Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 139

Add links
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Meet the new Movement Charter Drafting Committee members

The Wikimedia Movement Charter Drafting Committee election and selection processes are complete.

The Wikimedia Foundation has appointed two members: Runa Bhattacharjee (Runab WMF), Jorge Vargas (JVargas (WMF). The committee will convene soon to start its work. The committee can appoint up to three more members to bridge diversity and expertise gaps.

If you are interested in engaging with Movement Charter drafting process, follow the updates on Meta and join the Telegram group.

You can read this announcement in other languages here.

With thanks from the Movement Strategy and Governance team

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 20:06, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The only name I recognize is Nosebagbear, and that means there is no one on this list whom I know believe to be a nut in the negative sense. Most excellent. Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:21, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Followup

I raised an issue about a month ago Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 138#Category question and was told to wait. What else needs done to advance this proposal? Nunabas (talk) 02:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I would only not add them on templates where the en.wiki one doesn't add them. As Auntof6 mentions we basically use en.wiki templates often here and keeping customized ones here is generally not possible in reality. So if the en.wiki template still adds then so should ours. (This is the case in most cases here where templates are adding them). As Auntof6 mentioned in the section you link to because our templates update to match en.wikis fairly regularly they have already been removed from the ones they should be in most likelihood. I should also point out that their wording doesn't prevent them, it just doesn't recommend them. -Djsasso (talk) 11:39, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notify Gothic architecture being proposed for demotion.

See Wikipedia:Proposed article demotion for more details. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 00:48, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

holy guacamole what happened

why were so many people blocked, was there a massive sock attack or something? Derpdart56 (talk) 17:09, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just move along, nothing to see here. WP:DENY. Though I guess that is more for vandals. Just a big sock farm. -Djsasso (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New GA

Dear community, we have a new good article -- Sentō. Thanks to everyone who participated in the proposal and those who helped in improving the article.-BRP ever 00:56, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations @Frontfrog:. This is my first ever GA and I am so proud of all the work we did. Darkfrog24 (talk) 03:24, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Darkfrog24 Yeah, I went to your talk page to give you a barnstar for this one, but it turns out I recently gave you one ;) Anyways, good job guys! BRP ever 12:52, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, same feeling. I'm glad that you helped me. Frontfrog (talk) 12:47, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha, let's do it again some time! Darkfrog24 (talk) 16:24, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's possible! :) Frontfrog (talk) 15:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How to simply a link.

Hello,

There must be a way to turn Jugend (Zeitschrift) [Jugend] (just an example) into Jugend by dropping the (Zeitschrif) part but I don't know how to proceed; Can someone please tell me ? Thanks, LouisAlain (talk) 03:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@LouisAlain Are you thinking of the pipe trick? -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:04, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's the point exactly. Now I have to try. Thank you. LouisAlain (talk) 04:08, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be deletable?

A page I found, Ultima werewolf, appears to be a self-publication, where someone created a story and then uploaded it to Wikipedia as a page. It has a notability tag, a deletion tag, and a quick deletion tag, and I'm just wondering: can this be deleted? I'd say yes but the deletion policy might say otherwise, there's nothing in there that covers this scenario. 209.232.149.23 (talk) 21:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Has been deleted. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:39, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's me again (from home, the other one is my School IP), and despite the page being deleted I would like to know what would be the correct course of action if a self-publication situation ever appears again. 172.112.210.32 (talk) 23:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In general, an original story would not be notable unless an appropriately qualified source indicated it was notable. And if already published we could only allow brief excerpts and a commentary. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:52, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template fixation

Hello Wikipedians! I created a user template recently. This one:

This person uses Quora as Simple talk/Archive 139.

. Whenever I put this template either at mine or at others, including that of User:Ferien, it automatically links to a single and certain user in Quora. Can anyone fix this template? I don't why it is linking to a certain Quora user account, when that username is not particularly mentioned in the template content. I created this template, for Wikipedians who are also Quorans. It's like en:User:UBX/Twitter. Regards! :) Haoreima (talk) 06:55, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Single Chart cat broken

It says -3 Derpdart56 (talk) 17:16, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Derpdart56 Which cat? Can you link to it? -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:35, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Auntof6, the category doesn't actually exist but you can see it as the only red link in Category:Wikipedia backlog --Ferien (talk) 17:41, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Derpdart56 and Ferien: It's coming from Template:Backlog status. I don't know why, but some of the items in the list are set to display fewer items than are actually in the category. I/we could change it not to do that, but I'm reluctant to do so without understanding why it was set up that way. The enwiki version does the same thing, but of course they have a lot more in their categories so none of theirs is showing up with a negative number. Auntof6 (talk) 19:43, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Feedback on a article I'm working on

I'm currently working on Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection, please criticize me. (or edit the article) Thanks! Kolva (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolva: No criticism, just a suggestion! If you add at least one citation in every section of the article, it will be good. There are some sections which lack citations. Regards! :) Haoreima (talk) 03:24, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Second New GA

Dear community, we have a new good article -- Willis Tower. Thanks to everyone who participated in the proposal and those who helped in improving the article.-BRP ever 01:05, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations everyone! It looks great! Blissyu2 (talk) 08:53, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some preferences seem to have been undone

I had the setting to see notifications from other sites turned on. Then today I noticed that it had gotten turned off here and on other sites where I had it on. I'm just mentioning it in case anyone wants to check their settings. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:16, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Same in my case. I just turned it on.-BRP ever 10:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quran

See the talk page of our version. It's clear we should align more with En. Can I encourage interested editors to read the opposing comments, and suggest what should be done? Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:07, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the page should be reverted back to the point before all those complex and improperly sourced or biased content was added. The user can likely be blocked per ONESTRIKE, as they have been blocked on multiple wikis for same reason.-BRP ever 12:28, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Review needed

Can someone review these moves by a very new editor, they seems problematic. Thanks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:06, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Camouflaged Mirage Reverted and warned. Might be worth going through the edits as well as there seems to be some MOS concerns. Thanks-BRP ever 12:21, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@BRPever Thanks. The maths related moves seems hard to understand too, like the decimal as well as the E. Needs some more eyes I guess. @Macdonald-ross can you help to take a look, thanks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:23, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All edits from this editor should be reverted unless obviously good. I have extended their ban, but am unable at the moment to handle the edits (personal issue). Revert is what they mostly need. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:27, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Macdonald-ross. I tagged one more for speedy deletion. I too think they can be mass reverted (with your cavaet). Will wait for more ideas before proceeding. Thanks so much for looking. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:51, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should this page be moved?

I think the page "Social darwinism" should be moved to "Social Darwinism" because Darwinism is capitalized. SentientObject (talk) 15:36, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I've just gone ahead and done it. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 21:53, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Closing the comment period for the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Draft Guidelines

Thank you for your continued comments and ideas on the Universal Code of Conduct enforcement guidelines. Your responses have helped to build a stronger Universal Code of Conduct.

If you have not already provided your comments, now is the time as the drafting committee has been meeting to update the enforcement guidelines. The drafting committee wants to consider all comments as they make their updates. Please submit any comments by the end of November. The Committee hopes to finish its revisions before the end of the year, and the revised guidelines will be published as soon as they have been completed.

The next steps for the Universal Code of Conduct include conversations about ratification of the enforcement guidelines. There will be a conversation about ratification on Nov 29.

The Wikimedia Foundation will make recommendations to the Board of Trustees about the ratification of the guidelines in December. The recommendations will inform the next steps in the Universal Code of Conduct process.

Best, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 16:02, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talk to the Community Tech: The future of the Community Wishlist Survey

Hello!

We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will take place on 30 November (Tuesday), 17:00 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. Click here to join.

Agenda

  • Changes to the Community Wishlist Survey 2022. Help us decide.
  • Become a Community Wishlist Survey Ambassador. Help us spread the word about the CWS in your community.
  • Questions and answers

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, German, and Italian. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WAM

Hello people, my usual annual thread. Who is interested in organizing this, been doing this for the last 2 years, it really don't need too much of time just making sure the article is meeting the usual standards (very similiar to the recent women edit-thorn in requirements I will say). IMO will be good for 2 or better 3 judges to be effective as if judges were to participate, it need to be marked by other judges and do remember there can be a person in competition with the judge for the title, so some sort of COI is hard to avoid if there's only 1. In other words, if there is only 1, the judge is better not to participate. I can try to guide any new judges if needed, but sorry I am quite busy recently IRL, and I simply don't have time yet to restore IRC access, so it will need to be on wiki, and I expect 2nd half of Nov to be busy. However, as usual I will try to do my best if needed as a judge.

