Wikipedia:Simple talk

Change links
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Editor review)


Simple talk
Shortcut
This is the place to ask any questions you have about the Simple English Wikipedia. Any general discussions or anything of community interest is also appropriate here.

You might also find an answer on Wikipedia:Useful, a listing of helpful pages.

You may reply to any section below by clicking the "change this page" link, or add a new discussion section to this page. Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~). Please add new topics to the bottom of this page.

Please note that old discussions on this page are archived periodically. If you do not find a discussion here, please look in the archives. Note that you should not change the archives, so if something that has been archived needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.

Some of the language used on this page can be complicated. This is because it is used by editors to talk to one another, so sometimes we forget. Please leave us a note if you are finding what we are saying too hard to read.

Are you in the right place?

DYK update frequency[change source]

Hello all, there's been some back and forth at Wikipedia talk:Did you know however no results were achieved/consensus. I was wondering if we might be able to reach something here or if not if we could direct a vote (if needed) somewhere else.

If you could see the did you know nominations page, there's a large amount of approved hooks in the holding area. We agree that the solution would be to increase the DYK update frequency. Perhaps instead of twice a month we could go back to updating once a week.

Not sure if we could get the ball rolling here since at Wikipedia talk:Did you know there hasn't been much activity/updates about this.

I'd be in favor of updating DYK's once a week/every ten days so that we could knock out some hooks from the holding area. Thoughts? TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I agree, at least till the time we have a lot of accepted nominations -- 💌Ayesha46 (talk) 00:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support We have way too many hooks in the waiting area. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Every week is a good idea. Kk.urban (talk) 16:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Ayesha46:, @QuicoleJR:, @Kk.urban: & @Eptalon: Looking at it, there might be some problems in terms as who will be dedicated in updating the DYKs with a week's frequency. Another alternative soluation that I've found might be to increase the number of hooks per queue. At English Wikipedia, each queue has around 8-9 hooks. Our queues currently holds five hooks. This might be another good alternative possibly if no one's willing to update DYK every week. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:08, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, we have a huge number of hooks in the holding area and our queues are full. We could get around 35 weeks of DYK with the holding area and queues combined, which would last us up until the end of the year. We just need to keep in mind that the queues should have a variety of topics, especially now we have plenty of hooks to choose from! TDKR Chicago 101, it might last even longer if we go for 5 hooks per queue instead of 6, honestly I don't think it makes a huge difference but I think it is better for the hooks to last for as long as possible rather than potentially not updating for months once we have burnt through all these hooks. --Ferien (talk) 14:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien Before this gets archived, I wanted to check on the status so it does not get forgotten about. Thanks and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 06:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: It would appear that the number of hooks in each batch has been increased to 6 to deal with the problem. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:03, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QuicoleJR Thanks for the info. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 19:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month 2024: We are back![change source]

Please help translate to your language

Hello, dear Wikipedians!

Wikimedia Ukraine, in cooperation with the MFA of Ukraine and Ukrainian Institute, has launched the forth edition of writing challenge "Ukraine's Cultural Diplomacy Month", which lasts from 1st until 31st March 2024. 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 contribution in every language! The most active contesters will receive prizes.

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! ValentynNefedov (WMUA) (talk)

Enabling a machine translation model, Section and Content translation tools in your Wikipedia[change source]

Hello Simple English Wikipedians!

The WMF Language team plans to enable the Section and Content translation tools to Simple English Wikipedia by default. Also, the team is considering using the MADLAD-400 open-source translation model in the MinT machine translation for your Wikipedia. The current model in MinT provides limited support for your language, while the MADLAD-400 will provide more translation support from other source languages. We want to make sure it is useful for your translation work. For this, my team would like members of your community to:

  • Test the MADLAD-400 model in a test instance. You can paste multiple pieces of content from different Wikipedia articles and check whether the provided result is a useful starting point for a translation.
  • Give us feedback if the machine translation quality is okay to be on your Wikipedia by default, as an optional service or if it is not useful at all.
  • Let us know if you have any objections to having the Section and Content translation enabled by default in this Wikipedia.

Below is background information about the tools and how you can test them.

Background information

Content Translation has been a successful tool for editors to create content in their language. Since its release in 2015, the tool has aided the translation of more than one million articles across all languages. However, the tool is in beta in Simple English Wikipedia, limiting its discoverability and use. Being in beta also blocks enabling the Section translation in your Wikipedia.

Section Translation extends the capabilities of Content Translation to support mobile devices. On mobile, the tool will:

  • Guide you to translate one section at a time to expand existing articles or create new ones
  • Make it easy to transfer knowledge across languages anytime from your mobile device

MinT (Machine in Translation) is a machine translation service hosted in the Wikimedia Infrastructure. It is designed to provide translations from many MT models and we have the MADLAD-400 that might be suitable for your community.

Our request

The MADLAD-400 MT is available for your Wiki in our test instance. We want you to test it (translate sentences and paragraphs from articles) in our test instance:https://translate.wmcloud.org. Let us know in this thread if the quality of the automatic translation generated is okay to enable it in Simple English Wikipedia along with the Section and Content translation tool.

Our plans to enable the tools and the machine translation support

We plan to deploy the tools with the MT support by the 16th of April. If there are no objections from your community, we will deploy them. We want to provide the tools in the way they best serve the community, so we are open to make further adjustments after the deployment based on your experience.

We look forward to getting your feedback in this thread. Thank you!

UOzurumba (WMF) (talk) 20:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC) On behalf of the Language team.[reply]

the english to simple english translation is broken
https://i.ibb.co/4TWRLRp/image.png MCGAMER YOUTUBE (talk) 21:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It worked somewhat when I ran it, but it's not really good enough for translation. I'm not a fan of automated translation anyway, you might as well run en-wiki with a Google translate. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it might work somewhat for languages closer to english but other languages such as arabic or hebrew will be broken MCGAMER YOUTUBE (talk) 03:08, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, @MCGAMER YOUTUBE and @Lee Vilenski, for your feedback. In the coming week (16th of April), the WMF Language team will enable the Section and Content translation tool by default in Simple English Wikipedia.
As for adding MinT translation support that uses the MADLAD-400 model in Simple English Wikipedia, I would like to clarify from you whether the quality is unacceptable for this Wikipedia to be enabled as an optional machine translation service.
I would really appreciate your response on this.
Best regards UOzurumba (WMF) (talk) 15:45, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Content translation is certainly interesting, both from a practical, and a research perspective. I do however want t point out something:
  • Semantically, there is no difference between "regular" English, and Simple English as we practice it here. A mapping from one language to the other will therefore be closer to translating between closely-related languages (think: Afrikaans and Dutch, or think English from South Africa, from Great Britain, the US, India, Belize and perhaps Australia/New Zealand; perhaos Niederdeutsch/Plattdeutsch, and Frisian,but I don't know how closely realted those are)
  • Structurally, we use shorter sentences, and more common words. A model that is based on mapping a sentence 1:1 will not work for Simple English. For a model to work successfully, I expect it to be able to re-phrase the content (Can be simple things: like properly splitting a long sentence, or replacing a less common word with a more common one).
  • Machine translation always reuires proofreading by a human editor.
Eptalon (talk) 15:31, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@UOzurumba (WMF): I do not think that the tool will be useful for the Simple English Wikipedia, although I appreciate the effort. Simple English Wikipedia requires simpler words and simpler sentence structure, which will not be obtained from a 1-to-1 translation from any other Wikipedia. This reply itself would be too complicated to be included in an article. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProjects[change source]

