Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 167

A kind of "Foreign relation", yes or no?

Foreign relation.--What if Country T changes its laws, so that goods (or products) from the U.S. , do not have to (customs-tax or) customs duty, when those products come to Country T, so that the products can be sold somewhere in Country T?--Can that maybe be mentioned in "Foreign relations" section, of wiki-article? Does it belong in another kind of section? In my opinion (or feeling), i do not think it belongs in Economy (section).--Link (not English),

vg.no/nyheter/i/25e8eG/taiwan-fjerner-toll-paa-amerikanske-varer
. 2001:2020:C325:AB23:F9E8:7D95:F380:72A6 (talk) 16:59, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Dealing with SPAM

Hi User:National_School_of_Education's user page is clearly advertising. I was going to nominate it for speedy deletion as such, but I couldn't figure out how to do it and apparently you guys don't have a page explaining the criteria. Or at least I couldn't find one. So can someone please delete their page? Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 18:49, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

@Adamant1 The criteria are here: Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Quick deletion. For this page it would be {{QD|G11}}. 108.81.226.61 (talk) 18:54, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:56, 6 April 2025 (UTC)

Reinstate Rooster on Simple Wikipedia

I want to reinstate this article in Simple English Wikipedia. Can someone help me in solving this problem here now? 117.231.194.183 (talk) 12:26, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't think there's any need for that. If necessary, you can simply expand the Chicken article. BZPN (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

That article talks about chickens normally without any genders and i want someone to expand the article as an article about male chickens now here immediately off. 120.56.99.0 (talk) 13:06, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

I agree with BZPN. We don't need gender-specific articles about animals. How much is there to say about roosters that doesn't apply to chickens in general? -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:24, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

This much is there. See this article now about gender specific animals. All this: https://animals.howstuffworks.com/birds/what-cluck-case-gender-changing-hen.htm#:~:text=Hen%20feathers%20tend%20to%20be,the%20ridge%20of%20their%20back. 120.56.99.0 (talk) 14:53, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

You could describe it as a section of an article about chickens - it's not a separate species, so there is no reason to create a new article in which half of the content from the main article will be repeated anyway. BZPN (talk) 15:01, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, then you create that article now and i quit. 117.242.94.232 (talk) 17:28, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

117, Just to point out, over at the English Wikipedia en:Rooster redirects to en:Chicken .... so if they don't have a gender-specific article then why do we need one?,

As BZPN correctly notes if the article were to be created it would be a copypaste of what's already at Chicken so readers would gain nothing from having this article (other than having to click and scroll more to find the information they may want/need). –Davey2010^Talk 17:51, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

Davey2010, that article, Rooster, itself already had content before it was deleted and turned into a redirect for this article, Chicken, so you should just copy and paste that content in this article now itself immediately, that is my solution to this problem now, so do it please now. 120.56.99.71 (talk) 06:47, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Why should we have an article for "Rooster" when we don't have one for "hen"? -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:00, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

We should have an article for Rooster because it exists and create an article for Hen as it does not exist yet, so that this problem is destroyed now and this article flourishes along with that article now itself. 2409:40F4:100A:54E1:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 07:23, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

No, but we could have a section in Chicken on terminology, like enwiki does. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Then you do it by yourself and change that article. 2409:40F4:9:4294:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 08:46, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

No, thanks. I'm not the one who wants the article. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:34, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, i will create that article and copy paste that. 120.56.167.178 (talk) 12:11, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I can't edit it because of an error, someone help! 120.56.169.92 (talk) 14:36, 30 March 2025 (UTC)

I edited it into an article now and it flourishes! 117.196.146.223 (talk) 09:47, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, we should have a section in Chicken on terminology, like English Wikipedia does. 120.56.210.101 (talk) 18:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Too many pages in Category:Europe

Can you verify this? 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F404:19C5:84B:7057 (talk) 15:50, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know, I'm taking care of it now. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 17:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

I sadly don't have as much time as I thought :( So if anybody else wants to, I'd really appreciate the help. Or I can do it, but later. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:15, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

There are 24 pages right now. That's a reasonable number, although diffusing further would be fine if there are categories to diffuse into. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:19, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Demographic evolution in table form for populated areas of Slovakia

I would like to add: Demographic evolution in table form by places in Slovakia. Anyone against?

This is part of a multi-"project" (Modul:SK & Template:SK). Example of table: hr:Fintice#Stanovništvo. Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 17:22, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

That sounds good to me. Just remember to use a full stop (5.8) instead of a comma (5,8) for a decimal separator. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F404:19C5:84B:7057 (talk) 17:42, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Go ahead. It is better to have data presented in tables. Steven1991 (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

 Done simplewiki is "infected" with template and module SK.

If helpful post, then fine

"SAM" is an article about a person that seems non-notable.

This link 'needs a second opinion',
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=SAM&oldid=10176036

I am not going to take any of this, to AfD; However, i am likely to support, if someone does take it to AfD.

Another thing, come time, (then) SAM should redirect to a disambig page, in my opinion.--Thoughts? 2001:2020:C325:AB23:ADE0:3EA7:373D:A13B (talk) 20:47, 7 April 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:C325:AB23:ADE0:3EA7:373D:A13B (talk) 20:47, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. I adjusted the link so it goes to the right revision. The user who created this page is linked to en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Japansonglove/Archive. The page should redirect to a disambig page. Also Special:Contribs/Miinorax should be blocked for impersonating Minorax. 71.202.215.54 (talk) 20:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

For more context, this is a long-term spammer, and the references are not related to the subject at all; they're related to other people with similar names. 71.202.215.54 (talk) 20:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

If  Done, as it seems, then thanks. 2001:2020:C325:AB23:6D2F:C53A:24ED:CF32 (talk) 07:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster

Twinkle error

My Twinkle tool is not working specially rollback, Good Faith, Revert Vandal features. When I try to click on rollback it gives reply "Grabbing data of earlier revisions: The "token parameter must be set"." How I can fix this error. Anyone can help me? Bensebgli (talk) 23:28, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bensebgli Try clearing you cache and refreshing the page. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 23:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks @Cactusisme. I did but still not working. I also try gave some tries by logging out, clearing browser history, browsers caches. Bensebgli (talk) 23:36, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Try using a different browser or on mobile? @Bensebgli Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 23:37, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes Mobile. Bensebgli (talk) 23:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Try on another device. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 23:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hmm okay. Means no fix for such error? Bensebgli ^(Talk) 00:01, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

It seems to work for others. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 00:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 00:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bensebgli Do you have TwinkleGlobal installed? (See Meta:User:Xiplus/TwinkleGlobal), This will enable you to use it on any Wikipedia I think, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but it has minimum features. Try deactivating and activating twinkle. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 00:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Cactusisme They have Twinkle installed via https://vi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Plantaest/TwinkleMobile but I don't know if that's maintained or what, Their common.js page looks a mess which makes me wonder if this is all because it's been installed incorrectly?, –Davey2010^Talk 00:14, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Doesn't twinkle mobile require minerva.js instead? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 00:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bensebgli Try removing all of the Twinkle stuff from User:Bensebgli/common.js and replace it with:

mw.loader.load('//vi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Plantaest/TwinkleMobile.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript'); // User:Plantaest/TwinkleMobile by vi:User:Plantaest

–Davey2010^Talk 00:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I don't know where I made a mistake. Yes I've installed Twinkle via [1]. It was working, but 2-3 days ago it stopped working on Rollback. Only Undo feature available to use. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 00:20, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Interesting, I'm wondering if there's a global issue somewhere as I wasn't able to revert anyone using en:WP:Redwarn today, Twinkle worked though so that's weird, Sorry I'm lost as to what the issue can be –Davey2010^Talk 00:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Might want to check discord. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 00:24, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Still not working. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 02:03, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

undo is not a feature of twinkle Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 00:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

It works for me Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 00:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Reinstate Animal cruelty in Simple Wikipedia now

I want to reinstate this article in Simple English Wikipedia. Can someone help me in solving this problem here now? 120.56.166.70 (talk) 16:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@120.56.166.70, No need as we have Cruelty to animals which Animal cruelty redirects too, This also matches Enwiki (en:Cruelty to animals) so I'm seeing no valid reason to have 2 articles on 1 subject, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you! 120.56.166.70 (talk) 16:41, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

In English Wikipedia, Animal cruelty has no content, so it is redirected to Cruelty to animals, which has content. In Simple English Wikipedia, Animal cruelty has content, so it is to be made into its article off. 120.56.166.70 (talk) 17:06, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

We don't need two articles for the same subject. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:34, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Then delete this old article and other outdated redirects immediately! 117.231.195.58 (talk) 06:34, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Redirects are not articles. We can have multiple redirects, but only one article on a topic. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:40, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Then we can move this article to that article now! 61.2.49.66 (talk) 17:00, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

The article Cruelty to animals is far superior to the text in the pre-redirect article Animal cruelty, so we would not use that version. It is fine how it is. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:02, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay, then you can move Animal cruelty to Cruelty to animals and also create a section on terminology on Chicken for Rooster like it is in English Wikipedia as to be kept of in Simple English Wikipedia. 61.2.49.66 (talk) 17:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

The article is not protected, anyone can edit it. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:25, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but i don't know how to edit that, so you edit that article now and improve that article now. 120.56.171.195 (talk) 19:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

We don't really support orders to do items. Wikipedia is a collaborative space, but users are allowed to edit whichever articles they like. We don't respond well to demands Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:21, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I just want you to help me in editing articles. 120.56.171.195 (talk) 05:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

USERFY (April 09) ?

