Wikipedia:Simple talk

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


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

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

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

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 Note that you should not change the archives, so if something that has been archived needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.

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

Are you in the right place?

Thoughts from other editors on an article[change source]

Hello. I wanted to get others thoughts on this article Parish (country subdivision) which was just created. I am not finding it anywhere else and I am debating to myself if it is something we should keep. Perhaps, I was thinking, is make Parish a disambiguation page (currently it is only about churches) and create links to the various Parish lists we have. I would love to see the thoughts of others. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 00:22, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just linked the article in Wikipedia. As for Parish, it is fine as it is because the religious meaning is the primary one. It could use a hatnote pointing to the non-religious one. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:04, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Where you linked it to should actually be this article Administrative division which is redirected from Parish (administrative division). It is confusing because Q56061 points to Administrative division on ENWP. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I linked it correctly. The content of the articles I linked is the same. I changed the target of the redirect to the article closest in meaning. -- Auntof6 (talk) 01:19, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 Ah ok. Thanks. It was just really confusing following along with the redirects and both sites. Thanks. Thanks, and be well! - PDLTalk to me!Please don't eat da 🐑! 01:20, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In England parish is an administration areas within which people live. fr33kman 13:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In Louisianna , it's the same situation. Wekeepwhatwekill  Speak! 15:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Redirect[change source]

a long overdue WikiProject has been made on my profile. Please help make it -- thanks! User:LOLHWAT/WikiProject Redirect LOLHWAT (talk) 13:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LOLHWAT: Sounds promising. Will you be posting any specific goals or tasks? -- Auntof6 (talk) 13:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly, but I have little time right now. LOLHWAT (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly would a Project for Redirection do? Are you planning to tag items with {{R with possibilities}} or something? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
to encourage redirects, basically. speeding it up LOLHWAT (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are redirects particularly long winded? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i mean as in creating more. a lot of pages have no redirects and/or are missing them. "speeding up" basically means to make more of them faster with a group of people LOLHWAT (talk) 22:22, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Few pages really need redirects. I certainly wouldn't want to see a mass effort to create more that aren't really needed. If that's what you have in mind, I think there should be a consensus that people on the project want that. We've had people do that kind of thing before and the redirects often get deleted.
What I thought might be helpful is to add templates to redirects to indicate the purpose of the redirect. For example, some are redirects from alternate spellings, or from related items, etc. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:24, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we generally dissuade having redirects for redirects sake. The search algorithm is pretty decent now, so it doesn't help with that. Redirects are useful when there is a term that is suitable to be linked in mainspace, and has a target, but we don't just add all possible redirects to pages. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 06:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I take it you are disbanding WikiProject Redirect by your recent edits?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 11:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yeah ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I don't think it's really needed here for the time being LOLHWAT (talk) 11:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 11:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idiotic...[change source]

... In my opinion to have a page devoted to the world's oldest person (Maria Branyas Morera). No merit in longevity and needs to be kept up-to-date. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

20-odd other projects also seem to have such a page. Would be interesting to see if they agree on who the persion is? Eptalon (talk) 14:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The 11th oldest person who ever lived? Seems to meet GNG to me. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:06, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it depends on the coverage they get. This particular one has some reliable sources so it meets GNG imo.--BRP ever 07:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enabling noindex in article space[change source]

Following on from Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 133#Use of QD A4, there was a rough consensus to implement NOINDEX in article space, however it wasn't really considered worth it for the actual impact it would have, especially as it would differ from all other WMF sites. There was a discussion on my talk page, at User talk:Ferien#Why, where the idea of noindexing pages at RfD was bought up again. This time, it was pointed out by Lee Vilenski that enwiki actually has a system whereby pages newer than 90 days are not indexed unless they are patrolled – see w:WP:NOINDEX for how they do things.