What do I need to do to make my WikiProjects qualify for not being in my userspace? Irtapil (talk) 05:37, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing. This Wiki doesn't have wikiprojects in main space. Eptalon (talk) 08:14, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon @WeatherWriter
Could we add one?
Also, the current info page on here (Wikipedia:WikiProjects) seems to say thay can be moved to main space at some point, Possibly it's a copy from en.wiki and needs to be customised to be accurate for here.
Irtapil (talk) 12:35, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't really have much of a requirement for WikiProjects in that WikiProjects are a collaboration of many different users (at the very least, 5). We simply don't have the editor base. That's why it's suitable to have them in userspace here, to keep track of the articles involved, rather than in mainspace where it would be abandoned if an editor left. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:46, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should update the WikiProject instruction page that Irtapil cites. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:03, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Darkfrog24@Eptalon@Irtapil@Lee Vilenski I have gone ahead for now and commented out the conflicting guideline. Thanks - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 13:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb thank you.
Too many of the instructions here are just a copy of en.wiki sometimes there can be more confusing than helpful.
Irtapil (talk) 03:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of our stuff has not been simplified which can be an issue which is why if we do not have it, we divert to the ENWP policy/guideline on it. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 03:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski
so the thing i need to do is get enough active editors working on the project?
i was planning to do that anyway, not wanting too many people writing on a thing in my user space was the main problem, i don't mind it being in my user space while it's still small.
Irtapil (talk) 03:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Realistically something being in userspace is no different from the Wikipedia space. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon
surely this problem is solve-able?
this is a thing that can be changed, i just need to find the person with the should and authority to change it.
and possibly meet some relevant criteria?
Irtapil (talk) 03:13, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Irtapil As Eptalon stated, we do not use projects here. You can create an individual project and have it in your user space but otherwise we do not nor will we have them. Just how I have mine in my user space and I invite others to join by posting here on simple talk.
We do not have a base of users as ENWP does, so creating them will be useless and will have pretty much no chance of going anywhere. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 03:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb that seems like a very pessimistic approach. Irtapil (talk) 03:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Irtapil It is just the way it is. I am sorry you feel that way, but we are way to small to try to run them and keep up with them. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 03:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear: At the moment, this Wiki has a user base of likely less than 50 regular contributors. Wikiprojects are very nice. To be in main space/project space they need to be sufficiently long-lived, with a high volume of traffic going there. What is bad about having one in you user space? I mean: look at it, when was the last good article or very good article promoted? DYK is more or less run by 5 editors. Eptalon (talk) 12:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. DYK is run by five editors but mostly just TDKR. We haven't had a new VGA nomination in 6 months, let alone a new promotion. GA gets a few promotions, and Bowls looks like it could be promoted now, but it is still not very active. We have about 250 thousand articles to enwiki's 6.9 million, and most of ours are stubs. We have stubs for some really important articles, like Phobos and neutron. All of these problems can be summed up to not having enough active editors. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QuicoleJR WikiProjects in main space that link to other languages would help simple wiki grow. Irtapil (talk) 10:05, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Simplifying the info pages about guidelines etc. would also help. Simple English Wiki has the potential to be somewhere people can contribute if they know another language fluently but only know basic English. But the info pages all being in very difficult English is currently a barrier to that. The internet, and the world, is full of sources in numerous languages, but the main English Wiki is very skewed towards an English-speaking perspective. Machine translation means there is no longer as much of a verifiability issue with editors using sources in other languages, but monolingual English speakers relying on machine translation obviously can't find and use these sources as effectively as a native speaker could. Irtapil (talk) 10:29, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon @QuicoleJR There's a few problems.
The biggest practical disadvantage is that, when it is in a user space, I can't link the project on Simple to the project in other languages. This makes it harder for potential new contributors to find the project. So it can't be in main space because its too small … but being stuck in my user space makes it harder to grow. I can try posting invitations on the talk pages of other projects, but that is a bit spammy, particularly if I can't write fluently in the local language (the message would only be relevant to editors who know English, but it's still a bit impolite). Whereas, if I can link the projects to equivalent projects in other languages via meta, then it very easy for people to find if they are interested, without being intrusive or spammy.
Irtapil (talk) 10:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Irtapil: I think I'd have a problem asking people to come here and start doing anything major without first taking time to understand the requirements for simplicity and the other things that are different here. That's a reason for not linking our projects to other sites. As bad as it may sound, I wouldn't want a large influx of people to start doing anything significant right off the bat.
I think that's one reason this wiki is small. When people know a language, they want to expand their skills and learn more so they can do more with it. Here, people are asked to limit the way they write, and that can be frustrating. Even some of the regular contributors here don't get it right, and they've been doing it for a while.
So I guess it depends on what the new people would be doing. If they'd be writing text (whether in articles, help pages, or something else), then caution is called for. If it's anything else, maybe it could work. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"When people know a language, they want to expand their skills and learn more so they can do more with it". Plenty of people with limited English skills use English frequently. Learning the language wouldn't be the point, the purpose would be using their existing skills - their expertise in their own language and their existing English skills - to make Simple Wiki better. I expect a lot of people who know English as a second or third language could be valuable contributors if we created a welcoming environment. They could be translating articles from their home wiki into Simple English, and helping us expand stubs. Their motive wouldn't be learning English, it would be writing articles about things that are important to them or interest them, like the history or geography of their home country. Irtapil (talk) 07:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some real humans who know limited English would actually be very very helpful for creating articles in Simple English that are useful for real people; rather than fitting an arbitrary criteria that might not really be useful to any real life readers. Irtapil (talk) 07:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's incredibly unlikely anyone would join the project because it is linked to an existing WikiProject. If you were to publicise it, it doesn't matter if it's in userspace or Wikipedia space. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski, unlikely based on what? Irtapil (talk) 07:33, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why would a link to a different project bring people to the project exactly? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My thought is also that they are probably already busy within their projects on ENWP. I am not sure if other Wikis have projects, as I typically do not go to them except to revert cross-wiki vandalism. We also need to be careful, as has been said a few times in this thread, with those who do not speak or write English that well. It will cause a lot of issues for those of us who go through pages because we would need to go through and correct a lot of things which takes away from what we want to be doing or should be doing. I actually just edited an article written by someone in Bangladesh as I could not understand it, so I had to actually look it up and I trimmed it down to two sentences from the five they had, since it was all redundant and made absolutely no sense. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 08:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfD criteria (non-speedy)[change source]

If an article is just not in Simple English, if it's clearly not a machine translation, if the drafter clearly tried to make it simpler but didn't understand the scale of what was wanted, and if that author posted more than ten such articles in a short time frame, do we nominate them for regular deletion? Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Darkfrog24 Do you have an example of the article or the editor in question? Would this happen to be the same one from yesterday that opposed your method of evaluating articles for the folklore contest? Thanks - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 14:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regular deletion criteria should be about the article in question and unrelated to the editor who created it. What you are asking: Suppose there is an article that needs simplification, and that no simplification had been done for .. (months), can we nominate the article for deletion? - unfortunately, if no qd criterion applies, and the subject passes notability (etc) we can't Eptalon (talk) 14:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, some of the entries in the Feminism and Folklore contest look like they might as well be on en.wiki. I think the entrant did not know what was expected. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so it is the editor I was thinking. I also made some comments on their tp based on what they are doing and the mass creation without completing them or fixing things. Thanks and edit well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can they be simplified with a reasonable amount of work, or can we put a simple stub there? - obviously after the contest, we don't want to influence the contest Eptalon (talk) 18:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon You can take a look here. Thanks and edit well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 18:15, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All we can really do is tag them and actually work through Category:Complex pages. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski That will take a long time as we have no where near the amount of editors you have on en. It’s something we slowly work on (and by slowly I mean slower than a snail). However, this particular topic is about editors who throw near versions of en articles onto simple with little simplification and try to enter it into the Folklore contest and this one editor mentioned here seems to not understand that as they mass create them and then disapprove of how they are evaluated. We don’t really want to touch those articles while the contest is going on. So we aren’t tagging them or anything just leaving comments and suggestions on the editors tp. Thanks and edit well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are some articles that have been waiting more than 10 years for simplification. I think the question is - Is this worse than no article at all? Authorship should not normally be relevant. Rathfelder (talk) 22:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Rathfelder Oh I know. I fixed the box that shows articles back to day one tags. That’s why some boxes say almost 3200 instead of the 500 they said a week ago. The ones for the contest can be tagged after it’s over, but like Eptalon said we don’t do it while it’s going on so as to not make any influence on the contest (or appearance there of). A list can always be made. Even @Darkfrog24 may have a list of ones for after to get tagged with the issues. Thanks and edit well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. We're not talking about misconduct on the contributor's part. My take is that if the SEWP article is not much easier to read than the en.wiki counterpart, then we're better off with a red link. I'm speaking for myself here, but it's more satisfying to write a short simple English article from scratch than it is to fix someone else's regular English contributions.
As for the contest, the writing period ended March 31. The contestants have put down their pencils, so to speak. Even while the contest was ongoing, my take is that SEWP's and its readers' needs come first. If a third party improves a contestant's article before Haoreima or I can give it a score, we'll deal with it.
One contestant (a different person) submitted some contest entry articles that were deleted weeks ago. That does not disrupt the contest. We just gave that person points for the better work they did elsewhere. Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the following things are almost always possible:
  • put relevant tags on the sections in question.
  • Comment out or delete the sections that are far too complex
  • Replace with a simple stub that can later get extended
Note also that some subjects are difficult to explain, and readability tests are a good indication, but keep in mind that they fail miserably for some subjects Eptalon (talk) 09:46, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move "Gupta" (reason: disambiguation-page coming up)[change source]

Gupta, to Gupta (Yadav).--Links to 3 articles (and i can change that, 'after the fact').--Please make that move, thanks.--See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gupta_(disambiguation). Thanks. 2001:2020:32D:F669:5058:6530:E50C:3FEB (talk) 15:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daily conversation

91.73.191.43 (talk) 23:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move "Jumu'ah" to "Friday prayer"[change source]

"Friday prayer" is a more general and a more common term to non-Muslims than just Jumu'ah. We know what it's called but it's more generally called "Friday prayer" by the media. kleshkreikne. T 04:24, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Because "Friday prayer" is a common name, and also simpler, and this move was also discussed on English Wikipedia, I have moved it. Kk.urban (talk) 04:41, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should we be using English words where possible? Rathfelder (talk) 11:54, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Euphemisms[change source]

Should we be taking out euphemisms like passed away? Rathfelder (talk) 12:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Not only are such terms not simple, they are not encyclopedic. There is en:MOS:EUPHEMISM, which our version of that page doesn't have. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pages for deletion[change source]

Hi, I would like to delete the following userpages: User:LOLHWAT/beta.js User:LOLHWAT/common.js They were test pages, and Twinkle is unable to delete them due to them being JS pages.