For participants, is 4 articles related to Asia, new ones not expansion, 3500 chars, 200 words long, properly simplified and having references for all content and no maintenance templates can be slapped on them, then it's a pass. Welcome all to participate, as usual the judges won't make it hard. Prizes include postcards and barnstars (on simple at least).

If there are some participants and judges, I will then set up the page for this year. Best, Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can judge again this year --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 21:43, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @つがる for volunteering again, appreciate it. I had set up the pages for 2021, I will also tentative be the organizer. Do sign up at the sign up list on the page if you are interested, and some more organizers will be much welcomed :) Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:26, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If possible, I will try to participate this year :) -BRP ever 09:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If I were eligible, I would, but I'm not and I'm not sure if I can join since I don't live in Asia (unless you consider the Pacific regions to also be part of Asia as well). SHB2000 (talk) 09:57, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000 Hello, anyone can participate, the article needs to be somewhat Asia related but not the participants. Anyway, like Association Football, Timor is also participating in the ASEAN cup, just as how Australia is in Asia Qualifiers for World Cup, so those can be in scope too. Welcome your participation. :) Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:55, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bump: Last call for organizers, I will soon update meta on the local team this year. @つがる Last chance to quit if you want :P. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. Nope I am not quitting! :) --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just a reminder, it starts in 2 days time, welcome all to participate :). Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:29, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am -- Pulls his sleeves -- ready.- BRP ever 09:38, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And one more note: Only articles created from 1 Nov UTC counts, anything before doesn't. This year I guess I will be more liberal in the judging, as long as it looks sufficiently simple, and there isn't any glaring issues I will give a pass to encourage more to participate, last year I might be a little too strict. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:42, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Contest is now open...I know the central notice is big enough but I think this bump is acceptable too...Have fun :D Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:23, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A bump. 10 days in and we still have 0 entrants... Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:09, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to see more participants. Do reminded that the dateline is end of this month and you need 4 accepted pages for a postcard. Sorry Fountain is down on and off, if you want to submit and fountain is down, you can also leave a message here or on my talkpage and I will help to submit if it is up. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:36, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not being around for the past few days, today is the last day of submission, the end date for articles to be created is today 2359 (UTC). Do note for postcards there is a need for 4 articles accepted. For those who I had left messages on areas of improvement, please improve and ping me for re-assessment if needed. Thanks all for participating. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:36, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?

Hello everyone!

My last post here about DYK (link) seemed to give DYK a lot of attention and now DYK is at the stage where all the queues are filling up.

I'm here to ask: how frequently should DYKs be replaced? I think updating every week-two weeks or so is reasonable, but before Hiàn updated DYK on 6 July this year, it hadn't been updated since 6 August 2020. I don't think we want to get to a stage where we're updating every week for a few weeks and then don't update for a year again. I think this kind of thing should be answered by the community, which is why I'm here...

Thanks in advance for your input, --Ferien (talk) 16:46, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ferien: Weekly is the best choice. Irregular update is the responsibility for us. I saw some wikis doing daily, while some weekly, but not fortnightly or monthly. Even in Meitei Wikipedia, we plan for daily though update is irregular. Thanks for your concern! :) Haoreima (talk) 03:04, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I believe weekly is a good idea now that more editors seem interested in DYKs. Most of the content in our main page barely changes, so having this part updated frequently might make things interesting for frequent readers.-BRP ever 03:12, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am still of the opinion with should go with monthly and see what happens. Because this is what has happened every time in the past. We get a burst of activity and then people are like we can do it fast now and then we blow through the queues in like a month or two and then we are in the same problem again, this is what causes the irregularity. I would do monthly until you have enough queues to do weekly for atleast 6 months or you are just asking for us to be in this position again. That way you have enough runway to keep getting new ones so you can stay weekly. But at this point I doubt you have enough in the queue to maintain a weekly pace without running out like we always do when we try to go faster than monthly. -Djsasso (talk) 14:37, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
For monthly, as there are different amounts of days in each month, how about having it changed on the first of every month? LemonSlushie 🍋 (talk) (edits) 21:46, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Any recent changes patrollers here?

AssumeGoodWraith (talk) 06:42, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AssumeGoodWraith, hi, I'm quite an active recent changes patroller here. --Ferien (talk) 21:15, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien: How active is it? AssumeGoodWraith (talk) 23:48, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
AssumeGoodWraith, there definitely aren't as many edits as on enwiki. However we get a reasonable amount of recent changes and I think we get more vandalism per amount of edits in comparison to other wikis around our size. --Ferien (talk) 09:16, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rejoining Wikipedia

Hi guys, this is not any issue or help from me. I will be rejoining here at 15 December 2021. Hope I would be happy working with you all again in this platform.

TTP1233

Note:This is a message of a user announcing his rejoining. You may ignore this message if you feel like but don't give bad comments on this.

--DJRC (talk) 16:22, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey TTP1233, welcome back. --Ferien (talk) 21:27, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WAM

Hi! If anyone is interested WAM is still going, please see this page for more details! There is still some time to join this year's WAM if you'd like. Thank you, Tsugaru let's talk! :) 23:07, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Today is the last day of submission, the end date for articles to be created is today 2359 (UTC). Do note for postcards there is a need for 4 articles accepted. For those who I had left messages on areas of improvement, please improve and ping me for re-assessment if needed. Thanks all for participating. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The contest had ended, we will try to judge the articles as soon as possible and we appreciate your patience. Thank you all who had participated. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:07, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All judging had been completed by me and @つがる. For those who we had left comments on the declined articles, please fix it as soon as possible and ping us when it is fixed so we can accept. Dateline is end of this month. Thanks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:27, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding an "In the News" section to the Main Page

I feel like a news section in the main page (like the one in the main English Wikipedia) would be useful to be on there. I only use the main English Wikipedia these days to look at the recent news in a brief summary, so adding it would make it easier for those trying to read the recent news on here, but also making it easier to find it in general for those who do not use the main English Wikipedia. Washing Machine of Lies (talk) 13:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...i asked about this they said no Derpdart56 (talk) 16:09, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: The main page already has a section that frequently gets stale and adding a new one would just add on to this problem. Once DYK is updated often, and users show interest in maintaining it, it might be better to suggest then. LemonSlushie 🍋 (talk) (edits) 20:51, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Would be a great idea but we don't have a lot of editors interested in DYK at the moment let alone "in the news". ITN would be a little easier to update though because there's no need to think of an interesting hook. We could just take the hooks from enwiki and simplify, and like DYK, ensure the pages are also simple enough. However this could shift editors away from the already pretty inactive DYK... Something to consider in the future though, as the amount of active editors here has grown quite a lot over the past year. --Ferien (talk) 21:11, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose That's what Wikinews exists for. SHB2000 (talk) 07:09, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It would be almost impossible for a Simple English Wikinews to be created considering how many people oppose the Simple English Wikipedia's existence. --Ferien (talk) 09:19, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If I am not wrong langcom only allows Wikipedia in Simple and wikitionary to support wikipedia. News can be written in simple language at Wikinews anyway, just like how Simple Wikibooks are now WikiJunior at the English Wikibooks. Not oppose to ITN here if there are people willing to maintain it, but given the small pool of editors here, this can be a challenge. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
tbh, I'd oppose a SE Wikinews, not because of what most people think of as "duplication", but because even the English Wikinews struggles to get a good amount of articles up, and let alone a Simple English one, which I'd highly bet will go out of date very easily. SHB2000 (talk) 09:34, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I share the same views as Ferien. IMO it would be hard to maintain given we already have the less activity of users at the other main page section, the DYK. --Hulged (talk) 07:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should just focus our efforts on the existing featured content. This is hard to maintain, and will look ugly if not updated properly.-BRP ever 09:22, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I spent four years at the English Wikinews. They have a serious problem with retention in part because of the bottlenecks in the review system. This means the people who stick it out are the ones who are okay with the articles they draft being deleted just because there wasn't time for a reviewer to get to them, which means they're okay with articles being deleted in general. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:43, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at our recent experiences with Do you know, I don't think we have a community big enough to support it: Remember: DYK is not time-critical, In the News needs a daily, perhaps weekly update...--Eptalon (talk) 17:57, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Patrollers

Either we're giving the patroller status too freely, or we're not making clear what they should do. Here's an example:

  • An out-and-out advert goes to RfD and is deleted after discussion.
  • A transparently disguised repeat advert appears on RfD.
  • Where do repeat advert pages go to when a near-identical page has been deleted after RfD discussion?

If you can't answer that, you shouldn't have the status. I've just deleted an identical obvious advert page which has already been twice deleted, including an RfD discussion.