Race and health in the United States.--Should admins(?) be asked to USERFY? If it is not ready to be published, then i am fine with this article getting USERFY. Thoughts?--An article can be in poor shape, and sometimes i willstill make interwiki (language link) and/or put tags in place. (I see little hope for this article, unless anyone voices any kind of commitment, within reasonable time.)--I am not asking who should (or can) fix the article. 2001:2020:8355:8E83:219E:3E5F:2C7F:6D47 (talk) 18:45, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

It's a copy of the first two paragraphs from the en wiki article and does not appear to be simplified. Interwiki links updated on wikidata and the language chooser shows up. Without the rest of hte article being pulled over, there's a lot of information and context missing. Ravensfire (talk) 20:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Nominated for QD,
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Race_and_health_in_the_United_States&diff=10181172&oldid=10179754
. 2001:2020:8355:8E83:616E:BB15:179D:D31D (talk) 04:49, 10 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster
 Done (and quick-Deleted). 2001:2020:8355:8E83:600C:92CD:E098:2BC1 (talk) 20:59, 10 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster

Redirects to Wiktionary

I'm sure we've discussed this a million times in the past, but I'm curious about the current consensus. How do we feel about redirects to Wiktionary? See these short pages. I thought in the past we didn't want this. Maybe that thought has changed. They seem rather useless to me. A red link in this case is almost more useful, as it may encourage somebody to actually write something. This isn't an RfD, I'm just curious what the community thinks of these. --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 23:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I am more in favor of linking it straight to Wiktionary wherever needed. Redirects don't work crosswiki; and it makes no sense to create page with soft redirect when we can link directly or create a wikipedia page wherever applicable. BRP ^ever 01:09, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

An advantage of redirects is that if we ever create an article for the title, everything that links to it will automatically be linking to the new article. With direct-to-Wiktionary links, if we create an article, direct links to Wiktionary would have to be converted. I know I've found cases where a direct link to Wiktionary was in an article when there was an article it could point to instead.

I don't really like either option, though. I prefer to either use different language for the term or explain it. I don't like for readers to have to go to another site to understand what they're reading.

By the way, Category:Redirects to Wiktionary may not have all of our redirects to Wiktionary. It only has the ones that use the {{Wiktionary redirect}} template. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of pushing people offsite. I'd rather we didn't have an article on each individual term, but rather these terms all linked to one page based here that can either have the desired glossary of terms in the simple word list, or it has a basic overview and then a link to the Wiktionary.

For instance above would link to Glossary of simple terms#above or similar. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:29, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:RefToolbar - Cite label missing

Hi, the "Cite" label on Wikipedia:RefToolbar (WikiEditor) has disappeared as has whatever label used to be for the down arrow,

The RefToolbar now shows as a right arrow only (no Cite label next to it)

Click on that right arrow

A down arrow, cite name icon (tick) and cite error check (red cross) show underneath

the down arrow when you click on it shows cite web, news, book and journal (down arrow used to have a label)

Assuming this is an error somewhere?, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:28, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

Dubious (March 2008)

New article, Timashyovsk.--Not ready to be published (and i 'feel' it might have problems that make it ready for QD).--USERFY, is an idea, i think.--Anyone (else) can take this to AfD, if so desired.--(If the article is AI slop, then i have seen it worse.)--Note: i have not added language-link (interwiki); I am not looking for info about who should fix the article.--Good luck finding justification for QD, since i have not yet. 2001:2020:C325:AB23:6D2F:C53A:24ED:CF32 (talk) 07:44, 8 April 2025 (UTC)

Correction: April 08 March 2008. 2001:2020:8355:8E83:219E:3E5F:2C7F:6D47 (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster

The article now has 'the Scarlet Letter of A.I. slop' - the {.{AI notice}} --I will not (or expect not to) improve this article. But the next similar article, i might consider cutting away the A.I. slop at the end of the article, and that might be enough to keep. 2001:2020:C335:8778:55CA:2CB1:3E2D:5594 (talk) 11:10, 12 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster

Improve request

Can somebody improve this article? i think it's has a AI written article. — Raayaan9911 16:10, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

@Raayaan9911: I did some on the lead and the first section. I also did some general formatting. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:58, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Raayaan9911 01:33, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

"Notability"

I was recently thinking that for a word used so prominently on simple wikipedia, "notability" could hardly be considered a very simple word. Out of the three commonly-used guideline simple wordlists I could find(VOA, 1500, and LIST), none of them use the word "notable". While I understand that some words will not appear in a guideline wordlist, I think the idea of using the word "notability" is confusing to non-English readers: the word "to note or write" becomes a noun that means "something that is worthy of note". I don't find the connection from "note" to "important" very evident, and I believe there are better alternatives to the word. Instead, perhaps "important" and "importance" could be used, which has a more straightforward meaning, and is on all three wordlists that I have mentioned. Or maybe another alternative would work. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 01:16, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Whilst I do think that we should try and simplify our guidance and guidelines to be more accessible, a reminder that the language of the encyclopedia is for the content of the encyclopedia in mainspace, and not necessarily used within the governance of the site.

On changing the wording, notability doesn't actually correspond to important. There are arguably very important things that are not-notable and plenty of things that are notable and aren't interesting or important at all. Generally we use the word "notable" simply because people have written about it, which is the level we require for things like GNG.

I agree that it would be nice if we could expand on what we mean in our guidance and change things wherever possible to be more simple. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)

Maybe we can add a short definition in parentheses after the initial use of the word in various places. Kdammers (talk) 21:57, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Just as long as the doses are kept small?

redirect: Ostrazismus (Psychologie).--This links to nothing (and there probably is no requirement for such).--Some things might be somewhat strange to some people (or even to myself).--The redirect does touch upon one of the longest discussions on Simple-wiki, during the last ten years.--No big problem yet (is what i am feeling, or thinking). 2001:2020:8355:8E83:E06D:D79C:2CED:297A (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

I have no idea what you are suggesting - this is currently redirected to social rejection. I'm not sure I think we need this redirect (why "psychologie"?), but it does go somewhere. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:56, 11 April 2025 (UTC)

"Psychologie" is from one of the c. 6000 languages that has a word for psychology.--With German language, now 'knocked off the list', there are 5999 languages left.--For starters i am thinking that some user should maybe encouraged to have
[.[social rejection|Ostrazismus (Psychologie)]], on their user-page, instead of a redirect.--If this is just a one-off thing in mainspace, then maybe one can ignore this (or see thru one's fingers).--If this post gives an idea of what i am suggesting, then fine. 2001:2020:C335:8778:91CA:D62E:75A9:1A39 (talk) 03:27, 12 April 2025 (UTC)/original poster /2001:2020:C335:8778:91CA:D62E:75A9:1A39 (talk) 03:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

I think we can safely remove this redirect. In English, people would likely refer to it as ostracism, so the source of the redirect should be ostracism psychology) or similar. Ostracism was an Athenian procedure of banning someone from the city. Eptalon (talk) 06:51, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

i hav deleted the redirect, people in this Wikipedia are unlikely to search for it in this way Eptalon (talk) 09:00, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks! 2001:2020:C335:8778:4968:5C7:9D71:2881 (talk) 04:59, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

Help writing an article

Hello, can anyone help me write an article? I am not very fluent in English, but I can send the text of the article and its references to someone and that person can write the article correctly and publish it. Can anyone help me? Voxplusetc (talk) 23:32, 14 April 2025 (UTC)

You have a question, on your talk page, about your idea.--Please answer there. (And on that page, someone might maybe care to inform you, that it is desirable that users register wikipedia-accounts - with user name.)--If the post on your talk-page is helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:C335:8778:C27:1BDB:CA9:35F6 (talk) 13:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

please don't ask others to write articles for you. It's a type of W:WP:PROXYEDITING. I would recommend writing what you have into your userspace (such as user:voxplusetc/sandbox) and ask someone to help improve it. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month 2025: Invitation

Please help translate to your language

Hello, dear Wikipedians!

Wikimedia Ukraine, in cooperation with the MFA of Ukraine and Ukrainian Institute, has launched the fifth edition of writing challenge "Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month", which lasts from 14th April until 16th May 2025. The campaign is dedicated to famous Ukrainian artists of cinema, music, literature, architecture, design, and cultural phenomena of Ukraine that are now part of world heritage. We accept contributions in every language!