Thanks, LOLHWAT (talk) 16:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As they are in your userspace, can you not just blank those pages? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:13, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can, but the template for JS still shows. LOLHWAT (talk) 16:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Beta.js is also uneditable. LOLHWAT (talk) 16:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i have deleted both pages Eptalon (talk) 16:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! LOLHWAT (talk) 16:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LOLHWAT FYI, you can use twinkle and select the author requests deletion option. This will put them in the category for you and the next admin to hit those will delete them for you. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 20:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of countries in the 1990s[change source]

I noticed an issue with formatting under A for Afghanistan. I do not know how to fix and was hoping someone may know what to do. It appears like someone is using svg images and not using flagu perimeters, but this is out of my wheelhouse. If someone knows how to fix it, that would be great. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 20:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is specifically {{flagdeco|Afghanistan|1987}} which is showing wrongly. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should be fixed now. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:15, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski Thanks! Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 23:16, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle Change Suggestion[change source]

I am not sure how easy this would be implement, but I am wondering what others thoughts are on this.

When we nominate something for QD, I think instead of the generic the article you created has been selected, it should include the reason why. An example would be:

"The page you wrote, Kharkiv National Medical University, has been selected for quick deletion due to adding things copied from a book, magazine, newspaper or another website without the permission of the copyright holder..." or whatever the case will be.

I think this would be more beneficial as to why it is being nominated compared to being so generic and perhaps help alleviate the issue of editors just reverting it back without knowing why. What are your thoughts? Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 23:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can't you already set up Twinkle to allow you to put in additional information in? For instance, you can also just type in, say {{qd|a1|2=adding things copied from a book, magazine, newspaper or another website without the permission of the copyright holder|editor=Lee Vilenski|date=09:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)}} or similar. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski It is set-up to do that, however, when something is selected as a QD, it posts to the page creators tp with very generic terms. So what I started doing was QD and the a warning as to what they did wrong. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The answer is yes, it can be done I believe. The text comes from {{QD-notice}}. Other Wikis have templates per entry, such as en:Template:Db-a9-notice, rather than the generic one we have. I'm not super familiar with Twinkle to know how to change the backend, but in technical terms it's doable. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:22, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski I figured they would so I did not think it is much of a change, so I should probably start a RfC for this. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Just be aware that Twinkle is one of the things that periodically gets refreshed from enwiki. Any change made locally here may be wiped out when a refresh happens. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:28, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Yeah, I would need to have someone post on the main talk page if we reach a consensus. Where should I propose this, on twinkles talk page here in simple? Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Might I suggest that the templates for the items might be suitable to be made before requesting any changes to Twinkle? Whilst it's a valuable tool, you don't need to use it to QD an article, nor to notify the user of the nomination. Knowing what they would look like in simple terms might help me to know whether we want to actually do that, or to retain using one template. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:36, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski I could come up with them within a few days. This is my off week so I am home all week. I will keep it in my user space so I can copy what it states and the recommendation for a new one to use. For G5, I would like it to not post to the talk page, which I know I can turn off (and sometimes remember to do). Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:39, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski I did check into this and they can do it really easy and fast one consensus is reached. I will have to put out a proposal I think to see what templates the community would want built in. I know we can also add custom templates and reasons in twinkle. However, if the community wants certain ones to be global for us on SEWP, that might be a better ideal than individual. What are your thoughts on this approach? Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:48, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please close[change source]

Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2024/Miam Charitable Trust#Miam Charitable Trust. It was due 2 days ago and is a full on delete. The article was nominated by @Eptalon. We have 5 deletes and then an oddball IP who said keep and the remaining are the editor who created it. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved.
Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:48, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe don't use the template here, since it adds Category:Requests for deletion that succeeded, which should really be on deletion discussions only.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 15:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FusionSub I did not place that there, I marked it as resolved and submitted. I will need to research it some more. I have a very good idea of who may have done that. But let me find the proof. I removed the template. Thanks for the headsup! Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 15:32, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Company Group Fundamentalno.rf[change source]

Brought over as a single block; not simplified and just one of several examples of unsimplified text dumps on our wiki. All sources in Russian. Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Macdonald-ross Did you take care of these? If not, can you link and I can see if I can fix them or nominate them please? Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

250K Pages[change source]

We made it to 250k! This is a big milestone for our community. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm claiming 250,000th, even though there's no such thing. Fantastic work. Youll notice Simple English has moved up at the bottom of en:Main Page Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have you (as in "Simple's community") considered to write a post on the Diff to celebrate this milestone? Trizek (WMF) (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Trizek (WMF): How do you do that? QuicoleJR (talk) 15:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
m:Diff (blog) has many information, but in short you should:
  1. draft a common statement here, highlighting the achievement, the potential 250,000th article and the next challenges for your community (for instance, the too many stubs, along with Simple's specifics).
  2. Review the draft. It must follow the editorial process, and there is a checklist for publishing. I can also assit you there
  3. login on Diff, and post the draft, then submit it for review.
  4. It's published by the editorial staff.
I'm happy to assist you on the final steps, let me know! Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to congratulate all those that made this possible. When I went on wikibreak we had about 65k fr33kman 14:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Problem I have with this, is we have a lot of one and two sentence articles. So while yes, the number is high, the quality is still low. I know it was brought up last year to have an article review team before anything got published, but I was told that was shot down. Even worse is some articles are basically dictionary definitions that are never expanded on. Again only being a sentence or two when we have wiktionary for that. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 14:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you on the issue of short, one or two-line stubs. It's something I raised last year as well. We definitely need to focus on improving the quality of our content, rather than just the quantity. Thanks for bringing it up again. – Cyber.Eyes2005Talk 14:52, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Realistically, putting something in the newsletter is good press. Every wiki has a lot of poor articles. Promoting a milestone can only get more eyes on the platform. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:15, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski I would tend to agree with that, but on the flip side of that coin, will it bring us more trouble than us normal editors can handle? Like more people who do not speak English and we have to clean up the articles or a lot more cut/paste of complex articles, more short article, etc.? I think we would be better off if we were able to get the review process over here before they go to mainspace which will have two major benefits IMHO:
  1. Less spam articles to QD, because we would stop them before going to main space
  2. We can kick back ones that have potential that meet requirements. I am sure we can get a dedicated amount of people to help out on it. Myself included. I know @Ferien has been trying but the community voted against it but I would have to find it in the archives from last year.
Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 16:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are somewhat misunderstanding the reach of the WMFs periodical. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, many articles are short or low quality but that has always been the case since we started, so I think meeting 250k is still great for a small wiki. We are one of the largest small wikis and the others have the problem of short and poor quality articles and our articles are much better quality than many of the small languages wikis so I don't think this removes anything from the quality of our work!! fr33kman 16:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski was this meant for me? If so, please remember to ping me as I don’t always look at this page unless I’m mentioned or it’s been a while. I understand the reach but at the same time if we get people here they need to understand how we work compared to any other wiki. That will be the problem we will have to face. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A way to have better quality articles, or to assist newcomers in their editing, is to turn on Mentorship. You already have mentors who volunteered, but the mentorship system is not turned on. At the moment, any new users arriving on the wiki finds tasks to work on, but they have no human being on their Homepage ready to answer their questions. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 12:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Trizek (WMF) Yes to my knowledge there are 3 of us. I did want to ask what is the readership number of the The Diff? Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 12:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we have mentors, then it probably should be turned on. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb, I asked my colleague if they can publish the recent 2023 report somewhere public. I'll keep you posted. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 17:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Trizek (WMF) Thank you. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 18:53, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any simple wikipedias for other languages like French or Chinese[change source]