This is one reason we ended up with a huge list of RfD items. RfD is for decisions which need discussion. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:00, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The page that you deleted was actually sent to RfD by someone who wasn't a patroller, so I don't think this is an issue necessarily to do with the patroller right. Sometimes, it is just difficult to tell if a page has been deleted already or you just go straight to RfD and forget. --Ferien (talk) 21:14, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've always questioned the usefulness of the right. I'll admit that I often browse through Special:Newpages and check for vandalism or blatantly bad pages, but I don't remember a time I've ever actually patrolled a page here. Should somebody check the deletion logs before re-nominating a page for rfd? Yes. But I don't think it has much to do with the patroller right. More likely just general Wikipedia knowledge. I'd argue the reason we have a lot of pages at rfd is because we have a lot of bad pages, not because patrollers chose rfd instead of qd. In any case, I think many would agree that a large number of rfds here is not a real problem. We can manage just fine.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 21:38, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One thing to also remember is that something can only be deleted as a recreation if the content is substantially the same. But if the content is different the deletion has to go to Rfd. It is also important to realize that Rfd is never the wrong place for something. We would rather something go to Rfd unnecessarily than be QD'd incorrectly (which happens far to often). -Djsasso (talk) 12:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why can non autoconfirmed users create pages?

Can't it be the same as enwiki? AssumeGoodWraith (talk) 05:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point, and I believe that it would stop a lot of vandalism but the consensus is against it. Sjö (talk) 09:36, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't know about the consensus, but this editor's mind is changing. Many advertisers and PR agents hide behind moving IPs. Children at school are also IPs. A large percentage of new pages are barely concealed ads. Many are just vandalism. I can understand perfectly why IPs on En wiki cannot put up pages directly, and must go through a filter. We have a huge number of new pages on RfD. RfD takes up creative time of good editors. But I'd rather be here than on some of the non-English wikis which have appear to have been taken over by nationalism and politics. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:25, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If we prevented IP editing, paid editors (who generally use accounts anyways) would still create pages, and it would likely only stop the good faith IP editors who have better things to do from editing. We could implement a sort of draft system like the English Wikipedia does with AfC, but that would take a lot of continuous work and might be a bit too much bureaucracy to pass articles from new editors through. Vermont (talk) 21:43, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Having a smaller group changes a lot. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Heads up: more movie vandals

I just got done reverting changes by an IP that was vandalizing movie articles (changing cast and crew info, adding categories to say where a movie is set when it actually isn't set there--the usual stuff). Then I realized that a lot of the articles where I reverted this IP's changes actually had older vandalism that wasn't addressed, so I have to go back and check all that, too. The fun never stops! --Auntof6 (talk) 04:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6: Block that IP (if possible) to stop his/her fun. Haoreima (talk) 04:46, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Haoreima: There are procedures and rules about blocking users, especially IPs. Even if it were blocked, 1) most of the IPs that do this don't come back and 2) another user or IP would just do the same thing again. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this the date changing vandal? Or is it a different person this time? SHB2000 (talk) 00:41, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000: Some of the movie-vandalizing users change dates, some change cast and crew, some do other things. I mentioned the things I was seeing this time. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

British Raj

I have open a discussion regarding on ensign in this topic (click here). I would request you all to join in this discussion.--Jyoti Roy (talk) 03:59, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting file import

Unable to export to commons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hollow_Knight_cover.jpg. for Hollow Knight 💠Ely - Talk💠 06:17, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Elytrian: If you're asking for the file to be imported here to Simple, that has to be declined. Simple doesn't host files for the most part. (The only exceptions are some files that are specifically related to Simple.) -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:08, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is also non-free media so it can't exported to commons. Lots of things like video game covers or movie posters etc just don't get used here because they can't be on commons. -Djsasso (talk) 16:51, 17 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Elytrian: Don't mind, Ely! Even once I thought of "Sakura" (Naruto Cartoon character). It's only in en wiki, but I could not bring that to simple. :) Haoreima (talk) 04:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Then how is it on en-wiki? (I'm not an expert on copyright tbh) 💠Ely - Talk💠 13:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Elytrian It's used under a fair use licence on enwiki, meaning it can only be used under extreme circumstances. Unfortunately, this wiki doesn't care about "fair use" so... unfortunately, it can't be uploaded :-( SHB2000 (talk) 00:35, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Elytrian: It isn't that Simple doesn't care about fair use. It's that a decision was made not to host files (except for files that wouldn't be of use anywhere else, such as audio versions of articles here). -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Link to discussion that made this rule? 💠Ely - Talk💠 02:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(Pinging @Auntof6) 💠Ely - Talk💠 02:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Elytrian It was before my time. Ask at Simple talk, or the admins' noticeboard, where people who've been around longer than me will see your question. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:43, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing, how are Hollow Knight: Silksong uploads allowed on Commons but not the original? 💠Ely - Talk💠 02:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was a copyvio and has now been deleted.- BRP ever 03:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
F, I have no images now. Expected. 💠Ely - Talk💠 03:11, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I came across many proposals for "Fair use" of images, but it seems none were able to gain consensus. I think this one might be the original discussion.-BRP ever 02:55, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

200,000 pages!

It looks like yesterday we made over 100 pages and this Wikipedia now has 200,000 articles. Thanks everybody for creating pages! --Ferien (talk) 11:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hooray!!!-BRP ever 11:34, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OMG, I was waiting for this day! :-) (-: :) (: Haoreima (talk) 12:52, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats! SoyokoAnis - talk 14:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations to everyone who's helped achieve this goal :) Unfortunately, all simple needs now is a higher search engine optimization as I've never seen simple.wikipedia page turn up in my search results :( SHB2000 (talk) 00:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
200,000, wow! That's amazing. Thank you to everyone who has helped get to this new milestone! Vermont (talk) 01:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Broken webpage citation tool?

Hoping for a spot of help -- or help figuring out who to ask for help ?!?

When we started posting work for our school project and found that the citation tool for citing websites is broken.

This is where I was trying to add a citation

When I clicked on the "Manual"--> "Website" it looks like the bottom picture on the right.

this is what it looks like when I click on the citation tool for websites

Wondering if there is a way to get this fixed? Puting together a workaround on my end for students this term, but others may need it.

Thank you, Castilibrary2 (talk) 03:20, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Castilibrary2 See #Unable to convert as well. SHB2000 (talk) 05:46, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000 thanks! Castilibrary2 (talk) 05:57, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
:) --SHB2000 (talk) 11:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis is now a Very Good Article...

Hello everyone, I have deccided to make Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis a Very Good Article. This means it is among the best articles this community is able to make. Congratualations to everyone who contributed or reviewed the article. --Eptalon (talk) 12:31, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! I had been looking for free time to go through the article, but it does indeed look like one of the best work of the community. Congratulations and thanks to everyone who worked in the article :)--BRP ever 03:11, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RFDs created in the last week of the year

Greetings, fellow Wikipedians. As some of you may have seen in my message on the admins' noticeboard, there is an idiosyncrasy with closing some RFDs around the end of the year, where the result of the RFD is to delete a page. The issue happens when the RFD is closed in a different year from the one when it was opened.

When an admin deletes a page, the system makes up a delete reason that includes the name of the RFD page (which itself includes the year that the RFD was opened). Well, that's what it's supposed to do. What it actually does is make a delete reason that includes the RFD page name except that it uses the current year, no matter what the year of the RFD was. For example, if an RFD is created on December 30, 2021 and the RFD is closed as delete on January 6, 2022, the delete reason will show that the date of the RFD was in 2022. It's not a huge problem, but it means that 1) the delete reason is wrong and 2) people looking for the RFD have to go through a few extra steps to find the RFD. There have also been cases when an admin deleted a page using the delete reason the system made, then had to restore the page so it could be deleted with the correct reason. (Don't ask me how I know that!)