The most active contesters will receive prizes.

If you are interested in coordinating long-term community engagement for the campaign and becoming a local ambassador, we would love to hear from you! Please let us know your interest.

We invite you to take part and help us improve the coverage of Ukrainian culture on Wikipedia in your language! Also, we plan to set up a banner to notify users of the possibility to participate in such a challenge! OlesiaLukaniuk (WMUA) (talk)

16:11, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Vote now on the revised UCoC Enforcement Guidelines and U4C Charter

The voting period for the revisions to the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines ("UCoC EG") and the UCoC's Coordinating Committee Charter is open now through the end of 1 May (UTC) (find in your time zone). Read the information on how to participate and read over the proposal before voting on the UCoC page on Meta-wiki.

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 of the EG and Charter was planned and implemented by the U4C. Further information will be provided in the coming months about the review of the UCoC itself. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, you may review the U4C Charter.

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

In cooperation with the U4C -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 00:34, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Articles that does not have title (or redirect) at En-wiki.

"Scientific farmer".--However, there are two articles (there), that use the phrase Scientific farmer.--There is a science dealing with agriculture; Agricultural sciences.--First of all, i think that the article "Scientific farmer", needs to 'disappear'. At any rate, one should maybe consider if the phrase "Scientific farmer" should be mentioned in any articles (and if so, which articles). Thoughts? 2001:2020:C335:8778:C27:1BDB:CA9:35F6 (talk) 13:27, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

You cannot "disappear" articles, but you can request a QD or an RFD. ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 13:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

You should either nominate an article for deletion or don't do so. We don't need a discussion on every article that gets nominated for deletion. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:41, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I did not find your comment constructive.--However, i have now added something to "Agriculture",

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agriculture&diff=10193270&oldid=10028003
.--Less is more, might apply to wikipedia-users, from time to time. 2001:2020:C335:8778:C27:1BDB:CA9:35F6 (talk) 18:10, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

I did not find your comment constructive. - I wouldn't recommend just ignoring it. The suitable location for a discussion on whether or not an article should be deleted is at WP:AfD Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:01, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

cow tools W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:45, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Agricultural scientist, is a 'real thing'.
Farmer science, too.--To be brief: It is not (yet) a sure thing, that QD or AfD is the best medicine, for this case. 2001:2020:C335:8778:C27:1BDB:CA9:35F6 (talk) 17:35, 15 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster

Agriculturist, see
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculturist
, is another 'real thing'.--One (highly possible) outcome of the discussion, is that i will say, "I am gonna write article-stub XYZ, if anyone nominates for redirect-plus-QD; or only AfD". 2001:2020:C335:8778:C27:1BDB:CA9:35F6 (talk) 17:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Now, there is some helpful information, at Agriculture#Disciplines,
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agriculture&diff=10193399&oldid=10193270
. Anyone can consider to nominate Scientific farmer, for QD or AfD (and i expect that i will "vote" at AfD, in a heartbeat).--Note to self: If there are procedural complaints, then let someone else do the wiki-lawyering. 2001:2020:C335:8778:9C70:2E4F:20DA:CBC0 (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster
If googling, "Scientific farmer", then do you get any good hits? I believe not; It is likely a sort-of descriptive phrase, that never 'caught on'.--I did some work in the "Agriculture" article, and now my work seems done in this thread. Good luck while i fix articles (but not Scientific farmer). 2001:2020:C335:8778:9C70:2E4F:20DA:CBC0 (talk) 19:32, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Not mentioned at En-wiki:
"Farmer science",
"Farming science".--The Science of farming, on the other hand, is a subset of Agricultural science. 2001:2020:8341:83A0:45D7:1B3F:3DA6:81F9 (talk) 05:48, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Longer first paragraphs

On mobile view, an infobox shows up after the first paragraph, so it becomes a bit of a problem when the first paragraph of an article is very short. For example Saturn now just has two sentences before the info box, which don't exactly draw readers in. Just throwing this out here as a concern of mine. TagUser (talk) 02:14, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Pretty sure enwiki has similar mobile infobox behaviour.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 06:58, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Trying to write the article in this way (even if you have the tools to check all standard resolutions) is a diagnostic nightmare and would constantly break in future edits if/every time someone edits the first sentence of the page. There is also the issue of different levels of zoom in the browser and people with extra/large screen text. And all of this to write the sentence in a way (which potentially is less easy to understand for some readers) that changes the position of the text on-screen according to the infobox for the author/editors vanity and ego, which ought to be absent from your articles if on Wikipedia, along with personal writing style.

Let the reader be drawn in by the topic (which they came here for) and pause in the middle of the sentence to scroll for 2 seconds, not the opening sentence (which should be written to make it contain the first bit of basic information or basic summary of the topic), and write it in a way that hopefully they can understand W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:43, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Trying to solve a technical issue

Please see [2] and [3]. They're the same code, yet they appear different on mobile view. I'm looking into this, but I haven't found anything yet. It might have some connection to css, but I'm not sure. TagUser (talk) 16:37, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

What specifically are you seeing different? I can see that the subheader (Capital city) shows left aligned on mobile and centered on web, and the font sizes are slightly different. I know the font-size would be affected by the mobile styling, I suspect that's also true for the subheader. Are there other differences? If you're using a laptop/pc brower, try using the developer tools (usually F12) to view the final styling and what stylesheets it pulled from (and the other) to determine that final style. Ravensfire (talk) 17:26, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ravensfire They're two different links, one on simplewiki and one on enwiki. You see the difference, don't you? I'm referring to the mobile version only. TagUser (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, I know about this one. It's to do with something we don't have set up here. I'll try and drag out what was said when I asked before. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:01, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Apparently the difference is between [4] and [5]. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:39, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for finding that! I wonder why simplewiki used to have the line centered even though nothing was changed here. Nevertheless, now a bureaucrat can import MediaWiki:Minerva.css from enwiki and solve the problem. TagUser (talk) 23:02, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

I think it's a change from an infobox module that wouldn't normally show up, but the Minerva skin isn't making that change. I'm not quite technical enough to know if all we need to do is simply import it, but it's worth fixing. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:10, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

Could a bureaucrat become interface admin and import this? @BRPever, Eptalon, and Ferien: Then we can check if the problem is solved. TagUser (talk) 03:03, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I did try importing it; it works on the skin; but still no change in the sitewide mobile version. BRP ^ever 07:00, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Does seem to be working when I tried using other browser. BRP ^ever 07:25, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Looks working to me now.

You may have had caching issues before that.

Grand news. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:29, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

It does work for me. More importantly, it works on the mobile browser when logged out. TagUser (talk) 15:49, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Sigh, I just remembered that I have a script on en wiki that if I open a mobile link there from a desktop browser, it changes the link to the desktop version. Wasn't even seeing what I should have. Glad the issues has been identified though. If this was tied to the Minerva style, I probably wouldn't have spotted it as I use a different one. Ravensfire (talk) 23:10, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

pageviews / page views

"Pageview"is an extremely rare word. It might not be obvious to our users that it is a compound noun. I suggest replacing it with "page views." Both words are common ones. Kdammers (talk) 05:45, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Typically I use whatever format already exists and go with that, like if there is an article for pageviews if not a wiki definition. If I think that a certain word or format is going to be confusing for some people I use mine and refcat redirect the link to the one I use, to the format that already exists. Pageview and page views are both the same thing however the latter is less likely to be on the list of simple Wiki words to use, or it is going to be less likely to be on there, while the two words separate are more likely. For these reasons I think the two words should replace the compound version of themselves W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Minority-view is suggesting that we wrtie page-view.--(I am not suggesting using "page-view", in mainspace.) 2001:2020:8341:83A0:65B3:4D43:52EF:F0F3 (talk) 08:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Focus/attention related disability

Most (if not the complete majority of) articles on the Wiki could be easy to understand in people with mental disabilities and other well-known things like Autism. However the articles can get quite lengthy, and I think this is true for a lot of articles on the Wiki across all sorts of niches. This might deter certain readers and makes the information here less accessible when some of it is already not easy to get.