English is the most commonly spoken second language, but there are others like French, Hindi, and Arabic that also have many speakers. Is there a simple wikipedia for these languages? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 17:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle Not to my knowledge. Here is a complete list of them List of Wikipedias. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb is "Thanks, and be well! " part of your signature? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 17:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle yes it is. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
to my knowledge, SEWP is the only one. During some time there was the idea for simplified French, and there was also one for Simplified German. Neither of them made it, though Eptalon (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle, PotsdamLamb, and Eptalon: Not exactly, but there is Vikidia, which is intended to be an encyclopedia for children, and does try to write things simply. Its largest version is French and it has some other languages too (including English). Unlike Wikipedia, it is censored and doesn't allow inappropriate content for children. Kk.urban (talk) 18:03, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kk.urban That is not a WMF site though from what I can tell as I cannot log in with my credentials. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 18:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb True, it's an entirely separate website. Kk.urban (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't run by the Wikimedia foundation. Also, it being moderated ('censored') kinda ruins much of the idea... Eptalon (talk) 18:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kk.urban: We have an official project for teachers to get Thier classes editing simplewiki. @Eptalon: or @Djsasso: would Probably know more than I would iirc. fr33kman 19:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like simple Arabic Wikipedia would have a lot of people who want to use it. Because many people speak only one dialect of Arabic. But I'm not sure how many people would prefer it to French or English. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 20:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
with the current ruleset, getting a new language is difficult esp. If you can't point to something like an iso-code. Eptalon (talk) 21:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the Simple Wiktionary is the only one, I believe. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. There are not any Simple Wikipedias for any other languages. The problem is that there is no such language as "Simple English". When we started simple wiki the rules were lax and you didn't have to have an official ISO language code in order to get approved. Now a Wikipedia has to be an official living or dead language. We got grandfathered in (we snuck in). If we tried to start a French Simple Wikipedia it would be denied without even a vote because the language doesn't exist. Basically we are lucky. Just about every year or so there is a discussion on meta to close simplewiki because it's not a language. It always fails because a) too much work has gone into it, b) we try to stick to BE850 and BE1500 which are official word lists we try to adhere to and c) there is an active user community and d) people don't seem to see any harm in letting it stay open. I suppose that a case could be made for Simplified Chinese because that is different from "official" Chinese. Hope this helps. fr33kman 19:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate?[change source]

Can anyone who knows about Football tell/see whether the article 2025 UEFA Super Cup is a duplicate of 2024–25 UEFA Europa League or not and whether it's notable because the article doesn't have any references yet. -- 💌Ayesha46 (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the same. Those are two different events. The UEFA Super Cup is a match between the winners of the UEFA Champions League and UEFA Europa League. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
so if I link it in the Wikidata to 2025 UEFA Europa League final, will it be fine? 💌Ayesha46 (talk) 21:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's a different match. It's a bit crazy to have the 2025 Super Cup article, as the 2024 Super Cup hasn't happened yet (it happens in like September this year). Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Haha ok it got deleted anyways 💌Ayesha46 (talk) 08:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it’s too far out yet and with the way things are going on in the world and the fact we aren’t a magic 8 ball it’s useless pretty much. It would be like doing the 2026 Winter Olympics articles right now. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 08:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 2026 Winter Olympics wouldn't be too far away right now, considering qualification is happening now. I don't neccesarily think something so far ahead is particularly worrisome, so long as we have some details. An uncited item with no info doesn't make that suitable. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski agreed. But throwing up a sentence or two is not exactly what we want either. Example. I’m going to start prepping to 2024 US Election pages. They will have some info on them, and ready to be moved out into the main space basically when they are fully nominated by their respective party. One issue though I know is pending is for Biden to be on Ohios ballots as their deadline is before the conference where he should be named. Luckily since it’s an info box it can be easily changed once and effect all the articles linked to it. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 11:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser requests[change source]

This is just a friendly reminder that people can't just request for a single username to be checked. You need to request at least two users to be checked otherwise it's called fishing and it forbidden by global WMF policy. fr33kman 20:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let me add to that that as checkusers, we are forbidden from linking usernames with IP adresses; we can't comment on IP addresses. So, only named accounts please... Eptalon (talk) 20:13, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well put!! fr33kman 21:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Green tickY Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 12:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ultraviolet[change source]

Early today I tried implementing WP:Ultraviolet through here expecting for it to be shown by creating 10mn (thanks to the MW GlobalUser Extension), but it didn't work. However, JPxG is an example of said extension working. How exactly do I do this? It's up for QD but I would like to know. LOLHWAT (talk) 21:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LOLHWAT Ultraviolet and Redwarn don’t work here as our setup on the backend is different. That’s why we use Twinkle or just user scripts. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 08:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

replicating templates from en.wiki[change source]

{{West Bank Labelled Map}}

is it feasible to get that working here?

it's an attempt to replicate en:Template:West Bank Labelled Map

or is there to much missing?

it's not vitally important, if there's a simple fix it would be useful, but if we're missing simmering big i'll just delete the broken attempt.

Irtapil (talk) 03:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check it now - is that how it's supposed to look? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Irtapil what is this being used for? We can’t just bring templates over especially for just one article. I see you attempted to copy it over and it didn’t work. There are certain requirements to be met and looked at before it comes into SEWP. I don’t see any back links to any of your subpages and I know you have a lot of subpages so I would urge you to ask before you bring it over so it can be done correctly. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 08:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article feedback[change source]

Hi, Could editors/admins etc review User:Davey2010/sandbox2/VW Golf and let me know below what you think or what works and what doesn't please?,

I'm 50/50 on whether it's cited to death and whether the infoboxes are needed (I'm partially convinced the infoboxes have made it more complex than it needs to be but maybe it's just me),

I welcome all feedback and criticism good or bad too, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 15:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems to divide sections quite a bit. Maybe make them like this? LOLHWAT (talk) 16:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does but I wanted it in a way that made sense - For instance not every sport model was made in the same year so combining it into one wouldn't work, Apologies if I've missed it but regarding your link I'm lost ? Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was suggesting those sections could be formatted ====like this==== LOLHWAT (talk) 16:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your suggestion, I've removed the section titles and have to say it looks a lot better so many thanks for your suggestion/help :), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you don't need an infobox for every section. One is plenty. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Lee - I've removed those too, Many thanks for your feedback it's greatly appreciated, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 20:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010 Looks great. I have two critiques for you.
  1. Way too much bolding throughout the article. I would try to put the bolding in the beginning of each section as it looks really weird when you are reading a sentence and 1/2 way or 3/4 way through a six word sentence boom you have bold lettering.
  2. Double check your references for errors.
  • One such example is "Countdown to the new Golf: Golf Mk II – a perfected concept". VW Press. 16 October 2019. p. 2. Retrieved 10 April 2024 {{cite web}}: More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help). There is a script that will show you those errors too so you know if something is wrong with it. Some can be done with reFill and Citoid, however, some like this one have to done by hand. I do love the article though. I miss the old beatles.
Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @PotsdamLamb, Many thanks for your helpful feedback it's much appreciated, Same here to be honest I miss all the old cars, everything had character back then and looked different too! :(
So I've removed the bolding but have instead bolded the Golf name in each section and have left those that are called different names in bold and I've fixed the cite, Hows it look now?, Many thanks, Warm regards, –Davey2010Talk 00:36, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010 That looks better. At the bottom in the hidden category section I see user pages with reference errors. I would look at all of your references and see what’s going on as preview is not showing any issues. It can be a / at the end of the url or title or some oddball thing. Some look like they are meant to be notes and not references. Also, I did run citation expander on it to see if that would work and it didn’t. On your references you can change anything in all caps to standard caps. Do you have a history section you can add at the top of the article about maybe why the concept was invented, any ideas why or what it was made for? I think that would be a great starter for it outside of when it first started being made? Crash derby’s with beetles were my favorite thing back in the day to watch as a kid. They never gave up! Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 03:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've added url-access=subscription to a few cites,
Regarding the Stromer book; bizarrely it shows as normal, if I use incognito then it doesn't - i can get around it by going back to the book home page (no preview), click preview and then find the page number - that makes it then work but if I then grab that page number link and repaste in a whole new incognito window It doesn't work .... so I have no idea what's causing that (i'm assuming it's some sort of error with the Google Books site?)
Regarding Forbes; I've added archived urls so that way it can still be shown/previewed,
Many thanks for your helpful feedback it's much appreciated, Many thanks, Warm regards, –Davey2010Talk 12:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mentoring program[change source]