You can help by not creating RFDs in the last week of the year, if at all possible. (And remember that Wikipedia runs on UTC time, so use that instead of your local time to determine whether we're in that final week.) I'm not telling anyone not to create them, I'm just saying that it can make things go smoother if we have fewer end-of-year RFDs. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 07:57, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do not take this advice. It is extremely bad advice to not create Rfds in the last week just because a redirect has to be created. Auntof6 has had this explained to her many times and yet continues to make the same request. Create Rfd's as you normally would. On the off chance an admin doesn't enter the reason manually they can create a redirect and then all is fixed. It doesn't need to be so complicated and it doesn't need to be a harm to the wiki like delaying creation of Rfds would be. The undeleting and redeleting is particularly amusingly bad because all that has to be done is a redirect created at the link in the delete reason. -Djsasso (talk) 16:03, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Then just... close the RFD before the year ends and start a second nomination the next year. 💠Ely - Talk💠 04:43, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New pages patrol

  • I've looked back over the last 500 new pages, and see a huge number (2-300) have not been patrolled. We give trusted users the right to check new pages to prevent this kind of backlog. We know from experience that many of these new pages will be adverts, written badly, not simplified, unsourced, copied from unacknowledged sources, and occasional downright vandalism. If trusted users don't use the power we give them, it means many of our pages as picked up randomly will be rubbish or even vandalism. Having discovered this, I think it disfigures our wiki, and we should make it a priority to cut down this backlog. Patrollers should do more patrolling. We gave you the power for a reason. Of course, I know that some do work at it, and do it well: but too few. If you think I'm exaggerating, go have a look. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:22, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    NewPages is something that could be dealt with better but the idea with patroller is mainly that their work is autopatrolled and they're creating lots of good articles. I don't think we should expect all patrollers to be patrolling articles as much as possible because when giving it, admins' main focus is the content creation the user has done. --Ferien (talk) 21:26, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Macdonald-ross, Ferien On a side note when you say "new pages will be adverts", is adverts just a shorten form on "advertisements"? (for some clarification) SHB2000 (talk) 05:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, adverts are advertisements (as per the redirect). 💠Ely - Talk💠 03:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    (I have not gained access, and don't want the, frankly, useless patroller right and thus do not want to partake in this discussion apart from answering unrelated questions) 💠Ely - Talk💠 03:22, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    (well, I've never heard of the term "adverts" before) SHB2000 (talk) 11:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @SHB2000 (Neither have I.)
    @Macdonald-ross Are you suggesting we remove inactive patroller users? SoyokoAnis - talk 13:36, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moving articles manually

I have a doubt regarding page moving. To manually move a page, do we still need to request an import from the administrator's noticeboard? I already read the Wikipedia page on how to move a wikipedia page but I didn't quite get the answer for my question. Jacebrent1 (talk) 15:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jacebrent1: Do you mean bringing a page here from another Wikipedia (which is where importing could come in), or moving a page that's already here to a new name? If you want to bring a page here from another Wikipedia, you can copy and paste the text, then simplify it. If you mean moving a page that's already here to a new name, you can do that yourself if you're autoconfirmed. Neither of those needs a request to admins. Importing would need a request. We don't often import articles because the two methods above don't need an admin. I hope that answers your question. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:46, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you for your answer. I wanted to bring a page from English wikipedia to here and then simplify it. Jacebrent1 (talk) 09:41, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you're going to copy from the English Wikipedia, please remember to add attribution on the talk page too! --Ferien (talk) 09:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You can also use the Translation tool (when you are logged in: My changes -> Translations), and "translate" from English to Simple English. The benefit of this is: once you publish the translation, the translation tool handles things like attribution & interwikis for you.--Eptalon (talk) 08:19, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think one important thing is not to bring over a complex page onto our wiki, but to bring it over to a sub-page of your userpage. There you can work on it to get it simplified, and then put it up on the main wiki. It's one thing to have the intention of simplifying a page, quite another to actually do it. I write pages from scratch rather than bring them over, and that's another way. Of course, everyone has to find their own best way of working. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:08, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you everyone for your answers! These really helped me a lot. Jacebrent1 (talk) 13:33, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, everyone

Hi,everyone I am new here and wondering if anyone would like to help me out on how to navigate Wikipedia.I am also thinking about writing something to help other empaths if any other empaths would like to help me with this too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CareBear2498 (talk • contribs) 05:22, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Wikipedia:Introduction? Kolva (talk) 14:13, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming Call for Feedback about the Board of Trustees elections

The Board of Trustees is preparing a call for feedback about the upcoming Board Elections, from January 7 - February 10, 2022.

While details will be finalized the week before the call, we have confirmed at least two questions that will be asked during this call for feedback:

  • What is the best way to ensure fair representation of emerging communities among the Board?
  • What involvement should candidates have during the election?

While additional questions may be added, the Movement Strategy and Governance team wants to provide time for community members and affiliates to consider and prepare ideas on the above confirmed questions before the call opens. Community members can also organise local conversations during the call. You can find more information about this upcoming call for feedback here.

Best, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 23:52, 23 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American country musicians is a mess...

Hello all, I just wanted to point out that the Category:American country musicians is a mess:

  • The typical country musician will play the guitar, banjo, or similar instrument, while singing;
  • We do have a subcategory for singers, which contains 111 entries (of the 130-odd of the parent category)
  • There are Lists of country musicians from <state>: These are counter-productive and can be replaced by subcategories.

So, I'd think cleanup would be good:

  • Push people down the list, if they sing, they end up in American country singers; if necessary ...from <state>
  • Get rid of the lists

What do other people think?--Eptalon (talk) 08:50, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

True, some additional sub-Categories need to be created, the articles in the main can then be moved to the sub-categories. I can help. --Tarawneh (talk) 22:45, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Category : Category:American country musicians Tarawneh (talk) 22:46, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done re-classifying, there are 20 subcategories (Country musicians from <US State>), for all the states that have at least 3 entries; there are between 15 and 20 pages left, which are hard to classify (or come from states with less than 3 matching people). --Eptalon (talk) 22:15, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just remember lists and categories are not mutually exclusive. Both should exist. -Djsasso (talk) 15:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored the few "List of country musicians" that I quick-deleted. Anyone is free to do an RfD for the ones seen aqs unnecessary.--Eptalon (talk) 13:22, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hiddencat

Hi guys. In the Arabic Wiki, we use the hidden category tag {{Hiddencat}} in category structures reserved for Schools Projects (Example). Each school has its own category, and some times subs. Today I went through most of Simple policies and guidelines, but it seems I am not able to find the right page. Can someone please point me to the right policy. Thanks. --Tarawneh (talk) 22:56, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarawneh: On this Wikipedia, we haven't used categories for school projects. We tend to keep our category structure at a minimum. What are you thinking such categories would be used for? -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:45, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tropical Storm Gabrielle views
@Auntof6, It makes tracking and channeling progress way much easier. For example when using tools from toolforge server such as Massviews Analysis we can direct the students to focus on certain pages.
To exlpain... I can see that Tropical Storm Gabrielle article is on the main page. This article as expected is a Very good articles. The data from the toolserver can cast more light. Tropical Storm Gabrielle made it fourth within its category Hurricanes in the United States, with 491 views from October 5th til today
1 List of New York hurricanes 1,038 13 / day
2 1910 Cuba hurricane 973 12 / day
3 Hurricane Katrina 725 9 / day
4 Tropical Storm Gabrielle (2007) 491 6 / day
5 List of hurricanes in California 315 4 / day
6 Hurricane Hazel 134 2 / day
The graph shows us that the actual interest in Storm Gabrielle is due to the fact it was on the main page. 1910 Cuba hurricane located at the same category, has wider range of interested people.
This helps us guide the students to work on articles having higher demand. Of course we can do all of this manually, but it is way much easier using the categories. Tarawneh (talk) 11:08, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

People defaming fauci

Where do I report hem or her to Snowy Cotton Candy (talk) 03:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:VIP MathXplore (talk) 04:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Snowy Cotton Candy: If someone does vandalism, first give warnings. And if that doesn't work, please report him/her to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress. This is a noticeboard for persistent vandalism. Haoreima (talk) 04:46, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

5 million to 15 million within 2 decades

I saw Rajbanshi language article states that it has 5 million speakers in 1991 but 15 million speakers in 2007. Something, unnatural! The sources are also not too good. The population 15 million is stated both in Regular English as well as Simple English wikis. Google knowledge panel says it has 170,000 speakers in 2011. Haoreima (talk) 04:42, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot speak to you about en.wiki, but the thing to do would be to check multiple sources. It will soon become clear which one is wrong. Most likely, they're not defining "speaker" in the same way. For example, English has so many native speakers but many more speakers if we count people who speak it as a second or third language. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:03, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is one of the official languages in India. Assam seems to be the region/state where it is most prevalent. So all else failing, look at the census data of Assam. It should be relatively easy to get, and we can then link to that census data. Same thing for the "Rajbanshi" of Nepal (different language, same language family); there again census data of Nepal/the districs where it is prevalent?--Eptalon (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:WAM

It's 2022 and HAPPY NEW YEAR to all! Happy to report that WP:WAM is over. We had the most number of accepted articles, 16 this year, and the most number of participants ever, 5. These numbers may seem small but given the tiny size simple is, I am very glad to see such numbers. Thank you to つがる for being a very good co-organizer to me. Most importantly I wish to thank all participants for making it a success. We have a tie in the first place with @Prajjwal3959 and @Haoreima both having 7 accepted articles. @BRPever came in 2nd with 2 good articles. I also thank @FarhanNF ‎ and @ORAcled ‎ for submissions, these are good articles with just some work needed but they still enriched this project. That's wrap up this year edition of WAM, and I think the WAM team will be contacting those who are eligible for postcards to award them. Have a nice year ahead. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:47, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! Let's do it again next November.-BRP ever 08:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What good news!Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Real or not