I'm wondering if the community has any ideas on how to offer the information in a way that is still useful and complete, but in some other way that is easy for them to consume. Obviously there can't be multiple articles created for each page, and there are already sections, but I'd like to know if there can be discussion about this, and if Wikipedia already has tools to help create articles of information in alt formats such as slideshows or video. Also what you all think about this, and why/how you are using simple Wikipedia. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Target (or goal): An article on Simple-wiki is supposed to be written so that a (native speaker of English, that is) fifth grader (in elementary school or grammar school) is likely to understand the language in the article.--What you seem to be talking about, is changing the goal ('or moving goalpost's).--I like that Simple-wiki still has simple goal (and i do not support your suggested changes; However, i am guessing that there might be room for a portal-of-sorts on your user-page; Anyone, please correct me if i am wrong). 2001:2020:8341:83A0:1D98:EF94:E0DB:7457 (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

I always heard it was aimed at eighth graders. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:01, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I spoke to a person who had illness-induced brain fog. When I told this person about SEWP, they were very, very happy. The goal of SEWP is simple language. I see our audience as kids, English-language learners, and people with brain fog etc. But being short often makes things harder to understand, not easier. Example: Regular English "leaf litter" is in Simple English "dead leaves on the ground." More than twice as many words to convey the idea. The shortest I can get "secondary forests" is "forests that are growing back." Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:33, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Also note that there are different tools that will calculate more or less meaningless numbers, what is called readability score. There is no point in limiting the length of an article, though. So reaching these goals can be something checked by good/very good article criteria. Unfortunately these processes are not very active now. Eptalon (talk) 12:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Videowiki

https://mdwiki.org/wiki/File:En.Wikipedia-VideoWiki-Gout.webm W;ChangingUsername (talk) 13:49, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Adminship

Hi! Is anyone interested in becoming an admin or have any questions about it? Like always, I think we'd benefit from having more admins. So if you are interested, or just want to be sure if you are ready for an WP:RFA, or just want to know the areas that you need to work on, please leave a message below. Any inquiries via email are also welcome. If you want to know more about tools and rights you get as an admin, feel free to ask them. I am free till next weekend, so I will try to answer as much as possible. Thanks, BRP ^ever 16:16, 22 March 2025 (UTC)

This is just a forum. To know more about how to become administrator, visit WP:RFA.-BRP ^ever 03:52, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Hello! I would be interested in adminship. It's okay if you deny me because of my lack of experience (only 150 edits, 2 months of experience). If you are okay with me only having this much experience then i would like to know more. I've invested my time into countering vandalism and creating creating articles i am proud of (take these for example: Metro Transit (Minnesota), Minnesota Star Tribune, and Nickelodeon Universe) Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 00:39, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

@Ieditrandomarticles I think you are up to a very good start. A few more months and I think you will have an easier time passing. Keep up the good work!-- BRP ^ever 04:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank You :) Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 12:53, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

@Ieditrandomarticles: Also, be aware that it wouldn't be up to just one admin to accept or deny you. People become admins through votes of the membership. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I assumed that it would work like nominations for good and very good articles. Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 12:28, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@BRPever What do you think about me? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 23:33, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

I think you need a bit more experience too. Also, you don't need to participate in everything, especially the areas you are unfamiliar with or don't have the tools for. That often leads to mistakes. Give it some time, gain experience and there is a good chance. BRP ^ever 03:23, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@BRPever: Can you elaborate of more experiences? Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 03:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

More overall experience. Like when it comes to content, the pages you do still need quite a bit of work, you recently responded to a CU request you shouldn't have. Also more knowledge about policies/practices to avoid cases like these is also required. BRP ^ever 03:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 03:47, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Most of the abuse filters might want my help (and fixes), and some other admin areas could suit my help. What do you think? Codename Noreste (talk) 04:23, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Would it be ideal if an RfA candidate had most of their contributions in anti-vandalism? Are admins expected to contribute to/have a decent knowledge of all aspects of the site, or just the WP:RULES are okay? randomdude121    13:59, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

A decent knowledge of content is necessary IMO. It's not a requirement, but it's best to know how the wiki you are admin of is written. BRP ^ever 14:08, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Makes sense. Thanks. randomdude121    14:09, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm curious about opinion about me ;). BZPN (talk) 18:56, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I feel like it's a bit too soon from your last RFA. A bit longer period of continuous activity is likely to increase the chances of RFA passing. BRP ^ever 17:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@BRPever When you say "contentious activity", do you mean that to be an admin someone should be involved in controversial topics? 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F4BF:FFDC:18E3:C537 (talk) 17:17, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, it was autocorrect in action. I have corrected it.--BRP ^ever 17:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Curious about the areas I need or could work on. – Angerxiety^! 11:17, 3 April 2025 (UTC)

I can't really think of anything upon quick, looks like you are already doing a very good job in many of the areas. BRP ^ever 17:27, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@BRPever, probably I am not that active and certainly not one of those useful for adding contents. Still, if needed, I could give a hand with vandalism. --M7 (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@M7 With your experience, I think a hand in that area would be very helpful. We do need help in keeping up with VIP requests and responding to any urgent requests. BRP ^ever 17:16, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@BRPever thanks for your words. It's been a tough period lately, but I'll leave some notes and a request in RfA page in a few days. --M7 (talk) 19:28, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@BRPever I am interested in adminship but due to my unfortunate block on En Wiki and not having enough experience, I don't know if I can do it, that is why I need your opinion on it, I have around 2,000+ edits or something. ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 16:53, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Adelaideslement8723, I know you pinged BRP but I wanted to throw in my two cents as well. Since you recently had a failed RFA, it is probably a good idea to wait some time before running again by questioning what you need the tools for and to gain more experience. You could begin participating in maintenance areas and could read past RFA's to see what editors look for in an administrator. My suggestion would be to clear up the issues on enwiki before running again, especially after the declined unblock request from a few days ago. Ternera (talk) 17:04, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

Hi Ternera,

I appreciate your insights! I plan to clarify things on enwiki, but I need to wait six months for the Standard Offer timer to reset. In the meantime, I’m going to dive deeper into the responsibilities of adminship and look into past Requests for Admins to better understand what qualities users value, especially in cases like blocking vandalizing accounts or protecting heavily edited articles. I'll also be lending a hand with Vandalism in Progress and cleaning up articles.

Regarding the recent unblock request on enwiki that was declined, I intend to discuss this with the admins there, and I may reach out for some assistance from the admins here as well. I've been a responsible editor and genuinely hope to earn a second chance on enwiki.

Thanks for your support, and I look forward to hearing from you!

Best,
Adelaide

(Generated from AI ;)) ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 19:00, 9 April 2025 (UTC)

@Adelaideslement8723: Did you actually generate this with AI? For me, that would be a reason against giving rights. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:46, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

@Auntof6 Yes you have caught me red-handed! It is actually AI generated, I am sorry I was busy and I didn't have time to write a lot before my next class so I used Grammerly's AI letter generator, and just posted the comment, before I had to go to my next class. ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 12:39, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I would advise against using AI for any reason - it would be a massive red flag for me in an RfA. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:04, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Okay, I will not use AI for any types of stuff. Thanks ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 19:06, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I would want to be a Wikipedia administrator! I would ban Wikipedia vandals, protect articles, and so much more that i would make simple english Wikipedia a better version of Wikipedia! Wikipedian2025 (talk) 10:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedian2025, With a one month old account and 300+ edits don't you think it's too early? Bensebgli ^(Talk) 21:57, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

My account was made in January and I was already told to wait longer to pass. (see comment by BRP "I think you are up to a very good start. A few more months and I think you will have an easier time passing. Keep up the good work!") so what would the timeframe for a administrator be? 6 month old? 1 year? Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 22:00, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Most likely about 6 months to a year at least on here, that way they can see how you do over a longer period of time. Sheriff U3 22:17, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Also while I agree that you do need edits (experience) to be an administrator, listing it as a main point to having a high number encourages EditCountitis Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 22:04, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Why is there so few admins here? Also I already know that I am no where near ready for adminship, I just was surprised by the low admin count. Sheriff U3 21:47, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Sheriff U3: There may not be many admins, but we also have a low user/editor count. By percentage, I don't know if it's really that low. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:22, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

I am not yet ready but almost ready for adminship at the same time, but there are only a few admins here... If I was an admin I would help out the admin team a lot, I would be a great asset to them, because I despise vandalism in any form and also I help out with articles ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 16:19, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

COI

We don't have a warning Template for COI in twinkle. This article is created by G. V. Prakash Kumar we need to add Template:COI? or report such articles in future. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 21:51, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I think an old version of Twinkle is being used here and it may need to be updated. I asked about getting the AI template added and that was what Lee mentioned. Ternera (talk) 22:01, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Ternera You are right I'm unable to find COI and AI related warning templates in Twinkle. But I think posting this Idea on en:WP:AN is a better option because on En-wiki there are many admins and contributors who can edit or modify any existing scripts as they know coding. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 22:19, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

It's not an English Wikipedia problem so why would they help? –Davey2010^Talk 22:21, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I suspect we'd need to open a phab ticket to get our Twinkle updated Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski @Bensebgli Not really, it can be done locally, and I've done it before: Special:Diff/8927555. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 22:28, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes, this problem can be solved here on simple-wiki. I think we need some other warning templates, such as

1. {uw-mislead1} for misleading edit summaries
2. {uw-ai} for AI/LLM generated content
3. {uw-nor} for original research
4. {uw-notcensored} for censorship of material
5. {uw-defamatory} for addition of defamatory content on any article