Recently the mentoring feature has been mentioned with some users saying that they wish it to be turned on (only an admin can do this). Should we turn it on? fr33kman 18:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think if we have people who want to do mentorship, then we should turn on the system. I've done it on enwiki before, and didn't get lots out of it, but then it's better to have something than nothing at all. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we have enough mentors to keep it running, I don't see why it would be a problem. We could always just turn it back off if it ends up being a problem. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you have any question about it, let me know. I work with the team in charge of this project. Some ressources:
Mentors personal management:
Options to manage mentors:
Documentation and ressources:
"Enough mentors" mean 1 mentor for each set of 500 new accounts per month, with a minimum of 3 mentors. At your wiki, given the number of new accounts, it means 3 mentors minimum.
Trizek (WMF) (talk) 18:28, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Three seems very doable. I'm happy to sign up and give it another go if it would help. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe we have 6 or 7 mentors already (myself included). Based on the new accounts link about 90% of them are sock puppets if not more. FYI I posted this on WP:AN as well requesting it be turned on. The way I see it is this would be a great alternative to the ENWP AfC boards as we would be able to see what our mentors are doing and we have enough people who know the history of our socks that we could get them blocked. One thing I will note though is that if someone is blocked, they will remain as a mentee for up to 12 hours. I found that out when a mentee I had was a SP and I went to media to inquire and that’s what I was told. Any where between 1 min up to 12 hours depending on when the system purges. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
90% of new users are sockpuppets? That's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lee look at the ratios. We have more IP editors than named editors. The new named editors get (for the most part) C/U blocked. We do get some from ENWP and once in a while we get others from their home wiki that hop on here. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You think we have over 800 sockpuppet accounts created every month? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lee - You have to take into account a lot of things for this wiki. We have a lot of “educational users” (those whose teachers are teaching them how to use WP) and they SEWP since we are simple. That is about 100 users or so every 1/4. About another 200 come on to make one edit, edit war or vote (not going there with these 3), we have some that stay, some that go, we have the ONESTRIKE policy, and I’m not sure how accurate that graph is because if we really had that many users editing we wouldn’t have itsy bitsy articles. So I would say roughly 90% of those are CU blocked when you take away everything else. If you look at our CU board they find a lot of farms too and we don’t know how many accounts that entails, then we have GRP who makes, god knows, how many accounts then we have global locks for CU that happen. So I feel pretty confident in my answer of 90%. So that takes us to a little over one hundred new users. If we want exact numbers I’m sure we can obtain them via special pages and with a script that marks the blocked and glock’d account plus number of edits plus if they even made an edit. I have seen on IRC where accounts are made but no changes are made to SEWP. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 22:14, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should not be hesitant on turning Mentorship on: it is the best way to figure out what is would be the volume of questions. ONSTRIKE Sockpuppets aren't likely to disturb mentors as they prefer to keep their profile low. Teachers and students, on the contrary, might be really happy to have a human being available to help them.
Remember that any admin can turn the feature on at Special:EditGrowthConfig. I can do this for you if you want.
Trizek (WMF) (talk) 09:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Trizek (WMF) It has been brought up to our admins for their decision. They would have to make the decision as they run SEWP and we (as non-admins) would not want to step on their toes. They may want to turn it on, leave it off, take a vote. It’s been posted here and on the admin notice board. @Fr33kman have you gotten any insights from other admins on this? Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 10:11, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the update PDL! Trizek (WMF) (talk) 14:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to archive the main page talk[change source]

Hello all! Due to the requirements on the BRFA for Bot873, I have opened a proposal located at Talk:Main Page to archive it based on its current configuration. The proposal will be open for at least 14 days after which consensus will determine if it should start being archived again or not. All links are in the proposal for you to look at. Please do not comment here but head over to Talk:Main Page. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 23:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All editors head over to the links above and your comments or ¡votes. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:37, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all just a reminder that we have a Request for comments open at Main talk page regarding if we should archive the talk page based on a previous RfC about the settings. Please head over as it is due to close on April 25. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 07:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect goes to a bad place[change source]

Buddhist texts goes to a small little known series of buddhist texts. This is not an appropriate redirect target because lots of things like the Lotus Sutra are also Buddhist texts Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 16:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle IMO, the redirect should be deleted based on Buddhist texts from ENWP. I will nominate it for QD and see what an admin thinks. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sesame Street[change source]

Can someone take a look at all the changes an IP is making on this article and remove anything not correct please? I am about to head out or I would do it. One I saw was referring to Elmo as a "meerkat like creature." Last time I checked, Elmo did not have a tail, was spotted, or came from Africa. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:34, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PotsdamLamb: The changes did not look like they were correct, so I reverted them. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@QuicoleJR Thanks! I didn’t think so either. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 18:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I not autoconfirmed[change source]

Autoconfirmed user needs 10 edit and 4 days account age, but I have 18 edits and account created on 15 March 2024 and still not autoconfirmed. Carrot2333 (talk) 06:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Carrot2333 You are autoconfimed. See here Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 06:55, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But I can't see twinkle in gadgets. Carrot2333 (talk) 06:57, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Carrot2333 Look in Browsing Gadgets it should be the third one from the bottom. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 07:01, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is not. Carrot2333 (talk) 07:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Carrot2333 Do the second item where it has the link to edit your twinkle preferences. If it does not work, then you might need to have rollback rights on this wiki.
Here is the link Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 07:13, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Carrot2333. Can you do me a favor and press F12, which should open your browser's JavaScript console. Click on the console tab. Paste this, hit enter, and let me know what it says. mw.config.get( 'wgUserGroups' ); I'm expecting something like (3) ['*', 'user', 'autoconfirmed'], will double check that you're autoconfirmed from a programming code point of view. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC - Turn on mentoring system[change source]

As mentioned above at Mentoring program we should work on gaining consensus to have the feature turned on. We do get a lot of users that come on here and do good work and others that don’t. I personally feel this will be an added benefit and bonus to our community so the proposal is as follows:

Proposal[change source]

Have admins turn on and configure the feature (should not take long as it’s mostly linking to the correct pages based on what I’ve seen). You can see the features here in summary format. At last check we had eight mentors I believe.

Please place your ¡vote and/or comments in the appropriate section.

Support[change source]

* Support A a good way to start, and because our community demands it, I propose that admins decide who can be a mentor & ther should be some sort of criteria. DIVINE 07:39, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support for now. I agree with the comments above. Since we have enough mentors willing to participate, it would only be a benefit. If it doesn't work out later, we could always turn it off. – Cyber.Eyes2005Talk 10:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose[change source]

  • While I think that mentoring is a great idea, I also fear that in our case, this might be a solution looking for a problem. How many new users are there, each month, and do we really need a formalized process? - Do we agree on what the proper way of coaching these people should be? - I wlil be frank, I commonly 'translate' pages, I have translated 4-5 this month, most go to Simple English Wikipedia. I submitted entries to Feminism and Folklore, none was taken, because they were 'too difficult to understand' (acording to some Flesch-Kincaid calculator). How many new editors did we get the last 2-3 months, and how many did we 'scare away', because their writing wasn't simple enough? - So, before burdening this wiki with yet another process, with additional rules, stop and think that one of the things that makes people come to SEWP from ENWP is that the community is much smaller, and there are less procedures and rules to keep track of, and follow. I don't oppose that editors help each other improve their skills in writing Simple English, but I think that it should not be formalized into a process with additional rules and procedures.--Eptalon (talk) 10:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • First of all, we should know that yes, we do have a huge number of editors and IPs contributing to our community. However, what I have seen in the past few days is that IPs are making better contributions than most of the new users here. Mentorship is not a negative request, but who will be the mentor? Who has that much time to handle the new user registration flow? For example, when I was active on Simple Wiki, it was flourishing and still it is going well as now we do have a strong community to defend vandalism, fix articles, patrol new pages, and our community is better aware of RD instead of QD. While we have Simple Talk to address all concerns, we don't need Mentorship for now.