Is 2021 FIFA World Championship an actual thing? The page has no matching entry on any other wiki which is very weird for a top level football article. Google responds with us at #1 which is rarely a good sign. The page is screaming hoax but I thought it safer to ask for info rather than just toss it up for deletion. --Creol(talk) 23:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

According to the FIFA site, there was a Club World Cup, in the United Arab Emirates, in 2021. see here, for the men, there will be one in Qatar, in 2022, see here. for the women, it will be 2023, in Australia & New Zealand, see here. So there was something in 2021, but it is named differently. --Eptalon (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And the 2021 competition will be held in winter 2022, probably because of a virus...--Eptalon (talk) 23:34, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the issue im seeing with this:
  1. our seems to be national teams and not clubs
  2. ours is in Qatar while the Club cuo is in UAE
  3. The dates are overlapping
  4. Ours has teans who qualified up to years agam, one team wont qualify until 4 days before the tourney starts and one team who qualified back in Aug 2021 is still to be determined
--Creol(talk) 00:03, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In very short words: They meant Quatar'22, but mistyped the year? Eptalon (talk) 00:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
en:2022 FIFA World Cup? Eptalon (talk) 00:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can't be as this one is only 10 teams onand took place "as a prelude to the 2022 FIFA World Cup". This one also "was held in Qatar, from 14 to 30 December 2021" and at the same time was postponed and "was rescheduled to 10 to 26 February 2022" which comes in handy as the one team won't qualify until a month and a half after it origionallty was held. SO it took place and hasnt taken place both with a team who will not be deternined until just hefore the future instance occurs. And while "First match(es) will be played on 21 November 2022. Source: FIFA" It started on 14 Dec 2021 and will start until 10 Feb 2022. This 21 Nov 2022 will interfer with the previously mentioned 2022 Wold cup which this was/will be a prelude to as they start on the same day. The temporal dynamics here are/will be a bit hard to navigate at this/that point in time. I am starting to convince myself that this is all a poorly masked hoax. --Creol(talk) 05:38, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's a hoax. No information on this tournament's existence from FIFA, Qatar Football Association, Socceryway, or SofaScore. There is no website proving this tournament exists and there are no sources on the article. I say quick delete. Mwiqdoh (talk) 05:42, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon: And just a note, you are confused with the FIFA Club World Cup, a tournament for clubs, whereas this is a fake international teams tournament using the same format as the Club World Cup. Mwiqdoh (talk) 05:45, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted this one this morning, it's an obvious hoax. Thank you for noticing Eptalon (talk) 21:10, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit needed

{{Tp}} currently redirects to {{Tl}} which is redirected to {{template link}}. Normally this is a simple re-aiming to correct the double redirect. In this case its not so easy. {{Tp}} is protected above my level hense I need an admin to wander over and repoint that thing for me. --Creol(talk) 21:01, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Creol:  done --Ferien (talk) 21:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks --Creol(talk) 21:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

double redirects

There are a host of double redirects at Special:DoubleRedirects that still need attention. The main problem I have wotking with them is that they are protected .js/.css pages and I cant edit them. (else I would have been done with this a while ago) Many of them seem to have been caused by user renaming and it is doubtful they would ever be used but they still should be dealt with. The list is in the format Page A redirects to Page B which redirects to target page C. To fix, the source on page B needs to be copied and replaced on Page A. Hense, Page A redirectd to target C and not page B (and on to target C). SO, if anyone who can edit protected pages wouldnt mind making the edits (about 15x copy from here - paste to there), It would be appreciated. --Creol(talk) 09:45, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Djsasso, needs crat/IA action. Vermont (talk) 23:36, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All done...--Eptalon (talk) 10:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Folklore is back!

Please help translate to your language

You are humbly invited to participate in the Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 an international photography contest organized on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from different regions, including, folk creative activities and many more. It is held every year from the 1st till the 28th of February.

You can help in enriching the folklore documentation on Commons from your region by taking photos, audios, videos, and submitting them in this commons contest.

You can also organize a local contest in your country and support us in translating the project pages to help us spread the word in your native language.

Feel free to contact us on our project Talk page if you need any assistance.

Kind regards,

Wiki loves Folklore International Team

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unable to convert

I tried to convert some bare references into properly formatted references using those automatic mechanism. But I was unable to do it. My only way was to do them manually. I tried at Miss Manipur. What may be the actual problem? And could anyone convert those references for me using automatic way (if possible)? Please! Haoreima (talk) 04:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Haoreima I had a similar issue when I tried to translate fr:Forêt guyanaise into the English Wikipedia for some reason. Gave up eventually. SHB2000 (talk) 00:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Haoreima and @SHB2000 -- I was having trouble with the manual, as well, though only for websites, not other forms. TBH, I just went over to enwiki and did them there, then copied them here. Kind of a pain, though, and not something I could have my students do. Castilibrary2 (talk) 05:59, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000 and Castilibrary2: Some months ago, I could convert any citations from bare link to organised link through automatic mechanism. Nowadays, only links from Google Books, Archive org, etc. are possible but news and magazine links couldn't. This is the issue! For example, at page Phouoibi! Haoreima (talk) 02:13, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Castilibrary2, SHB2000, and Ferien: Hey guys! I don't know if we should post this issue at meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2022/Citations. Presently, proposals are being submitted. We can take this opportunity. :-) Haoreima (talk) 15:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent idea! If you want to take the lead, I will certainly follow up with my experiences. Castilibrary2 (talk) 16:57, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Castilibrary2: Yeah, I had posted it. :-) Haoreima (talk) 16:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hah, sorry. Was just reading your post over there and thinking, "This thoughtful person spoke about the problem very nicely," and saw it was you! Turns out, cannot add to it from work as have specific-Wiki exemptions from a major IP block, but will put on my calendar to comment after I get off today. Castilibrary2 (talk) 17:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you want, then go for it :) SHB2000 (talk) 04:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Core Contest

Hello, Simple Wikipedia editors! :) My name is Vat, and I'm not very active on simplewiki, but I'm active on the English Wikipedia and English Wikivoyage. I recently had an idea for a simplewiki editing competition I've been talking about with some admins here, who like the idea. BRPever suggested I bring the idea up here, so other Simple Wikipedia editors can talk about it.

On enwiki, there's a competition called the Core Contest. The point of the Core Contest (TCC) is to find important articles that are in bad shape, and improve them over a six-week period. You can look at the entrants and winners from last year to get an idea of how the contest works. The contest has cash prizes, so the people who make the biggest improvements to an article win a small amount of money as thanks for their hard work. On enwiki, this is funded by Wikimedia UK.

The next enwiki TCC will run in February. BRPever and I are considering hosting a TCC on simplewiki. TCC seems like a good idea on simplewiki, because many important articles here are stubs or redlinked. The Vital Articles list includes many important articles that don't exist on simplewiki, or exist only as stubs, and a competition to encourage people to create and improve them could get a lot of important work done. Because simplewiki is an important project for audiences like children and English language learners, this could do a lot to expand free knowledge worldwide.

If simplewiki editors like the idea, we could look into getting a grant from the WMF to fund the competition. We could also consider getting a CentralNotice to advertise the contest on lots of projects. This could encourage people experienced with article writing elsewhere to edit simplewiki, helping expand the project. I'm coming here to see if simplewiki editors as a whole like the idea, and if it's something the simplewiki community would be interested in participating in. BRPever is interested in the idea, as is Vermont, but we would need to get a wider range of opinions to know if this is a thing people want to do.