I don't know any further if we need to add or not. Thank you. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 00:13, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Do you think we could update our Twinkle? It currently does things like not pass through QD rationales and the like. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:01, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

Yes I think. But things need to pass through QD rationales, I'm agree on it. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 05:13, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

No.5 probably isn't needed as we already have warnings for deliberately adding wrong material to articles (which defamatory content would be).- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 17:00, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I agree, I have used twinkle on English Wikipedia and it is much more capable as you can add your own templates to the options. (That is done through Twinkle preferences which is a link in the twinkle drop down on English Wikipedia,) Sheriff U3 18:23, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

@Bensebgli I'm not sure if you're asking about adding the notice to an article, or adding a COI warning to a user's talk page, but both exist in Twinkle. The first is on the Twinkle "Tag" menu, under "General content issues": "Neutrality, bias, and factual accuracy". The second is on the "Warn" menu, under "Single issue notices". Also, things can be added to Twinkle at MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js. TagUser (talk) 22:08, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

In-lieu of not having a COI warning, I've given the user a {{Uw-advert1}} warning and have A4/G11'd their article as either way they were advertising themselves. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:22, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm confused why you said "in lieu of not having a COI warning", because there is a COI warning in Twinkle already. TagUser (talk) 22:25, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

My apologies, we indeed do have a coi warning template, I didn't bother reading the OPs message properly, So what's the OP crying about as we have {{coi}} for articles and {{uw-coi}} for users?, Feel like I'm being dense here and missing something completely obvious.... –Davey2010^Talk 22:42, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

@TagUser I've rechecked; you were right we already have {{uw-coi}} for conflict of interest.Bensebgli ^(Talk) 00:10, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Y'know, not all warnings have to be done through Twinkle. Just sayin'. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:43, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Huh I never said they did ?, –Davey2010^Talk 22:51, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I've asked for both. I've installed Twinkle through setting/preferences and also installed Twinklemobile script through User:Plantaest/TwinkleMobile. But unable to find both COI/AI related warning templates. I know on en-wiki we have COI but I don't why we don't have here on Simple-wik. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 22:28, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I think what Twinkle also needs is the 3RR warning template, because on mine, I don't see it. ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 16:24, 19 April 2025 (UTC)

@Adelaideslement8723 That's in Twinkle, it's under "Single issue warnings". TagUser (talk) 04:56, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

@Adelaideslement8723 Please check here. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 09:59, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

What about warnings this.

1. {uw-tempabuse} for abuse of warning or block template.
2. {uw-aiv} for abuse of WP:ANI's report.

Can somebody create it? Raayaan9911 10:32, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure how much we really need the second one, as the amount of WP:AN abuse is incredibly little and can simply be warned across using the standard vandalism templates.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 11:37, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I've mentioned five what do you think? We need these five or less than five. Thank you. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 12:24, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

@Raayaan9911 I think second one is not a good. Sorry if I'm wrong. Thank you. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 12:29, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Second one is not necessary? Raayaan9911 15:33, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

I think. But not sure about others opinion. Bensebgli ^(Talk) 16:41, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

It's okay, wait for others' opinion. See if necessary or not. Raayaan9911 17:19, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

We should really try our best to only template items that are to be common problems. I can't see the second of these being a common warning item. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Using enwiki's search bar, both of these templates have been used about 300 times ever in enwiki. Considering our smaller presence, I don't think that these templates will ever be very useful. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 00:20, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

Comments?

Looking for opinions on this. I feel like edit ear is simplified enough as it is and also the warning template links to WP:Edit war. Either we move WP:Edit war to WP:Change war or change the warning message. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:37, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Considering we use "change" in the interface and most references to modifying a page, moving WP:Edit war to WP:Change war would probably be preferable.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:43, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

clean up, eval 4 templates: hyphenate params (4×);

Is there any particular reason that edits like Special:Diff/7572875 were being made? Does it make any difference? 11USA11 (talk) 03:23, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@11USA11: Have you asked the user who made the edits? -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

No. @Djsasso: is there a reason for these edits? 11USA11 (talk) 05:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Requested move

Hi. It appears that unlike EN wiki that has a separate page for requested moves, here we have to put forth such requests on this page. The page in question is Razia Sultana which I think should be moved to Razia Sultan based on WP:COMMONNAME principle. There was a recent discussion at Talk:Razia Sultan on EN wiki which determined the common name to be "Razia Sultan", hence my attempt to have the page moved. I would appreciate it if one of the page movers or administrators could look into the matter. Thanks. Keivan.f (talk) 05:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Not a 'Category page'

simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:People_with_ankylosing_spondylitis
.--Please say if the page is okay or not (as a 'Category page').--I found the page while i was removing one person from the category (because there was no source (or mention) in the article, for him having the condition).--If the person has been added as a 'medical hoax etc', at English-wiki, i can not say.--Good luck (while i fix other 'category pages'). 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:9CC9:562C:7DCD:2913 (talk) 07:01, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

That is a category, or "category page", because it's in the category namespace. The text on the page belongs in an article, not a category, so I deleted it. I also changed the categories. Let me know if you have any questions. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:56, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Stub

Can anyone confirm if these instructions are still relevant on Wikipedia:Stub:

The MediaWiki software can make finding stubs easy for you. To make it do this, set the Threshold for stub display higher than 0. This makes it easy to find or fix (make into a longer article) a stub. See Special:Preferences to set your threshold, or Help:User preferences for more help on this and other settings.

I looked in my preferences and didn't see anything like that. A comment five years ago remarked on this. If this is outdated, it should be removed from the page and that section should be rewritten. TagUser (talk) 23:07, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Doing nothing about Fake sources (that come from 'Hallucination' from 'A.I. software')

This article was taken from 'Death row', then given a 'pat on the back' (on February 17), and then set free.--The fake sources (in the article), were not removed; The article was not nuked/Deleted.--Our system has failed (in regard to that article).--Now, one user has used time, and has also gotten the article put 'on trial', again.--Should there be suggestion for change (such as another formal justification for QD), for fake-sourced articles?--I am somewhat concerned about what will be the next new-article, that ' slips thru the cracks', and avoids being nuked, while still having fake sources 'from hallucination from A.I. software'. 2001:2020:8341:83A0:C0B6:1805:D64C:75C5 (talk) 08:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

I would support a QD option for articles that have no non-AI sources. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:11, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

Please can you try to make things a bit more easy to read? There is no "death row", no putting "on trial" and there is no "system" for an article to "fall through the cracks".

If an article is about something that doesnt exist - WP:A6 is the appropriate QD. We don't delete articles on the sources they produce, rather how notable the subject is. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)

perhaps the most difficult: how do you identify these 'AI generated sources'? Eptalon (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Why does the Simple English Wikipedia has no Portals like on the English Wikipedia???

If almost all versions of Wikipedia have portals for specific things (like food, physics, biology and others), than why the Simple English version of Wikipedia (and other smaller versions of Wikipedia) have no portals? I think that the Simple English Wikipedia and other smaller versions of Wikipedia should have portals. Like: Portal:Food, Portal:Physics, Portal:History and others. Wikipedian2025 (talk) 10:49, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

@Wikipedian2025 Because we do not have enough active users to maintain decent articles and there has been no consensus that exists for such a space. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:52, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

ok thanks! Wikipedian2025 (talk) 10:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

Even the English Wikipedia deprecated Portals a long time ago. They are only really there because people wouldn't give them up Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:25, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Request for Admin Assistance: Duplicate or Overlapping Articles

Hello Admin,

I recently created the article titled 2025 Pahalgam attack, but I noticed that another article, 2025 Pahalgam Massacre, already exists. Upon review, the latter appears to have been created recently and seems to largely replicate content from the English Wikipedia, potentially copy-pasted.

Both articles refer to the same incident, and having two separate entries may cause confusion or redundancy. I kindly request your assistance in reviewing both pages and making a decision—whether to merge, redirect, or retain only one with proper sourcing and neutrality.