FYI: We already have WP:Simple Talk to address issues where not many new users are engaged, and we should promote it on our front page to address any issues.DIVINE 19:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion and Questions[change source]

  • The proposal mentions that some users come here and good work, and some don't do such good work. Which ones are you thinking would benefit from the mentoring system? It seems to me that the ones who do good work might not need mentoring, and at least some of the others wouldn't want it. I can remember many times that a new user here wasn't writing in simple enough language, but they weren't interested in learning how to. Are you thinking we would impose mentoring on the ones who don't do as well? --Auntof6 (talk) 09:25, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Auntof6 New users are automatically assigned to a random mentor. Once assigned, we can see all of their edits on our dashboard. Example is an editor came through today and created a bunch of articles that are QD others created articles that can meet the criteria but they just put a paragraph on it with no sources, no pictures, no links, and no cats. This will be a way I think all of us more established editors can keep the wiki going and growing and catch all the tiny vandalism that gets thrown in as well by watching the mentees edits. It’s not big brother it’s to help them understand the rules and criteria for SEWP. As this moves forward we should get enough mentors and grow our base editing team and start towards the 500k goal. Plus if we do get more after the story get published (mentioned above) we hopefully will see an influx of users. They will have a series of links that the admins configure like the basic words, extended, the info in your user page, etc. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the explanation. Does this apply to IP users or only to registered users? In the meantime, we can look at new users' changes for some of this information.
    What story are you referring to?
    Also, please, please, PLEASE do not make it a goal to reach a certain number of articles. Every time we approach a big round number, we get a lot of minimal articles created just to inflate the number. A lot of those articles are of poor quality, and some even have to be deleted. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Auntof6 Thanks for your response.
    1. It does not apply to IP users. We will still need to monitor the new changes or the IRC channel for those (I personally prefer the IRC channel as I can see all changes at the moment they happen and react faster if needed).
    2. The story is referring to the comments made by Trizek (WMF) in the topic Wikipedia:Simple talk#250K Pages. It is the 3rd or 4th comment I believe.
    3. I am aware of that, which is what I had posted in the previous statement about what we can do with the Mentees and what we will see, so that we as mentors, can get them in the right direction to create fuller articles other than basic one to two sentence articles. We have a good team of users who constantly monitor new articles and fix them, QD them, RfD them, etc. I am not seeing that as a major issue. I do a lot of work out of this this link which helps me find bad pages because they are not linked to wikidata and I can work from there on the above mentioned items. If you have any other questions, please let me know.
    Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion with Divine[change source]

Moved from wrong section.

  •  Comment: Admins are only here to help maintain order. They cannot choose who participates in what. They also cannot set the criteria either without a consensus from the community. Those of us who are mentors are long time users and admins. If someone who signs up to be a mentor is blatantly ignoring everything and guiding in the wrong direction causing disruption, then an admin can block that user. So basically just as Wikipedia is not a democracy, it is also not a monarchy or dictatorship. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 07:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Firstly, I mean the admin should set some criteria (which can be discussed later by the community after they file proposals like they started now). Secondly, I don’t understand what you mean by your above comment as I never mentioned democracy, monarchy, or dictatorship anywhere. Also, I am a user here, suggesting while voting. DIVINE 10:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @DIVINE My comment about democracy and such is in response to you saying I propose that admins decide who can be a mentor. That is why I said that. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 10:12, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lee Vilenski Have you or the admins set any type of criteria or select editors who can or cannot be mentors on ENWP? Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 10:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not that I know of, you can just sign up. Abuse would likely lead to a block regardless. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lee Vilenski Thanks. That was my thought as well and stated here. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 12:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From what I remember, mentorship isn't a user-right. But, be aware that we do expect people who are mentors to not bite the mentees and give them useful information. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lee Vilenski yes same rules here. Mentor project is a project anyone can join. If they screw up an admin can ask them to step or block the person. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 13:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lee Vilenski Why can't we introduce a new platform like Simple:Teahouse instead of a mentor? It seems easier, doesn't it? Even simpletalk is already here. DIVINE 14:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @DIVINE Our simple talk is our version of the teahouse, the village pump, etc. it is all in the sake of simplicity. The mentorship is a whole different concept because they can get one-on-one time with their mentor to ask questions, review their work, etc.

    Basically our simple talk is described as
    Wikidata: Project:Village pump (Q16503), central place for discussions about a wiki; page (usually with subpages) used to discuss technical issues, policies, and operations of a Wikimedia wiki
    Aliases Travellers' pub, Simple talk, Travelers' pub, Wikipedia:Village pump, Wikiversity:Colloquium, Wikisource:Scriptorium, Wikiquote:Village pump, Wikibooks:Reading room, Wikinews:Water cooler, Wiktionary:Beer parlour, Wikidata:Project chat, Commons:Village pump, Project:Current issues, Meta:Babel, Wikispecies:Village Pump Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 14:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @PotsdamLambI think you don't have to jump into everything I posted here. I respectfully asked another editor, and it wasn't even concerning you. And this project isn't just yours; it's ours too. From now on, I'm going to ignore any response from you to my queries if it doesn't pertain to you. DIVINE 14:37, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @DIVINE Anyone can answer any question posed to anyone. That is the way this works, irrespective of what name space it is in. I am available to answer questions, and I have the knowledge to answer them. I am extremely familiar with all of this because of my prior involvement with the various things that have happened. If I didn’t know the answer then I would not comment. I am one of the long term editors here at SEWP with a lot of knowledge and I even learn everyday new things. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 14:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's probably not a mutually exclusive thing. It's totally possible to have a teahouse and also mentorship. The thing about the Teahouse (I'm more of a EN:WP:HD guy) is that there is already plenty of noticeboards for how much activity there is here, what's really required is a suitable person to help new accounts with settling in. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lee Vilenski You are on our EN:WP:HD board. Then we have VIP, RFCU and finally WP:AN. That pretty much covers what we have for about 50 regular named accounts. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 19:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you take a look at WP:Administrators, administrators are the ones who manage user rights. Currently, there are 17 active administrators who can review and consider consensus when granting tool access, while also taking suggestions from the community. Additionally, please be kind to other users here; I don't feel comfortable with your comments above. DIVINE 10:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @DIVINE I am being kind. I’m pointing out various things which I’m allowed to do and I am not being rude about it in any way, shape or form. As far as rights and tools, those are access rights here on Wiki, the Mentor is not a rights access feature. It was a wish list item that is open to any editor in the community to join. That is the difference. This is a WMF community project in which a grant was authorized to build it out. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 10:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If I reckon correctly, WMF staff mentioned that only at least 3 mentors are needed. DIVINE 10:44, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is based on numbers but there is nothing that says we cannot have more. It is a random system. When a new user signs up they get randomly assigned to any available mentor who is accepting new mentees. If that mentor leaves or opts out, the mentee will be assigned to another mentor who is available automatically. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 10:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion with Eptalon[change source]

@Eptalon WMF gave us a by month count of new users into SEWP. It came to, on average 900, I estimate less due to CU, fly by editing, etc. There is no process really. When they create their account they are taken automatically to the new user page which introduces them to our wiki and presents various activities for them based on what they like to do. These range from very simple wiki linking with suggestions based on the page to the more complex of HARV/SFN errors and other difficult to do tasks. They are also randomly assigned a mentor and it is told to them when they first sign up so they can contact that individual via a help me button and pose their question. It’s pretty easy imo. So is the configuration as the web links need to be set up which are like what is the page with our policies on it, our MOS, etc. pretty much everything that a new user will need to have access to before they can start. We should also be able to push out the links as well to them. All of the mentors signed up (at my last check) are our more active editors and I also believe Ferien is on the list too. I know a lot about it because I was looking into it before the announcement was made. I do know WMF suggested we write something for them to publish about us hitting 250k articles, but IMO I would rather wait until the system is in place before that gets there. There has been no discussion on who would write it though. I think there are a few admins and a couple of editors who would be good at it (and for a touch of class put in Simple English). This RfC is due to close on Friday, April 19, 2024 at 09:20 (UTC) Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 09:20, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stubbing question[change source]

Mostly for @Auntof6 (since there is a lot of knowledge there), but anyone can comment. On stubs, it can be removed from the stub category if it meets 1,500 characters. That is roughly 210-380 words with spaces included. Do we feel that is enough of a word count to take it out of a stub category and put it to normal status? 2,000 characters is roughly 290-500 words with spaces. I think that would be a bit better to take out of stub status. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 00:52, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts are that we should give as much weight to completeness as we do to length. There can be a lot of words without a lot of meaning, so word/character count don't give a good indication of much.
When I say completeness, I don't mean that every aspect of a subject has to be covered in depth. I just mean that important aspects should be mentioned. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Ok I was just going off of Wikipedia:Stub, which is why I thought of this. I will keep that in mind as I go through pages. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 03:02, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Well, keep in mind that those are just my thoughts. They aren't official policy or anything. Of course, Wikipedia:Stub also isn't a policy or guideline (I'm not sure what it is), so we can refer to enwiki's, which does mention incompleteness.
By the way, in case you weren't aware, be sure to count only the article text when determining word or character count. Things not to count include infoboxes, nav boxes, references, tables, categories, administrative stuff like maintenance templates, etc. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Correct. I have a script that ignores all of that and gives me the actual words only. It removes headings, references, boxes, any hidden content, etc. (as you mentioned). The definition put into Wikidata for it is very short article that does not go much beyond a definition.from Wikidata object So that makes it very hard to determine if it is a stub or not. One paragraph could be enough to take it out of stub status by that definition. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 06:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
1,500 is just a rough guide. You can have 3,000 and it still be a stub. On enwiki, there are fully complete GAs that barely meet the character limit. Stubs are articles that don't give a good estimation of a subject and can be expanded easily. I don't think going by character limits is all that helpful. I tend to think if the article has major sections and covers major points of a subject it is no longer a stub. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So what are your opinions on "Kuwaiti dinar " whether it's a stub or not? and can anyone tell how many words it has (ofcourse without counting that infobox/references,etc) -- 💌Ayesha46 (talk) 14:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prose size (text only): 1407 B (243 words)
I'd say that's an example of something that is a stub by character count, but not actually a stub. There's certainly more that could be added, but to state it's a stub is missing what those types of articles are Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have to compare the text we have with the text we think the article should have. It's not an exact science. Its quite a subjective question. So I would not call Kuwaiti dinar a stub - but its not a subject I know anything about. Rathfelder (talk) 21:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski@Rathfelder That is basically the question I posed. At what point can we say something is no longer a stub? I guess from what editors are saying and an admin from here and one from ENWP it is more a judgement call on the contents of the article versus word count or character count. Would that be a correct assumption? I bring this up because when I am patrolling through pages I find some marked as a stub that are in depth but do not reach any of the, I guess, guidelines, of removing them from a stub. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's exactly what we are saying. There is no exact number, just a 1500 character guide that is not a catch all. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So then I can honestly say that if I come across any that I feel are no longer stubs, I can remove the stub. They will probably get the complex tag, but then again, 90% of the articles here would need that lol (not an exact percentage Lee, just a random number). Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:44, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, any template that you don't believe fits an article can be removed, just use good judgement. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:46, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski Thanks! Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 21:49, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Movement charter[change source]