Thank you for your time, and I'm interested in hearing from you. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 11:24, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

​I think this is a good idea overall and I'm very happy to help out if I'm needed but we've got to consider: there are lots of things different from enwiki and simplewiki, and if we are trying to attract editors from other wikis, we need to make sure they can create simple articles. The core articles are typically the most difficult and complex articles to create (that's mainly why they haven't been created yet) and having tons more articles to simplifty from the flood of articles that will come in in a contest may be a problem. --Ferien (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We would need to check possible entrants to make sure they would be able to participate. I was thinking mostly about the opposite problem (screening out people who can't write well enough at all, not just not simply enough), but that's important too. Of course, someone whose article wasn't simple enough wouldn't win the contest.
Core articles can be hard to write, but one unexpected thing about them is they can be easy to write, too -- because they're very general, you don't have to get too technical. I found that on enwiki, the TCC articles were often simpler than a more niche article on a similar topic would be. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 15:47, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, writing a language in simple terms often requires a higher language proficiency than non-simple articles, given the many grammatical and word choice possibilities that one needs to juggle to best explain complex concepts simply. See WP:HOW for more specific information. However, I don't really think it'll be an issue here. We have had edit-a-thon type projects before, which has worked well, and we can always check and improve articles that don't meet community standards. I'd be happy to participate in this. Vermont (talk) 23:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was trying to find the best way to put that -- simple language can be very hard to write. But it can be easier, surprisingly, on some of these "big articles", because core articles tend to be about broad ideas and not the technical details that need harder language. I'm happy to hear people like the idea! Vaticidalprophet (talk) 12:31, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm interested. Anyone feel some kind of unofficial pre-contest qualifier to assess anyone's simple writing skill level? Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Something that's pretty easy to implement, and cross check: Sentence length, one idea per sentence. What about a team of established SEWP editors. Before the contest ends (like halfway through): New editors get one "language simplicity review" per article, where these editors can point out problematic sections?--Eptalon (talk) 01:11, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The usual TCC structure involves a panel of judges. Usually the judges have checked articles at the beginning and end, but on simplewiki the idea you propose of checking in the middle as well sounds good. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 12:32, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My idea would be that the editors reviewing for language would not be part of the other judges; they'd simply point out isssues with the language complexity of the article (e.g. on the article talk page). The judges would then be able to see the development, and could assess whether the issues had been fixed. Note:Simple Wikipedia is not about adhering to word lists, it is about explaining well..--Eptalon (talk) 15:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello everyone. This idea was brought to me by Vat, and I liked it very much. If we get approval for CentralNotice, it can be a good opportunity to introduce our wiki to users and readers from other communities. The progress of the contest can be monitored as we go, and guidance to the participants can be provided by the people already familiar with Simple English. It can be judges or any member of the community. Thanks --BRP ever 04:15, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just keep in mind that if we do go onto CentralNotice then a lot of people will see it. We will need to be careful because we could get a very large amount of pages to review. No other editing contest we have ever had before has had CentralNotice, so instead of getting around 10 people in a competition CentralNotice may increase that to 100s. Also this post has only been up for 3 days now so we might want to leave it a bit longer to see what other people think. --Ferien (talk) 16:09, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As much as I would like to get more people over here. I don't think we could remotely handle the crush of people that would come from being on a CentralNotice. Not even slightly. I should also point out we actually have all the WP:VITAL articles created since it was mentioned above that we were missing many. That being said many of them need work. 100% in board with doing a local event to do this, but I do not think we could handle the flood of articles from advertising to other wikis. We already have a hard time keeping up with fixing articles from people coming over from other wikis assuming they know how to write simple and don't at all do so. People often don't realize it is very hard to write simple as opposed to writing just regular English. -Djsasso (talk) 16:23, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I discussed the CN opposition with Ferien on Discord and was asked to repost it here. It's extremely unlikely a CN would result in a crush of as many people as worried. The enwiki TCC is advertised extremely broadly across the entirety of that project, which is a much larger project than simplewiki, and still doesn't attract many signups; last year there were 17 signups, of which about two-thirds made any significant edits. 5 people were awarded prizes, which means more than one-third of the participants with significant edits received a prize. That's on a project with an order of magnitude more editors. On a project simplewiki's size, CN advertising would be needed just to get enough people to make it viable to run. As well, CN doesn't necessarily mean a huge blast across all of Wikimedia -- it can be very tightly focused on specific demographics, which would be the plan here, and which would result in a much smaller and more manageable uptake.
With regards to the "all Vital Articles exist on simplewiki" comment, I'm not just referring to Vital level 3 (which is the one linked from en:WP:VITAL), but also other levels. Many (most?) of the articles in levels 4 and 5 are missing, and many of those are still very core. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 22:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah Ferien had mentioned you talking about it. And that sounds good. But it wasn't so much the participants that I was concerned about as presumably people taking part in it would try hard to be simple etc because of wanting to excel in the contest. It was the people who didn't actually sign up but came because they had a link put up in front of them a little more blatantly than an interwiki link on the side. Those coming over and making a few edits here in more of a drive by method. However, I am sure you will get support based on the below. As I said love the contest I am just not sure about the advertising. -Djsasso (talk) 20:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as proposed. I'll volunteer to assist with the contest in anyway I can. Operator873 connect 21:14, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose without reservation. The idea of getting people to work on articles with the prospect of, essentially, getting a cash prize for contributing the most to an article doesn't sound right to me. It shouldn't need to take the carrot of getting money being dangled in front of someone's face, to get them to contribute. DaneGeld (talk) 23:10, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @DaneGeld, Cash prize is a sort of award here, and is often seen in several events around Wikimedia community. This contest isn't the first of this kind. And it's not really a lot of money to make people write pages for one and half month just to earn it. It's a small sum given to the winners as a token of appreciation. It is neither given, nor received in the manner you just pointed out. I have won some contest in Nepali wikipedia, got around $70. But I didn't participate in the contest for the money. I participated for the fun of it, and that small reward, gave satisfaction that no other $70 would. Thanks--BRP ever 16:49, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We've also had cash prizes on other contests here, like Wiki Loves Women South Asia for example. People working in these competitions are usually competing to improve the encyclopedia, not to earn the cash. --Ferien (talk) 20:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. I won't stand in the way of the contest, but I won't be contributing to something I morally disagree with. In the words of Dragon's Den, "I'm out." DaneGeld (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It seems a good idea, but I share similar thoughts as Ferien. If the articles are not simple enough, that would go on en, not here. SHB2000 (talk) 00:08, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - looks like a great idea 😁 - TNT❤ 14:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can Support this now. Vat has addressed all my concerns here. And as I have said already, I am very happy to help in reviewing the articles. --Ferien (talk) 16:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to join the contest, so Support. I've been working to make enwiki content simpler, and I'm keen to see if I can take it a few steps further here. I was at first not that keen on cash prizes, but I know that this can mean a lot of some editors, for instance getting them a better computer to work on Wikipedia (or simply rent, also quite vital for editing work). Femkemilene (talk) 18:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but monetary rewards might need in depth consideration as there can be disputes in judging etc. Oppose using CN to promote as clearly we cannot handle the load coming from multiple wikis as CN can be very pervasive in reach. One exception is that we tailor the CN settings that only certain amount of notifications, which in that sense a village pump announcement can work equally well or MMS. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Community Wishlist Survey 2022

The Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is now open!

This survey is the process where communities decide what the Community Tech team should work on over the next year. We encourage everyone to submit proposals until the deadline on 23 January, or comment on other proposals to help make them better.

The communities will vote on the proposals between 28 January and 11 February.

The Community Tech team is focused on tools for experienced Wikimedia editors. You can write proposals in any language, and we will translate them for you. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing your proposals! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 18:10, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feminism and Folklore 2022

Please help translate to your language

Greetings! You are invited to participate in Feminism and Folklore 2022 writing competion. This year Feminism and Folklore will focus on feminism, women biographies and gender-focused topics for the project in league with Wiki Loves Folklore gender gap focus with folk culture theme on Wikipedia.

You can help us in enriching the folklore documentation on Wikipedia from your region by creating or improving articles focused on folklore around the world, including, but not limited to folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, women and queer personalities in folklore, folk culture (folk artists, folk dancers, folk singers, folk musicians, folk game athletes, women in mythology, women warriors in folklore, witches and witch hunting, fairy tales and more. You can contribute to new articles or translate from the list of suggested articles here.

You can also support us in organizing the contest on your local Wikipedia by signing up your community to participate in this project and also translating the project page and help us spread the word in your native language.

Learn more about the contest and prizes from our project page. Feel free to contact us on our talk page or via Email if you need any assistance...

Thank you.