Thank you for your time and help in maintaining the quality and consistency of Wikipedia. Qewse (talk) 12:51, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

I would support a merger of the two articles. Steven1991 (talk) 14:09, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

@Qewse: This doesn't require an admin. Anyone can do the merge, and then either redirect one article to the other, or ask for one to be deleted. Whoever takes care of this, please be sure to address the Wikidata link, so that the article that remains is linked in Wikidata. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 16:20, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Use the templates {{merge}}, {{mergefrom}} and {{mergeto}}. Eptalon (talk) 17:37, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

Defending opening/helpme tag

I am making this post here to pre-emptively defend myself from the consequences of my last edit. The related link is: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion/Requests/2025/Viruses/Did_you_know/1

The person opening up the RfD - and closing it - deleting the article, is the same person. He also deleted another article with no RfD at all. He also made a post on my talk page to carry over a discuss from his talk page that I don't think he wanted to take part in anymore - and so did another DYK admin (Did you know). I am doing so because he is an admin and I am a normal user and the only other eyes on this is his buddy - I hope you understand. This is normal practise - even in real life - and still doesn't mean I am personally going against him now or in the future no matter the outcome if I wanted to wish him all the best before he gave his own talk/article approval. 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{{SUBST:big} 06:43, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@TDKR Chicago 101 replying to tag you 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{{SUBST:big} 06:44, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I created the RfD because you wanted for discussion and I felt that hearing other users feedback would allow a better understanding. Other admin @BRPever: also shared the same thought that the articles you were creating were not suited to be their own articles hence the deletion. BRPever also wrote on your talk page explaining his justification as did I in my own talk page. I don't see a reason for you to defend yourself when BRPever and I were respectfully explaining our edits and reasonings. I do believe your edits are done in good faith which is why I suggested for you to continue your edits via sandbox as well. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Removing the article closed tagging is not the way to complain about this. I agree there should have been more discussion at the RfD but the article is deleted now. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Also to clarify, I did not delete the RfD article. I closed the RfD discussion because the article was already deleted (not by me). I opened the RfD because the user wanted more dialogue and seeing as how no headway was being made on my talk page discussion I felt the user reading other user's perspective on why the article was suited for deletion they would understand the point I was trying to get at via my talk page. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:50, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Oh yes my bad. Sorry, I just trusted the person making the comment. Clearly that was a mistake. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 07:03, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I gave you my reasons. The reasoning that you want DYK from enwiki portals to be copied into subpages just so you can link more pages makes no sense to me. I reminded you to read and follow our practices. I am not sure what the actual issue you come up here with is, but those pages should not exist here. You are free to keep them in your userspace. BRP ^ever 07:05, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/AIDS 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{{SUBST:big} 07:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Image help

Hi can someone help me fix the image on Maria Konopnicka? Thanks, Adelaide What is it? 15:14, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Fr33kman fixed it, thanks so much! Adelaide What is it? 15:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

You're welcome fr33kman 15:26, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I won't ping as you just thanked me but I replaced it with the infobox from enwiki, Not sure if Fr33kman said but you were missing the |thumb parameter which is why it wasn't working :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:27, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! I need to start reading up on Infoboxes and such and how to add them lol Adelaide What is it? 15:29, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

Creation of Talk-page(s)

Creation of Talk-page(s) of salted Brain rot memes, is 'on the increase'.--Can I.P. users add anything (of what the original poster is suggesting), to talk-pages?--If my question is regarded as helpful (and relevant), then fine. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:FC35:132:41ED:26E8 (talk) 05:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

"Template: ... conviction", or "... case", or "... scandal"

"Template:... sex trafficking scandal".--A high-profile victim died recently. Please consider using other (Simple) words in this template - not "scandal".--'Side topic'; is it fair to say that the case goes beyond "scandal", and on to tragedy or travesty.--Note: using the word "case", can be regarded as downplaying the crime.--One questions, if our template can use (or find) a 'more encyclopedic' title, than "... scandal".--Another thing: "sex trafficking" in the title, already highlights which (of the worst) crimes, this is about; using the word "scandal", can make one feel/think that things might be approaching 'hyperbole of sorts'. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:FC35:132:41ED:26E8 (talk) 04:56, 26 April 2025 (UTC)
simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Jeffrey_Epstein_sex_trafficking_conviction
. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:FC35:132:41ED:26E8 (talk) 04:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

'AI slop et cetera', from blocked user

This article about a Technology company.
Not ready to stay in mainspace.
QD (promotional) is an option. However, if anyone takes to AfD, then i expect to "vote" Delete, in a heartbeat.--This article does not have 'only a little bit problems'. Therefore, i will not add tags (but everyone else is welcome to do so).

('Suspected') AI slop, from blocked user.--If this post is regarded as helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:C98B:66B2:F01:2FF3 (talk) 23:09, 26 April 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:8355:B9EA:C98B:66B2:F01:2FF3 (talk) 23:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

Justification: 'Not simple'; and/or 'Promotional'. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:C98B:66B2:F01:2FF3 (talk) 23:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)

De-indexing user and user talk pages

People like to add spam to their user pages here, because it gets indexed by search engines. However, on English Wikipedia, the user and user talk namespaces are set to not be included in search engine results. Can we get consensus to do that here?

The instructions for de-indexing a namespace are found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Controlling_search_engine_indexing#Other_namespaces_and_robots.txt TagUser (talk) 18:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

I thought it was that way here. I know I remove the indexing when I see it hardcoded on user pages. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

When I do a Google search for "Auntof6", I see your user page here and on commons. TagUser (talk) 23:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)

@@TagUser @@Auntof6 I thought it was indexed by default (says in the special "page information" on an article), or am I mistaken? Tagged user because that is why the pages show on Google search { 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 06:34, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

@Catcus DeMeowwy: OK, maybe it is.

By the way, I believe I asked you to stop putting codes on pages that don't belong to you. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

What do you mean { 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 06:38, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

@Catcus DeMeowwy: The string of numbers. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:43, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

That's just my signature and it's the same every time { 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 06:44, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

@Catcus DeMeowwy: Then to quote Emily Litella, "Never mind!" -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:59, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Need for c. one template for star-thingies (or constellations)

Hi!
If anyone could create one (or more) templates, then that would be quite nice. Please see,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Leo_(constellation)
.--For whatever reason, there seems to be a rather large interest (among wiki-users), for 'stars and astronomy and things far-away into the sky'. With an okay template, there will not be less interest in these things!--Note: i created c. 3 categories yesterday, in regard to 'the 12 zodiac-related constellations'.--Good luck (while i try to start writing (more) about 'common misunderstandings about the night sky, and its stars and other heavenly bodies'.)--Have a nice day. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:A1BC:E271:B457:785A (talk) 13:34, 27 April 2025 (UTC)

Sub-referencing: User testing

Hi I’m Johannes from Wikimedia Deutschland's Technical Wishes team. We are making great strides with the new sub-referencing feature and we’d love to invite you to take part in two activities to help us move this work further:

1. Try it out and share your feedback

   Please try the updated wikitext feature on the beta wiki and let us know what you think, either on our talk page or by booking a call with our UX researcher.

2. Get a sneak peak and help shape the Visual Editor user designs

   Help us test the new design prototypes by participating in user sessions – sign up here to receive an invite. We're especially hoping to speak with people from underrepresented and diverse groups. If that's you, please consider signing up! No prior or extensive editing experience is required. User sessions will start May 14th.

We plan to bring this feature to Wikimedia wikis later this year. We’ll reach out to wikis for piloting in time for deployments. Creators and maintainers of reference-related tools and templates will be contacted beforehand as well.

Thank you very much for your support and encouragement so far in helping bring this feature to life! Johannes Richter (WMDE) (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Striking-out text (mainspace)

"Artificial intelligence".
See section 3 (or 4).--Someone with 'rollback tools' might give it a quick fix. (If i had seen the strikeouts earlier, i would have reverted or informed admins 'directly'.)

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Artificial_intelligence&oldid=10210720
. Good luck (while i fix other parts of the article). 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D28:F2B7:1BE5:E3E (talk) 16:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Probable fake / hoax

It seems that a group of accounts - at least Kochamyizrael, Maxim4447, and SPAStepinski - is trying to push a hoax about a supposed Polish village named Jajomyje in various projects. I became aware of this through a speedy deletion request in German-language Wikipedia, where I'm an admin, and deleted that article, see there. There's not much more than an X account, a page at the freehoster Neocities, and a recently uploaded YouTube video to be found about this "place" in the web, certainly nothing on maps, and I believe it doesn't exist. The only Wikipedia language version which now has an article is this one, and I noticed that there was already a speedy deletion request filed by User:WTM which got reverted by the articles' author as "griefing". I filed a speedy deletion request as well, which the author reverted again. So I'm pointing this out here, otherwise not being active in Simple English Wikipedia, for the local community to deal with as you see fit. Gestumblindi (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Vote on proposed modifications to the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines and U4C Charter

The voting period for the revisions to the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines and U4C Charter closes on 1 May 2025 at 23:59 UTC (find in your time zone). Read the information on how to participate and read over the proposal before voting on the UCoC page on Meta-wiki.

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 message with members of your community in your language, as appropriate, so they can participate as well.

In cooperation with the U4C --

Keegan (WMF) (talk) 03:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

Help needed to Delete meme-thingy

Needs AfD, sub-set of meme-thingy, because it is not notable.