There is currently a discussion at Meta-Wiki about making a charter for the entire Wikimedia community across all sites. They are taking community input on the first draft of the charter until the end of April. The charter can be found here and discussed here. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Complex pages wanted?[change source]

Hello,

I just came across the page Non-denominational Muslim. The page is short. It was created in 2015, since then, several peopel edited it. Yet if I run one of these famous bean-counters, it tells me, that there are too many beans, so to say. Should we flag such articls with {{complex}}? - I know that simplfying this is likely a lot of work, and the article was there for almost a decade, likel a seashell in warm water. DO oyu think that iven our community, would the article be simpilfied sooner, if it had the tag? Eptalon (talk) 11:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon Honestly I don’t think it will matter. I have come across many article with tags still on them from the beginning of the wiki. What’s funny is we have the complete opposite really of articles being to short. Since a lot of our articles are coming from (mostly) ENWP, they are copying just the first one or two sentences and leaving it at that or they bring over really complex ones which we tag for QD. We currently have 568 tagged articles with complex or complex in line tags. That is from 2016-present. That’s a tiny fraction of the stubs we have. I’ve been working through my cat and I come across a lot of stubs and malformed pages so I tag them and leave a message at the users talk page. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 11:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Realistically, if something is complex, then we need to tag it. Will it make someone come around an actually simplify it? Probably not. But, tagging is an important step, it tells us more about what the scale of the issue is. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:06, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski Here is the cat.
Category:Complex pages Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 13:09, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category move discussion[change source]

Hi! Wasn't sure where the best location, so feel free to let me know if there's a en:WP:MfD equivellent here. There's a big old series of categories in Category:Establishments by continent and year, for different places and dates. They have categories like Category:1978 establishments in Europe. It's not super simple, would anyone support moving such categories to something a bit more simple? What about Category:1978 creations in Europe or similar? I'm happy to sort out the moves (and likely an AWB run) if there's some consensus.

Let me know if you're happy with categories being less simple. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lee Vilenski To my knowledge with some cat work, we do have those, but before they can be “created” there is a minimum requirement of 3 members to be in it first. I’ve seen things like 2020 buildings constructed or 1944 vehicles. So IMO, I do not think it would be a problem. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 13:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I'm not asking for anything to be created, rather to move the existing cats to a more simple title. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It can be called a move, a merge or however you prefer. I’m assuming you would be doing a redirect from the old cat to the new then AWB to change the links? Also not sure about created as it’s a noun with three meanings and one refers to "God" creating the universe. I’m sure this admin could chime in as they do a lot of work there @Auntof6 is very helpful in this area and has a mastery of them. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 13:31, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PotsdamLamb: Actually, created is a verb, not a noun. I'm not sure what three meanings you're referring to. It generally means to make something new, and that applies to the Biblical Creation as well as to simpler, everyday things. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The categories would probably use the word "creations", which is a noun, right? Kk.urban (talk) 03:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a good feeling about: Category:1978 creations in Europe, but maybe there is a synonym for the noun establishment (and that a noun is used in that category-name).--Problems? The category seems to have to cover many things, such as city-establishments and company-establishments.--Was not the Apple Company created in a garage (but the establishment was done months or years later)? When was Rome created (and how many years later was there an establishment, in regard to the city).--Another thing: The creation of some of things, seem to be POV; However, the establishment, is not POV.--Another thing: Things have to sound like okay English; "Creations"? Has it not become a loaded word, and largely meaning "an item of clothing, created in the fashion industry", or "a food-thingy that is made by a chef, under artsy-fartsy circumstances"? 2001:2020:345:BEA6:F5DC:E82E:6FC3:21B (talk) 15:13, 14 April 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:345:BEA6:F5DC:E82E:6FC3:21B (talk) 15:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IP user, honestly the way they are we probably do have some in many forms, meaning the same things.
@MathXplore @Cyber.Eyes.2005@Dream Indigo all do a lot of cat work as well, so I am pinging them for input. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 15:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! When I first got here on SEW, I had the same thoughts as @Lee Vilenski, so I understand what they mean: "Establishments? Isn't that an advanced word?" Yes, it is, I learned it in high school.
I like the idea, however I feel like the word "creations", despite its simpler sound, is no better than "establishment". Neither of them is on the Wikipedia:Basic English combined wordlist, which is the list that we have to follow (even though many times we are forced to use other words). In my opinion, if we want to change, we should use a word on that list.
"Start" is a basic word, for example. We could say "Category:Things started in YYYY", but I do not like how bad and wordy it sounds. "Established" is great because it has a corresponding noun, "establishments". "Started" does not have a corresponding noun (or maybe it does? I do not remember right now).
We can say "Category:Musical groups started [established] in YYYY", but how do we say "Category:Musical groups by year of establishment" using "to start"?
Another important note: just like on enwiki, we also have dis-establishment categories and many subcategories using the same, advanced noun, such as the one about musical groups I told you about before. If we change "establishments", we must change "disestablishments" too, and edit every single Estcat template to display the correct words and to put subcategories in the correct parent categories.
My temporary solution is to change all the EstcatCountry/Continent/etc templates (there are a lot of these templates, you can see what they do here: Category:1978 establishments in Europe) to display a Wikilink to establishments (we should also start a page or a redirect with that name). If somebody does not know the meaning of that word, they can click or hover on the link and learn it in a few seconds.
Sorry if my English is not that simple here, I had to use specific words to explain better. Thank you for reading my thoughts :-) Dream Indigo 16:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
wikt:establishment would be the link if we were to do that. "Created" was just an example, I'm happy to go with whatever. What about Category:Started in 1973 or similar? I know we lose some definitives, but we should try to limit the amount of complex words throughout, and categories should be no different. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski I love your new idea! I support it. We could also have "Category:Ended in YYYY", "Template:StartcatCountry", "Template:EndcatCountry", et cetera. I hope more editors read this and share their opinions. Dream Indigo 19:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think you have a point, but do you realize what a tremendously huge task this would be? There are 6,436 existing categories that have the string "establishments" in their title (that would cover both establishments and disestablishments). I believe there are also a lot of redlinked categories on pages with the string -- I don't know how to count those.
While doing that, the television series debuts categories could also be addressed, because debut is also not a simple word. There are 218 categories with the string "debuts" in their title. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Massive changes have been made by bots in the past. Kk.urban (talk) 03:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Establishment and "Dis-establishment" is simple, in at least one sense: it is one word - and quite possibly it can only be replaced by several words (or several cases, having a word changed).--Apple Company, started in a garage, around the time of two famous guys making a computer that worked. However, the company was registered at some other point (but possibly the same year).--It is unlikely that the word registered will work, with all cases where "established" is now used.--All of this reminds me of: The title of an article, is allowed to have words which are non-simple.--For now, the word started, seems like an option that is not as bad - as other options. 2001:2020:339:9BB2:7D5E:1C48:1D61:C919 (talk) 04:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:345:BEA6:F5DC:E82E:6FC3:21B[reply]
Being one word does not mean it's simple in the sense that we're talking about. Even the base word, "establish," isn't considered simple in that sense. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get that these things are a lot of changes, but my thoughts are, so long as something is technically possible, we shouldn't let the size of the task prevent improvememts. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:20, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so active in this Wikipedia, but I support replacing established/disestablished with started/ended. Categories using establishments/disestablishments can be reworded so that we can use started/ended there. For example, Category:2000 disestablishments can be replaced with Category:Ended in 2000. Yes, it may sound strange to a native speaker, but it does not sound strange to me. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • changes) 12:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, "disestablishments" isn't something you'd say in everyday parlance anyway. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: Well, everyday life is not about organizing a encyclopedia (or an encyclopedia). 2001:2020:327:D575:60B7:EC18:9EFF:8910 (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:345:BEA6:F5DC:E82E:6FC3:21B[reply]
Comment - Can redirects be helpful? Such as, redirecting from Category:Railway stations in the United States opened in 1978, or similar. (En-wiki uses "Establishment", but then also has Category: ... stations ... opened in 1978, in that category tree.) 2001:2020:327:D575:60B7:EC18:9EFF:8910 (talk) 19:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:345:BEA6:F5DC:E82E:6FC3:21B[reply]
Comment - make changes in the lower parts of the category tree (for now), and keep Establishment (as part of the title), at the top of the category tree (for now).--That is my latest suggestion (or feeling). Thanks. 2001:2020:327:D575:60B7:EC18:9EFF:8910 (talk) 19:14, 15 April 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:345:BEA6:F5DC:E82E:6FC3:21B /2001:2020:327:D575:60CD:227A:2E3B:EDA (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not really something that's suitable. We should be consistent. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Script for everyone[change source]