Feminism and Folklore Team,

Tiven2240 --05:49, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiven2240: Hello! I just want to ask you a query! "You can help us in enriching the folklore documentation on Wikipedia from your region by creating or improving articles focused on folklore around the world, including, but not limited to folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, women and queer personalities in folklore, folk culture... ". In the above paragraph, I have a doubt. (1) Can we expand already created articles also? (2) What is meant by including, but not limited to? Does this mean that the mentioned topics are included but it's not only these mentioned topics but there are many many more topics eligible? Haoreima (talk) 15:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Haoreima,
Answering 1st question - you are free to expand already created articles, be sure to have 3000 bytes and 300 words in expansion for the jury to consider it for points.
2nd - The main aim of the project is to create/expand articles regarding local folk cultures and Women. It is not just limited to just folk dance, music, culture but every aspects of folk such as folk cusines, folk mythologies, etc.
We look forward for immense participation from you and the simple English Wikipedia community :) --Tiven2240 (talk) 16:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tiven2240: Is the contest to be organised on the basis of country or on the basis of particular languages' wikis? I am asking this because I saw a French version of the contest organising only for the country of Benin🇧🇯 (an African French speaking nation)! Seems it excludes France even though it's in French. In another case, Bengali is organising for both India and Bangladesh at a single contest. While Assamese is organising only for India! I saw all these from here. (1) Could you please clarify what is the rule of the contest based on country, language and wikis? (2) Can a participant expand article created by another editor? Haoreima (talk) 04:24, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Haoreima, just to clarify that this wiki - the simple English Wikipedia is a global wiki wherein people from various countries can participate. Some Wikipedias are language specific such as Assamese Gujarati Marathi etc which are all based in India but have different language Wikipedia. So this project is not limited to just one country or language. Any person from any part of globe who is an editor on simple English Wikipedia can participate in the contest.
2) yes a participant can expand article created by another user.
Feel free to ping me or contact us on project talkpage if you need any assistance. Best wishes. --Tiven2240 (talk) 09:13, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This looks similar to the Wiki Loves Women event back in October. I could help as a judge and organizer, but is anyone else available to help with me? I ended up doing most of it myself last time. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I started a project page [1] Darkfrog24 (talk) 02:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I found an article that needs cleaning up.

Like I said, I found an article that needs major cleanup. I tried to clean it up, but the info is so jumbled I can't even follow along. I came here because the person who responded to my help request on my user talk page couldn't fix it either.(No offense to them) I'm hoping someone here knows how to deal with pages like these.

Here's the article: Nokia 8800

Thanks, Midknight of the Abyss (talk) 17:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Call for Feedback about the Board of Trustees elections is now open

The Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections is now open and will close on 7 February 2022.

With this Call for Feedback, the Movement Strategy and Governance team is taking a different approach. This approach incorporates community feedback from 2021. Instead of leading with proposals, the Call is framed around key questions from the Board of Trustees. The key questions came from the feedback about the 2021 Board of Trustees election. The intention is to inspire collective conversation and collaborative proposal development about these key questions.

There are two confirmed questions that will be asked during this Call for Feedback:

  1. What is the best way to ensure more diverse representation among elected candidates? The Board of Trustees noted the importance of selecting candidates who represent the full diversity of the Wikimedia movement. The current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Europe.
  2. What are the expectations for the candidates during the election? Board candidates have traditionally completed applications and answered community questions. How can an election provide appropriate insight into candidates while also appreciating candidates’ status as volunteers?

There is one additional question that may be presented during the Call about selection processes. This question is still under discussion, but the Board wanted to give insight into the confirmed questions as soon as possible. Hopefully if an additional question is going to be asked, it will be ready during the first week of the Call for Feedback.

Join the conversation.

Best,

Movement Strategy and Governance, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Cat-a-lot preferences

Is there a method to change the edit speed of Cat-a-lot ? When I was using this at JAWP, one user asked me to do so n order to avoid floods in the "New changes" page. MathXplore (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template import

Can someone please import a copy of {{Cite q}}? I was fixing Arjuna and noticed it uses that template. Nunabas (talk) 19:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I can get it for you. -Djsasso (talk) 20:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Error on Template:Main

The template{Main|Article title}does not seem to work and results in this showing:

See the main article: Article

It seems to be a script error and I do not know how to fix it. Any help will be appreciated.--NadirAli (talk) 20:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I will look and fix it. -Djsasso (talk) 20:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk to the Community Tech

Hello

We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will take place on 19 January (Wednesday), 18:00 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. This external system is not subject to the WMF Privacy Policy. Click here to join.

Agenda

  • Bring drafts of your proposals and talk to to a member of the Community Tech Team about your questions on how to improve the proposal

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, and German. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Movement Strategy and Governance News – Issue 5

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Movement Strategy and Governance News
Issue 5, January 2022Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the fifth issue of Movement Strategy and Governance News (formerly known as Universal Code of Conduct News)! This revamped newsletter distributes relevant news and events about the Movement Charter, Universal Code of Conduct, Movement Strategy Implementation grants, Board elections and other relevant MSG topics.


This Newsletter will be distributed quarterly, while more frequent Updates will also be delivered weekly or bi-weekly to subscribers. Please remember to subscribe here if you would like to receive these updates.

  • Call for Feedback about the Board elections - We invite you to give your feedback on the upcoming WMF Board of Trustees election. This call for feedback went live on 10th January 2022 and will be concluded on 7th February 2022. (continue reading)
  • Universal Code of Conduct Ratification - In 2021, the WMF asked communities about how to enforce the Universal Code of Conduct policy text. The revised draft of the enforcement guidelines should be ready for community vote in March. (continue reading)
  • Movement Strategy Implementation Grants - As we continue to review several interesting proposals, we encourage and welcome more proposals and ideas that target a specific initiative from the Movement Strategy recommendations. (continue reading)
  • The New Direction for the Newsletter - As the UCoC Newsletter transitions into MSG Newsletter, join the facilitation team in envisioning and deciding on the new directions for this newsletter. (continue reading)
  • Diff Blogs - Check out the most recent publications about MSG on Wikimedia Diff. (continue reading)

Zuz (WMF) (talk) 08:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

heh? Derpdart56 (talk) 17:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Errors apparently from Template:Estcatbycountry

There are a couple of issues that appear to be caused by Template:Estcatbycountry and/or its subpage.

Issue #1: Look in Category:Establishments by year and country, and you'll see that some of the subcategories show a negative number of pages. That number should never be negative. Click on one of the subcategories, for example Category:1986 establishments by country, and you'll see that there are only categories there, no pages or files.

Issue #2: In categories using this template, for example Category:1986 establishments by country again, you can see that the navigation line showing years is there twice. It should only be there once. (By the way, this issue is also appearing with pages that use Template:Estcatbycontinent.)

I could probably dig into this and figure it out, but I'm sure some of you could do it faster and better, so does anyone want to look at it? Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Issue 1 may be a MediaWiki bug or an issue in the object cache and/or job queue. There were also some subcategories with negative page counts, but they subsequently updated themselves to the correct value after navigating to the subcategory's own page. Perhaps the act of navigating to the page "forces" a recalculation?
For issue 2, I have performed the fix here - the template was incorrectly calling Navseasoncats twice, once for years (only), and once for decades (only). The present module no longer requires two calls. This was probably a legacy issue from the pre-Lua era.
There is one remaining issue where the alignment of the navboxes is slightly displaced to the left of the screen. This is related to the avoidself logic in lines 52 and lines 368-375 of Module:Navseasoncats, which adds the following CSS property: max-width: calc(100% - 25em). Our page titles seem to be incorrectly triggering the avoidself logic - I haven't figured out this one yet. Chenzw  Talk  06:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chenzw: Thanks! -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Football

Is sitting on the bench the whole match also an appearance for the player?--Werner100359 (talk) 06:56, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Werner100359 I'm not fully sure, but you should probably get the best image of the player for the appearance. SoyokoAnis - talk 15:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On en.wiki you are only considered to have played if you actually got on a field. I assume you are asking to see if someone meets en:WP:NFOOTBALL-Djsasso (talk) 18:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Certification Table Entry usages

(reference example = Good Girl Gone Bad)

There are a ton of categories being added to articles by template in the "Certification Table Entry usages for <country>" format. No clue what or why - no real care either. Problem is they are hiding away the more useful categories (ie. who's album, when, genre, etc). Not going to go into removing them in general as there likely is a reason for it all, but couldnt these added cats be tagged as hidden so as to not flood the page with info which is useless to most users? --Creol(talk) 08:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds OK to me, for these and the singlechart usages categories as well. They seem to be hidden on enwiki. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:43, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These are intended to be hidden, whomever created these particular ones just didn't do it I guess. -Djsasso (talk) 12:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Desktop Improvements update and Office Hours invitation

Hello. I wanted to give you an update about the Desktop Improvements project, which the Wikimedia Foundation Web team has been working on for the past few years.

The goals of the project are to make the interface more welcoming and comfortable for readers and useful for advanced users. The project consists of a series of feature improvements which make it easier to read and learn, navigate within the page, search, switch between languages, use article tabs and the user menu, and more.

The improvements are already visible by default for readers and editors on 24 wikis, including Wikipedias in French, Portuguese, and Persian.

The changes apply to the Vector skin only. Monobook or Timeless users are not affected.

Features deployed since our last update

  • User menu - focused on making the navigation more intuitive by visually highlighting the structure of user links and their purpose.
  • Sticky header - focused on allowing access to important functionality (logging in/out, history, talk pages, etc.) without requiring people to scroll to the top of the page.

For a full list of the features the project includes, please visit our project page. We also invite you to our Updates page.

