are new users that instead of reading project pages about how to create a page on wiki and etc they ask ais (mainly ChatGPT) about how to edit and etc and then they ask the ai to generate a text for a article and they copypaste the text even though it has mistakes like promotional text and etc.

But a weird thing is that after copypasting the ai-generated content they just disappear never coming back to edit again so they probably only make one or two small fast edits before disappearing anyways i hope you guys understand that best regards. 179.109.143.190 (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Your comment is completely incorrect, AI content is created by IPs and user accounts both of whom are short-term (disappear) and long-term (stay forever/ until blocked). –Davey2010^Talk 20:30, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting me but the reason i said this is because i saw mainly ip editors making ai content even though i saw some registred users doing this as well also you are right some users also keep making ai content until they are blocked and their creations are deleted and yeah again thanks for correcting me. 179.109.143.190 (talk) 20:38, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

No worries, Welcome to Simple Wikipedia :), Happy editing, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:45, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

What should I do if I think a page should be deleted

I think the page Chadnav should be deleted. When I search for it on the English web the only results are: usernames, this wiki, and a copy paste on the kidzsearch wiki. I do not think this is notable enough to need a Wikipedia article. What should I do? Flapjack06 (talk) 22:05, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Are you referring to Chadnav? If you believe that an article doesn't meet W:WP:GNG then you can nominate for deletion, instructions can be found at WP:RFD Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:46, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

I was referring to Chadnav I nominated it for deletion now. Thank you for the help. Flapjack06 (talk) 23:41, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion for "my" new title (article)

Title-suggestion: "Wacker Burghausen (club for several sports)".

Start of article: Wacker Burghausen is a sports club for c. 20 sports in Germany. Its football (organisation or) club is (also) SV Wacker Burghausen.

Advice (or suggestion): Do not change the title of the 'football-team article', and do not merge into it all kinds of non-football info. (It will royally annoy many 'football-people' if Simple-wiki starts 'messing with the football-team article'; If the article was okay for all these years, then it is totally uncool to make such a major change now. That might become a major sentiment, whether spoken or left to fester.)

Another thing: German-wiki uses the title "Wacker Burghausen"; En-wiki uses "SV Wacker Burghausen".

(I came across the overall topic, while working on our "Bundesliga (wrestling)").

(The German-wiki article, it is only one about the club, see link,
de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wacker_Burghausen and the en-wiki article.--Thoughts?

Reminder: on this website people choose what topics they want to work on, for free. (I have not planned using any of my time, on re-doing 'the football-team article'.) 2001:2020:C321:99F5:F093:1C3D:1969:28FB (talk) 16:58, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Move discussion to Talk:Wacker Burghausen (club for several sports). 2001:2020:C321:99F5:F093:1C3D:1969:28FB (talk) 17:53, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Another thing i noticed

Hey guys i noticed another thing:i saw some editors here (mainly ip users) editing articles by replacing the characteristic simple words sentences and text from here with more complex ones for example an ip edited the hyundai i40 article where he replaced the simple words and sentences with more complex ones his edits got reverted by Davey2010.

He also did the same thing in other hyundai car articles and etc in my theory the editors who do that are probably from the en version who are confused that simple english wiki dosent have the detailed info that en wiki has so they edit the articles to have complex words ignoring the fact that the readers of this version have more difficulty to understand complex words so yeah (sorry if i did a mistake) and i hope you all understand best regards. 179.109.143.190 (talk) 18:30, 2 April 2025 (UTC)