As all know, we have to do a nice WP:BEFORE before nominating any article. I found a script on ENWP that will greatly assist with this. I customized it for this wiki. The script is at User:PotsdamLamb/scripts/NPPLinks.js. If you do not know how to install scripts, please leave me a message on my TP and I will happily assist you. Once you install it and refresh your browser you will see all of the following links on your left hand bar (or right depending on the skin):

Copyvio, check Duplicate article, check AI/LLM check (this will actually allow you to run the text through an AI and see if it was written by human or AI), WP:BEFORE web, WP:BEFORE news, WP:BEFORE news archive, WP:BEFORE books, WP:BEFORE scholar, WP:BEFORE check foreign wikis (currently does not work), WP:BEFORE search for foreign name (currently does not work), Professor (Google), Professor (Scopus), Reliable sources search, News (name in title), Wikidata, Species search. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does it work correctly here at our community, as most of them are free, but I know we can copy and paste scripts from enwiki? DIVINE 17:54, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DIVINE Yes. I have been testing it. Notice I said I customized it. So I took out anything that would direct to ENWP and made it to set to SEWP. For example, copyvio on the main one would use ENWP version of the check, the one I made, uses Simple. If it did not work, I would not have posted it here. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, all scripts are free on Wikipedia. By our agreement we have to release them to the public domain with attribution. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You mentioned that you found the source above from enwiki, so I think it has already been released into the public domain DIVINE 17:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am just informing you based on your statement "as most of them are free" that all of them are free. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 18:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zoroastrianism[change source]

Hello friends. I Need your honest opinion. Zoroastrianism is considered a Monotheistic religion, by Zoroastrians themselves, and by the majority of Scholars (based on reliable source.)

Can you give your Opinion regarding the Religion and tell me here, whether the religion is Monotheistic or not?

thank you. Researcher1988 (talk) 08:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All mainstream Zoroastrians for many centuries have been monotheists. It's possible that Zurvanists were dithiesists, but that sect died out a long time ago. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf
thank you. there is an ongoing dispute for 4 month in English Wikipedia, Zoroastrianism talk page. we try to reach a consensus. may I ask you to join the discussion and vote for the consensus? Researcher1988 (talk) 11:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but to be clear, this page is not really the appropriate venue for this kind of question. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:18, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf Actually, per w:WP:Canvassing#Appropriate notification it is. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For clarification, that was my first thought too, but after reading that and the way they posted, it meets the guidelines. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per the header and the fact that we are on smiple.wp, this is about the Simple English Wikipedia, but it seems that his issue is on en.wp. Does the community here want content dispute discussions about a different wiki discussed here? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf It can be relevant regardless of which project it comes from. An editor from Wikivoyage can post here and ask for comments on a dispute there. They just can't go to individual users pages (unless they meet the requirements). Mostly it is for consensus. Not all of us on here use Simple English (like me). I edit here because I am banned from ENWP, however, some are not banned from ENWP. They find it easier to edit here. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:49, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf No worries. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 17:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf - this thread can possibly be looked at, as disturbance of Simple-wikipedia.--By the time of post "11:05, 15 April", there is (probably, or quite possibly) reason to be (somewhat) concerned.--Thanks for your good catch.--Not sure that I will be coming back to this thread. 2001:2020:327:D575:39A5:4B5E:1F43:B973 (talk) 19:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
IP user, there is no disruption of simple. Editor did not even post a link but is allowed per above linked policy, is allowed to do what they did. They have not posted anywhere else on this Wikipedia per their contributions, so your "thought" is incorrect. They are not even close to qualifying under disruptive changing. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 20:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol[change source]

Do we have a "new pages patrol"? Somewhere I can easily find the pages that might need the most work? BottleOfSoup (talk) 10:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BottleOfSoup: Yes, it's at Special:NewPages. If you have the patroller right, the unpatrolled pages are highlighted in yellow. You're a bit new to get that right, but you can see what has recently been created.
And since you're new, let me welcome you and point you to this list I maintain of things that are different here from English Wikipedia. The list itself isn't a policy or guideline, but it links to relevant policies and guidelines. If you have any questions about it, feel free to let me know. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:44, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
that list of your could use a link to WP:CATGENDER... Eptalon (talk) 10:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[change source]

I had seen by 2018-20 that the infoboxes of Galileo Galilei and Jesus were being replaced with the ones from English Wikipedia, but the languages used in the infoboxes were kept as it is. When I made changes to those infoboxes, they were undone by other users. I don't know why the users did that. The languages used in the imported infoboxes should be changed to use Simple English words. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • changes) 12:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sbb1413 - Please check the talk page (of each of those articles).--If you still think about changing each infobox, then go ahead change it.--That is what I am thinking for now.--If your edits get changed again, then you should maybe consider starting an Infobox-thread, on each of those talk-pages. 2001:2020:327:D575:39A5:4B5E:1F43:B973 (talk) 19:47, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you use templates on your user page in this Wikipedia[change source]

I don't know! Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 13:18, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, is there WikiLove and barnstars? Amoxicillin on a Boat (talk) 13:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Amoxicillin on a Boat: Templates: yes. WikiLove: not the way it exists on other Wikipedias, but you can always write your own message of support. Barnstars: yes. -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, also see Wikipedia:Barnstars. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:43, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move titles (month of April)[change source]

Please move Ibac to Ibac (in comics) or Ibac (comic character), etc.--Then I will translate en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBAC. Thanks, 2001:2020:327:D575:39A5:4B5E:1F43:B973 (talk) 19:39, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done ✔️ DIVINE 19:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DIVINE and IP user, why did you need this moved? It matches what is in ENWP and there is no other article named Ibac that will be created. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 19:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As long as it's redirected, it will be easier for people to know that it's a movie character just by watching the title rather than thinking of something different of company or institution, as I did per their request. DIVINE 19:57, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not a movie character, it is a comic character. There are no other articles that will have that name. There is a IBAC cycling team, which is listed as such on ENWP w:IBAC (cycling team) but nothing else. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 19:59, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad yes Comic character and it has been moved there not at movie character. DIVINE 20:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh ok. Thanks for clarifying. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 20:01, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help with pages[change source]

Can someone help direct where these should go or nominate for QD please?

  • National Democratic Party (Brunei) - I cannot find anything on this other than they are banned. We also have no Wikidata object for it nor does any other Wikipedia have this article.
  • 2012–13 FC Liefering season - Pretty sure this can be redirected to a main article or something. Also no Wikidata for this. If you think it is worthy of keeping let me know and I can create the object, but no other WP has it either.

Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 00:40, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I see the problem with these. Not having a Wikidata item doesn't matter -- one can be created if appropriate. If you think the topics are hoaxes or non-notable, you can request deletion. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:23, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 - National Democratic Party (Brunei) on ENWP is mentioned in numerous articles that are politically related in general because the party did not survive or do much (along with another party) and both were banned within a couple of years.
For the other one, the seasons are all listed on the FC page, so I was thinking, live every other FC article, the information could be merged into the article of the FC.
As far as Wikidata, I use it as a reference point, amongst other searches, to see where I can fit it in at. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 02:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Third division in Austria wouldn't be notable per w:WP:SEASONS on enwiki, but that doesn't mean we have to retain that if enough sourcing can be found. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:18, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Simple_talk&oldid=9486385"