The features deployed already and the table of contents that's currently under development


How to enable the improvements

Global preferences
  • It is possible to opt-in individually in the appearance tab within the preferences by unchecking the "Use Legacy Vector" box. (It has to be empty.) Also, it is possible to opt-in on all wikis using the global preferences.
  • If you think this would be good as a default for all readers and editors of this wiki, feel free to start a conversation with the community and contact me.
  • On wikis where the changes are visible by default for all, logged-in users can always opt-out to the Legacy Vector. There is an easily accessible link in the sidebar of the new Vector.

Learn more and join our events

If you would like to follow the progress of our project, you can subscribe to our newsletter.

You can read the pages of the project, check our FAQ, write on the project talk page, and join an online meeting with us (27 January (Thursday), 15:00 UTC).

How to join our online meeting

Thank you!!

On behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation Web team, SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:The Game of Death#?

185.167.52.108 (talk) 20:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I am not sure what you are referring to?... --Tsugaru let's talk! :) 22:40, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why doesn't extended confirmed permissions exist here?

This is something I've wondered. kolva | chat? 16:07, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolva — Extended confirmed permissions only exist on enwiki (see en:WP:XC). Per that section, it was stated that it was created by the Arbitration Committee to deal with community issues and other stuff. Hopefully this helps. — 3PPYB6 — TALK — CHANGES — 16:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@3PPYB6: I think extended confirmed also exists on jawiki. --Ferien (talk) 16:25, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Ferien is right, actually I have extended confirmed permissions at there. MathXplore (talk) 09:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kolva: I'm not sure, but I think extended confirmed even on enwiki is relatively new and maybe adding extended confirmed here would just be another complex thing we don't need. --Ferien (talk) 16:25, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Uber Eats

Uber Eats doesn't have any obvious paid editing in it, so why is it on there? Derpdart56 (talk) 16:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Derpdart56: - They were copied over from the enWP article by the author of the article on here, which doesn't make much sense, as the issues present in the enWP don't necessarily apply here. I have removed them. Thanks for bringing it up! -Griff (talk) 19:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User active on English Wikipedia

I need to speak a editor who mostly active in English Wikipedia. If anyone knows please tell me by tagging me or at my talk page. I need to speak immediately. Thanking you, TTP1233. --Jyoti Roy (talk) 06:47, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is canvassing and can result in a violation of our policy regarding blocked users on English Wikipedia. I strongly suggest you focus your activities on this project to following our policies and improving our articles. Griff (talk) 18:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feminism and Folklore 2022 Edit-a-Thon about to Begin!

This year, the Simple English Wikipedia is participating in the project's Feminsim and Folklore edit-a-thon! Here "Folklore" means less "legends" and more "any type of folk culture or knowledge." Write about folk culture or women involved in folk culture in Simple English.

Please come to our page on the contest to sign up and win wonderful prizes.

By which I mean cash. The prizes are cash. Hooray! Darkfrog24 (talk) 01:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template double calls

Ive been working on clearing Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. Got it down from over 400 to 150 of so but seeing a snag. This is mostly wikignome work though Im fixing a ton of reference errors and updating infoboxes. The main issue im seeing is Chess articles. Im getting the warning "... is calling Template:Chess diagram small with more than one value for the "" parameter." but can't for the life of me figure out what is triggering it. Gambit is an example. Just open it up, change source and hit show preview and the error(s) is shown. {{Chess diagram small}} doesnt trigger in alone, just when somethings call it. And that part is not consistant. French defence (opening), Endgame (chess) and Alexei Shirov dont trigger it but Modern defence, Middlegame and Howard Staunton do.. And no clue what to do to clear them (and a host of others) from the list. Any help would be appreciated. Dont even need someone to do the changes, just point me to what I need to do and ill take care of them. --Creol(talk) 20:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I also came across this problem when I was doing that same work. A user worked on it a bit, found the problem, and fixed it in some articles, but I don't remember who it was. Maybe we could look at some of the non-affected chess articles and look for earlier fixes. I do remember that the solution was convoluted and required a lot of work on each affected article. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:39, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So I fixed the error on Gambit, but the chessboard's pieces are now in different position, although they match enWP's. I'm not a chess expert, but based off my light reading, it looks like enWP's chessboard (and now our chessboard) is correct. @Creol: I'm not sure I have time to fix them all, but if I have time later today, I'll work on it. My sandbox has the correct parameters. Let me know if you have any questions. Griff (talk) 19:34, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seems the issue is in following the layout. Most templates link labled to values (|image=somepict.jpg) but this template refers to the called order and parameter numbers. ie 1= possition, 2=header, 3=top left square, 4= next square... 66=bottom right square, 67=footer. If that layout isnt followed perfectly then all hell breaks out. The layout in the imported doc now on the page is sort of correct, as long as you go halfway down to the part about the actual template being used. I went through and corrected all the chess articles in the category so that should be that for now/a while. --Creol(talk) 08:24, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Massive creation of redirects by IP

There is an IP user involved in massive creation of redirects. The editor claims that all of them are Australian English. Redirects are cheap, but shall we keep all of them ? MathXplore (talk) 11:37, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MathXplore Can you link to some? SoyokoAnis - talk 14:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MathXplore: I don't think we can answer that unless you give more specifics. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:32, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pasted from my QD log:
  1. Hard R: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 10:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  2. Hard R: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 10:56, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  3. G'day: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  4. Chook: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  5. Maccas: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:09, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  6. Scomo: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:10, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  7. G'day mate: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  8. Albo: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:17, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  9. Bikkie: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:19, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  10. Bickie: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:20, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  11. Roo: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:23, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  12. Snag: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:24, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  13. Tassie: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:27, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
  14. Tazzie: CSD R3 ({{db-redirtypo}}) 11:29, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Mass deletion has been applied. MathXplore (talk) 05:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MathXplore, it is probably not best to tag all of these in future. Admins have Special:Nuke to delete lots of bad pages at once. Tagging them just fills up recent changes. --Ferien (talk) 18:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please rename "Alexine Tinné" to "Alexine Tinne"

Could an admin please change the name of this page to Alexine Tinne? See the Talk page in the English Wikipedia. — CvZ (talk) 09:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CvZ,  Done --Ferien (talk) 17:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! CvZ (talk) 22:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@CvZ In the future, a administrator is not always required for a rename/move. SoyokoAnis - talk 14:59, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@SoyokoAnis: in this case an administrator was required because for the move, a page had to be deleted that had two revisions. If I recall correctly, if you're not an admin, you can't delete a page that is already a redirect unless it's got just one revision - but I may be wrong. --Ferien (talk) 16:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
, I thought it was protected.h SoyokoAnis - talk 19:15, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definition of 100 edits and logged actions

A quick one, per the RFDA, why not we just change the policy to state explicitly 100 edits the "edits" aren't automated / semi-automated or bot like. I think this might be relevant via a policy change but well we can go to RFDA route too and then nothing needs to be changed. Ideas? Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 09:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'd prefer we keep it as simple as possible. I am not opposed to "automated" or "semi-automated" edits. "Nuking" all editsd (or the bigger part of them) of a proplem user is very useful, yet it problably counts as "semi-automatic". Also, note: if we change the policy, that'd be for the future. We can't reasonably change the policy and make it apply to the past. And if we are talking running a bot, or something like a script: that likely shouldn't be done with an admin account. Eptalon (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it'd be easier if we keep it simpler as Eptalon said but it's also important to note that doing 100 edits at the very end of the year every year that are typically made with AWB is just clearly gaming, whether we mention it in the policy or not. It's also probably worth mentioning that Twinkle and rollback also count as semi-automated in Xtools. --Ferien (talk) 16:08, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hijacked checking

Hello everyone! Is there any tool or technique to check if my wiki user account is hijacked by someone or not? If anyone knows, please tell me immediately! I want to know about it as soon as possible! Haoreima (talk) 07:27, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. But if you are really in a hurry, the fastest resolution is to change your password. MathXplore (talk) 07:29, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I found https://haveibeenpwned.com/, at here just put your e-mail address linked to your wiki account and you can check if there is a breach. MathXplore (talk) 07:31, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MathXplore: Thank you so much, my friend! :) Haoreima (talk) 07:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, but if it helps you should change your password and email. SoyokoAnis - talk 14:36, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MathXplore and SoyokoAnis: I am 100 percent sure that I have not done this very edit by myself but my username is appearing for the one who perform this edit. I was wondering about the talk page creation of the page Panthoibi also, besides Talk:Imoinu. But this things immediately occur just after I add these articles to the fountain page. Is there any mechanism through which the WLF template is automatically added to respective articles' talk pages immediately after the article is submitted to the fountain? @Darkfrog24 and Tiven2240: Do you have any idea? Haoreima (talk) 14:48, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_139&oldid=8895042"