(It is part of non-notable meme-thingy.)--Good luck (while i fix other articles.) 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 18:07, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

I've tagged it for quick deletion since the article is a copyright violation. Ternera (talk) 19:45, 23 April 2025 (UTC)

You can use WP:TWINKLE to do deletion nominations without help. Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 21:27, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

non-notable meme-thingy (minor edit of title), needs AfD or maybe QD? (Say, re-creation of Deleted page? Justification: not sure how that should be worded.) 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 01:06, 24 April 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 01:10, 24 April 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 01:13, 24 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster
non-notable meme-thingy (variation of name).--Salt needed upon re-creation. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:253A:A02B:2EB9:68F2 (talk) 01:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Hey! Please use WP:TWINKLE to create the nominations. Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 01:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Should medical-related templates be added to talkpages?

@Catcus DeMeowwy is spamming {{Reliable sources for medical articles}} on articles, Do we really need these templates on talkpages?,

I originally reverted stating no one uses talkpages often/at all so was pointless but Catcus has reverted and taken issue with this so thought I would ask other peoples opinions,

Irrespective of peoples opinions I won't be edit warring/reverting (unless consensus is to remove these), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:46, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Conversation carried over from User talk: edit reverted on Munchausen Syndrome where not much has been said. This discussion is not an issue with me either (I understand Davey has no problem with me doing this), but I do take issue with the template not being on medical article talk pages (it does not belong on the article) - or does it? Note that I have also created in a section on the Munchausen syndrome talk page along with my undo (revert: added template back in). It is linked in the first comment by @Davey2010. Thanks (comment by Catcus DeMeowwy original UTC: 20:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)). updated. sig: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 22:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

If the community decides that the talk pages can have the template (reliable sources for medical articles) then another article talk page Talk:Artificial_insemination could benefit from it as the article is sort of just hanging out there. { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 22:56, 29 April 2025 (UTC)

I also had a reason to come here, about another mass change but I will do it later. I would like to say again (it was said in the original comment and on talk page) that I have added this template to multiple articles.

{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 20:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I don’t think it necessary, as here no one really check the talk pages often. So there is really no point in doing so. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 22:41, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

Well I believe that I am being held back much (with what I am allowed to do), and for the reasons I have said already, elsewhere, I think it matters less if people check the talk pages often than if it is necessary. I think I should be allowed to do it { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 22:44, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

I see no issue with this template, and in the case that a discussion does occur in the talk page of a medical-related article, having this information can be considered important. The number of people that will end up seeing this template on a talk page and will find it relevant on a discussion, however, is trivially low, and it is likely not necessary to add many of these templates at once. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 23:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)

"QD ruled out?"

Has there been instances, where scummy articles have thereafter been (succesfully) thrown into AfD (or QD), with no further prompting? Yes.--Is this a volunteer project, where folks choose what areas one will work with, (and within guidelines)? Yes.--Do busybodies et cetera, present themselves (and their platform), from time to time? Yes.--Have i recently been trying to make get a message across to any particular user? I think not.--If this post is somewhat illuminating, to at least one 'complainer et cetera, of today', then fine.--Good luck, while i am off to fix this-or-that article, of my choice. 2001:2020:C305:834B:9DCC:B381:D69B:36B1 (talk) 15:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

Do you mean that a article you created was deleted without you knowing? Please be clearer. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 12:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Please can I ask you to make your comments more succinct? This topic is incomprehensible. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:57, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

POV pushing at 'Invasion of Ukraine'

There are c. two users, that insist that Donald Trump and JD Vance and Elon Musk, do not like Ukraine. (And one of the users is also doing revert,without making edit comment; That user has been warned about such, some months ago!)--The text is not saying which experts of political science have given their view about the two 'hangarounds' and the president do not like Ukraine.--Please also help those c. two users, in seeing the light, about how English-wiki has not come to the same conclusion.

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine&diff=10229430&oldid=10229423
. Thank you in advance. 2001:2020:C305:834B:381A:B204:F2B:BBC5 (talk) 18:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello, as one of the "two users" I would like to make this more clear.

"insist that Donald Trump and JD Vance and Elon Musk, do not like Ukraine." There is overwelming evidence proving this including: this (Trump and Vance), this (Elon), this (Trump and Elon), this (Trump and Vance).

"Take it to the article about Trump. Vance is only a 'spare' or a 'spare tire', for now. Musk is not even a member of the cabinet." It is important to have this in the article because 1. Trump is the leader of a country that was helping with lots of the funding and help for the war, 2. Vance is also against ukraine in this war, even if he is the second in line he still has influence, 3. Elon has done a lot of the commanding for trump including see here.

I hope this can clear this up and if you have any questions feel free to reply. Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 21:48, 1 May 2025 (UTC)

He has shown that he does not like Ukraine TBH

sig: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 03:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

There is a template: {{NPOV}}

If you think an article is biased, correct it (and abide by the three-edit rule). The information should be sourced, from reference. I hope that in the end a NPOV is reached in the article. Good luck

sig: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 03:29, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Teahouse closed

Why is it still closed to "very new users"?80.187.72.139 (talk) 10:13, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello IP user, I assume your talking about the en:Wikipedia:Teahouse? If I am correct please note that the Simple English Wikipedia is not the same project as the English Wikipedia.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:42, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

Its protected due to Persistent disruptive editing, it will expire soon, on sixth of may. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:43, 2 May 2025 (UTC)

We don't have a teahouse here, only a redirect to this page. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 08:55, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski I assuming IP talking about en:Wikipedia:Teahouse, it's protected due to persistent disruptive editing. Raayaan9911 18:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Maybe, but we aren't the English Wikipedia. We shouldn't really be answering questions about sister projects. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:59, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

The IP said; "Why is it still closed to "very new users"?", maybe answering about English Wikipedia or this project. Not all projects create teahouse, it's created differently, Simple English Wikipedia is not same project of English Wikipedia. Raayaan9911 19:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

It is not our business. Every project is run independently. Steven1991 (talk) 14:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)

Talk reset script

How i get talk reset script gadget in my mobile? — Raayaan9911 15:46, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

@Raayaan9911 I am assuming you mean reset talk script. Hears the code, copy to you common.js:

//<nowiki>

$(function (){

var RT_config = {

name: '[[:w:simple:User:DannyS712/Reset talk|reset talk]]',

version: 1.1

};

if ( mw.config.get( 'wgNamespaceNumber' ) % 2 === 1 && mw.config.get( 'wgNamespaceNumber' ) > 0 ) {

mw.loader.using( 'mediawiki.util', function () {

$(document).ready( function () {

var link = mw.util.addPortletLink( 'p-cactions', '', 'Reset talk', 'ca-ResetTalk', 'Reset talk page');

$( link ).click( function ( event ) {

event.preventDefault();

ResetTalk();

} );

} );

} );

}

function ResetTalk(){

mw.loader.using( 'mediawiki.api', function () {

new mw.Api().postWithEditToken( {

action: 'edit',

title: mw.config.get( 'wgPageName' ),

text: '{{Talk header}}',

summary: ('Reset talk page with ' + RT_config.name + ' (version ' + RT_config.version + ')'),

} ).done( function ( response ) {

console.log( response );

location.reload();

} );

} );

}

});

//</nowiki> Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 13:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I created my common.js, i tested reset talk in my sandbox's talk page and it's worked. Thank you for guiding me! Raayaan9911 18:39, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Speedy Delete

What Speedy Delete is policy?--Kikikiki.aka (talk) 08:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

@Kikikiki.aka: That function here is called quick delete. You can find information about it here. Is that what you were asking? -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

This is it. Thank you. Kikikiki.aka (talk) 02:43, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

We will be enabling the new Charts extension on your wiki soon!

(Apologies for posting in English)

Hi all! We have good news to share regarding the ongoing problem with graphs and charts affecting all wikis that use them.

As you probably know, the old Graph extension was disabled in 2023 due to security reasons. We’ve worked in these two years to find a solution that could replace the old extension, and provide a safer and better solution to users who wanted to showcase graphs and charts in their articles. We therefore developed the Charts extension, which will be replacing the old Graph extension and potentially also the EasyTimeline extension.

After successfully deploying the extension on Italian, Swedish, and Hebrew Wikipedia, as well as on MediaWiki.org, as part of a pilot phase, we are now happy to announce that we are moving forward with the next phase of deployment, which will also include your wiki.

The deployment will happen in batches, and will start from May 6. Please, consult our page on MediaWiki.org to discover when the new Charts extension will be deployed on your wiki. You can also consult the documentation about the extension on MediaWiki.org.

If you have questions, need clarifications, or just want to express your opinion about it, please refer to the project’s talk page on Mediawiki.org, or ping me directly under this thread. If you encounter issues using Charts once it gets enabled on your wiki, please report it on the talk page or at Phabricator.

Thank you in advance! -- User:Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Enabling Dark mode for logged-out users

Hello Wikimedians,

Apologies, as this message is not written in your native language. Please help translate to your language.

The Wikimedia Foundation Web team will be enabling dark mode in this Wiki by 15th May 2025 now that pages have passed our checks for accessibility and other quality checks. Congratulations!

The plan to enable is made possible by the diligent work of editors and other technical contributors in your community who ensured that templates, gadgets, and other parts of pages can be accessible in dark mode. Thank you all for making dark mode available for everybody!

For context, the Web team has concluded work on dark mode. If, on some wikis, the option is not yet available for logged-out users, this is likely because many pages do not yet display well in dark mode. As communities make progress on this work, we enable this feature on additional wikis once per month.

If you notice any issues after enabling dark mode, please create a page: Reading/Web/Accessibility for reading/Reporting/xx.wikipedia.org in MediaWiki (like these pages), and report the issue in the created page.

Thank you!

On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Web team.

UOzurumba (WMF) 00:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Reincarnation of actor from Bronx and Harlem

"01:21, 24 December 2024 ... deleted page ... this one (QD G5: Created by a blocked or banned user: Mass deletion of pages".--Not notable.

Reincarnation, this one.--Maybe anyone should QD. 2001:2020:303:BB75:98A6:6418:1695:23A5 (talk) 04:18, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Should the European Parliament article have an infobox?

Should the European Parliament have an infobox like on the English Wikipedia? I'm not that good at making infoboxes about parliaments, but it would be better if this article had an infobox Wikipedian2025 (talk) 13:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Infoboxes are things we don't actually have a consensus on site-wide. If you feel like it would benefit from an infobox, feel free to add one, but we don't require articles to have one. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:27, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

ok, im gonna add the infobox to the article Wikipedian2025 (talk) 13:28, 11 May 2025 (UTC)

Bulk creation of complex copy-paste medical code lists without proper attibution

It seems like all of the articles in Category:Medical Subject Headings titled "List of MeSH codes (Letter Number)" were just copied and pasted. They are all complex, as is a common problem with medical artAOicles. They all list a non-existent website in the text as the source, but no good citation is given. Not sure what the purpose of these is and it may be harmful to have unreferenced, unsupported medical info out there. It's an awful lot of articles to mark for deletion or QD for copyvio, but bringing this here. I think they should all be deleted. All created by User:Catcus DeMeowwy who may wish to comment here. Thanks, Gotanda (talk) 00:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know that the link (in the articles) is broken. I will go fix it and it will be working in future revisions, if the articles stay up.

Let me say that the articles are made to link between medical conditions. These are supposed to be (for medical editors) a "back bone" of lists to work through, to make articles for conditions and link them together, as well as to the external sources like MeSH. I also have to say that (future) - like tomorrow - I was going through them all to translate each term to simple language (and wanted to discuss on whether a link after the term to the wikt dictionary would be a good placeholder for each item until they are translated by editors, over time).

The red links would eventually become populated (sort of like how A01 is) and look pretty, and be a way to navigate simple Wikipedia pages (complete) for each of the MeSH terms.

If the community holds out on deletion it might let the articles flourish. If they benefit (and stay here), the articles they link to benefit as well. I have already started filling out the anatomy, and like I said I planned on making simple medical terms to go next to each entry for the reader to understand (if they some how got there).

Also they are more navigation and I do not think readers would be using them to learn about conditions or disease, anatomy, and so on. Instead they would go to the main article for the term. These articles need to be sorted through, found, and populated in order for the end user (reader) to have their content translated here.

Thank you.

Signed: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 01:05, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Here are some examples of how the articles may be useful. You have to imagine them fully populated, with simplified medical terms on them - and whatever other ideas come from the community to aid in accessibility to all editors.

• List_of_MeSH_codes_(G08) for example helps with the pregnancy and childbirth (sub)topic or speciality of medicine. G09 is the circulatory system, for anatomy
• List_of_MeSH_codes_(A01) is the anatomy link I mentioned in the last comment
• https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_MeSH_codes_(C04)&oldid=10234193 (for {{tumours}}

These articles are a list and each topic can be gone through to make articles for in an orderly way { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 01:09, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

There is no "unsupported medical info", merely links to medical pages on a reliable website (at least historically reliable, maybe if won't be soon if US government agencies start ignoring science). Attribution can be easily given. Catcus DeMeowwy, I suggest you do that. Criticism of the usefulness of these pages may be warranted. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:B522:E2:F374:FE4C (talk) 01:08, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

If the list is gone I lose a lot of organization and reference. It also is not all of the articles but you would have to imagine that it has reached a point where the list is populated and all entries are linking to useful articles with translated versions of their names on the page. I can eidt in attribution if you would like, and we all reach consensus on how to do that. If the link to the external website is broken on articles then they can be edited and fixed (I think the MeSH website is probably still up)

The attribution belongs on each talk page. Attribution to the English Wikipedia, if they were copied from there. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:FC21:8BC:E147:47FA (talk) 01:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you but they are in the revision history (article linked) and I am not sure if so much attribution is needed, only because it is a list of external content (which editors have brought up in the RfDs of the articles there (en). { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 01:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

There is no attribution in the revision history. The history for G08 reads, "copied from https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_MeSH_codes_(G08)". These are all a big circular mess with regard to source or attribution. --Gotanda (talk) 01:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

If people think that it should be attributed to the en. Wiki source then it should be. But just to note that the content is coming from the external website. If it ends up being attributed then I will bring having to do that into the process. I can leave everyone else to talk instead of responding to everyone but if you would like to continue then just let me know any time

sig: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 01:48, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Move 'almost all' the pages to user-pages. USERFY, that is my suggestion, for now.--Can one page, get an okay form? We got a long way to go, before we maybe can get there.--If this post, is looked at, in 'a constructive light', then fine. 2001:2020:C305:834B:1804:FAEA:FEA3:2E33 (talk) 06:38, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

It might be fun to tell you (and build some of) that one list - that one that contains eukaryotes (our cells) contains every animal and plant in existence and you can link to them from the library if you manage to find it :)

So the browser or the lists here (they are not on Simple (yet?)) contains in some form (it allows you to navigate to) any thing you can think of. There are also prokaryotes and I do not care about algae tbh. I think this was cool and you might like playing around with it.

{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 00:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Fix (with formatting, and to make our own if we want to) is likely going to be done by a pro with regex or a good text editor. Just to get the info over. There is also no export (there was actually one with a file similar to .xml). Still not an issue, but the format will probably be automated, and a bot would be helpful and probably all that is needed, either now or in the future. { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 02:37, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Thanks again. You said the link is broken and it is. It was also the 2006 (files to get from to update) link to the files on the article page. I think that link should be fixed and should stay on there, but the link to the website needs to be fixed.

Thank you again, for pointing it out (otherwise I would not know).

The link is in the second reference on the list of MeSH codes. The specific page i.e. A01, B, C, 2, 3, in brackets has an external link to the website (working). The link to every article on the list of codes page to a specific page, the specific code being in brackets (), has two references, the second one being the live website it is generated from. I overlooked the external page link next to the numbers.

The link before it on list of MeSH (specific codes) (first link) which I think is numbers, comes before the link to external with (I think numbers. It links to the simple Wiki (or en. Wiki) list of codes again (the right thing for it to do at least in some way).

The en. Wiki is probably also wrong unless simple is missing something for me to manually copy the page over. They probably do not know either. If you ask there about the dead link (should there not be bots doing that) they might fix it quicker than it will happen here, and done better. en. Also seeing more traffic (with that broken link).

The article should link to the list, and the website properly. For anyone interested in browsing (I am busy doing it right now) they can. There is also C23. There is also the broken link to 2006 files which are not added (but again if it is done on en. Wiki it is more useful, as well as I can copy the page to simple). en. Sees more traffic and other people would probably duplicate it also.

Just wanted to say before I go down a rabbit hole through this over thought website (I like it).

{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 07:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

It is also important to mention that I like MeSH (as a reference), and used/found them on the Vas deferens (anatomy/reproduction/genitals (male)) article.

sig: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 01:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

List of MeSH codes (A01); Nominate that one, for AfD.--(And do language-link, interwiki, while you are at it.)--Then i can try to simplify that (one) article.--Thereafter, when i have simplified, then i (quite possibly) will explain, why things had to be done in that (aforementioned) order.--Hope to see you (as prescribed), soon. 2001:2020:C305:834B:AD2A:106A:4BE3:B12 (talk) 17:04, 4 May 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:C305:834B:1804:FAEA:FEA3:2E33

Do none of that, and do not go delete one single list of codes of out all the lists.

Do not give one page out of the list an "okay" form

Do not move the lists to any user page off the Wiki { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 23:46, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

List of MeSH codes (A01); Nominate that one, for AfD - without regard to 'the other articles'.--It is not Simple (and drastic measures are needed).--The ball is in the court, of the one of you, who nominates that one article for AfD. 2001:2020:C305:834B:39D0:DB22:E37:88BE (talk) 02:40, 5 May 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:C305:834B:39D0:DB22:E37:88BE (talk) 02:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

updating the topic so that it does not get archived

signed: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 23:24, 12 May 2025 (UTC)