Now, we don't want any AfC/NPP-like processes here (as was rejected in Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 134#Proposal: Introducing Wikiproject Article for Creation), but we could adjust our patrol system so that only articles that were either patrolled and/or existed for, let's say 10 days, would be indexed. This would allow the time for the notability of articles to be discussed at RfD, while not worrying about the article effectively serving as a free promotion for the person, company etc being discussed at RfD. This would also, hopefully, reduce the misuse of A4 that is still occurring over 3 years on from that original discussion. Thoughts? --Ferien (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - As I mentioned before, I'm obviously fully in favour. I think it's worth noting that, I think the technical solution is pretty simple, and just a case of opening a phab ticket for the change to be made. I like the idea of ten days, as it is enough time for an article to go through AfD if suitable. I can see a massive upside to not indexing potentially dangerous articles, and the only downside being a small wait for indexing on good faith articles.
Enwiki also has w:WP:autopatrolled permission. Whilst not part of this discussion, would be easy enough to setup to give a flag to community members who make a lot of articles to bypass the delay (if they care). A potential discussion for a later date if this were to proceed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: we already have patroller which serves as both our patrol and autopatrol right. --Ferien (talk) 20:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no problem, didn't realise it was bundled. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: @Ferien Do we also have page curation tool here? DIVINE 20:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DIVINE, I'm not quite sure what you're referring to so probably not, we have our own version of Wikipedia:Article wizard, but I don't think that's the same thing? --Ferien (talk) 15:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ferien No, it is completely different. It is usually used by patrollers while reviewing pages on English Wikipedia. I thought we also have it here at SEWP, but we don’t have it. I think this tool will be helpful while patrolling the new pages, as patrollers' rights here on SEWP are a combination of both New Page Reviewer (patroller) and Autopatrol. And the tool iss more advanced and has additional features, which will surely help while patrolling. You should take a look once.[1] DIVINE 15:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DIVINE, oh yeah, I've seen that before. I'm not sure we'd need it here, as our patrol process is a bit more basic than en's, and we might need to customise it more to fit what the community would like here, but that's another discussion. --Ferien (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ferien the only problem is that we can mark as patrolled but can't reverse it in case of a mistake. I don't see any confirmation options before patrolling. DIVINE 16:04, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it's that big of a problem. If it happens accidentally, the patroller is responsible for tagging, or taking care of what needs to be done. If unable to do so, they can bring it to this page and seek help.--BRP ever 16:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good. DIVINE 16:33, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support 10 days.--BRP ever 07:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just going to add 'unless marked patrolled' just to be precise haha. BRP ever 15:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BRPever agreed, YGM on this one haha. DIVINE 15:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles need to be merged[change source]

These two articles La Tomatina and Tomatina are about the same thing Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 23:25, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Immanuelle In enwiki, it's La Tomatina. I personally think that anyone can redirect Tomatina to La Tomatina. If it’s ok than i can do that. DIVINE 23:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DIVINE: If you do that, please be sure to update the Wikidata entry, because Tomatina is the one that's linked. Thanks! -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking that too.  Done Thanks! DIVINE 04:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uw-unsourced[change source]

Hi :-) I noticed that {{Uw-unsourced1}} and {{Uw-unsourced2}} do not show up on Wikipedia:User talk page warnings. Is there a reason for that (example: they are obsolete), or have they simply been forgotten?

I also noticed that there is no level3 warning. Instead, their pages suggest that we use {{uw-vandalism4}}, which is a bit bitey, in my opinion. {{uw-vandalism3}} would make a better level3 warning.

Dream Indigo 21:15, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dream Indigo, I think it's not added to there because it was "only" added 10 years ago, compared to most of those other templates. I would agree with what you said about using uw-vandalism4, and it might be worth making our own unsourced3 and unsourced4 warnings, rather than calling it vandalism, as adding unsourced content isn't really vandalism. --Ferien (talk) 15:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Ferien, thanks for replying. I agree, we should translate our own unsourced3 and unsourced4 warnings, enwiki has them and they would be useful here as well. In the meantime, do we add {{Uw-unsourced1}} and {{Uw-unsourced2}} to {{User talk page warnings/table}}? Dream Indigo 19:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dream Indigo, yeah, I think it'd be good to add them. Once the other unsourced warnings have been added, they could be dropped on simple talk as well to ask for any potential feedback then add them to the table as well. --Ferien (talk) 22:01, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien, I added them. I may also simplify those other two now, they are very short notices, it will take a short time. Of course, I'll drop them here before "making them official" (I do not remember how to say it) :D Dream Indigo 22:54, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

how do i change my password i forgot what i made it[change source]

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Reatom2 (talk) 13:20, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reatom2, Special:PasswordReset will help you with that. --Ferien (talk) 15:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categorizing people who move from one place to another[change source]

How should we categorize people who move from one place to another? This is a tricky issue because we have categories based on demonyms (American sportspeople, Japanese academics), and categories that use the word "from" (Writers from Toronto). Do these mean anything in particular, or is it just "a person with that occupation who lived in that place sometime in their life"?

  • For example, what if someone grows up in Japan, then moves to Canada and becomes a politician there? Do we include them in "Category:Japanese politicians" even though they were never a politician in Japan? Or do we include them in "Category:Japanese people", thereby polluting that category with pages that can't be subdivided by occupation?
  • Another example, take "Category:Politicians from California", which includes Governors of California, Senators from California, Representatives from California, etc. Should it also include someone who grew up in California, went to college in California, then became a representative for Illinois?
  • And then there are academics. Many articles will call a person "a Chinese academic" although they spent most of their career in the USA. Clearly this means that a person's origins can be important, whether or not their career took place elsewhere. But we have no way to indicate this.

Kk.urban (talk) 19:03, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Kk.urban :)
You raised a great point that should be talked about on enwiki as well, because it is equally as confusing there.
I have always followed enwiki and categorized people by their nationality, rather than their ethnicity. Category:Japanese politicians is a sub-category of Category:Politicians by nationality. If one has a double citizenship, I put them under both categories. I would put the Japanese-Canadian politician either under "Canadian politicians" only or both, depending on their nationality.
We have some categories by ethnicity on simple, but not as many as enwiki (none for Asian-Americans; that "Chinese academic" should probably go under "American academics", unless they have Chinese citizenship).
About categories that use the word "from", I noticed that they usually refer to the place someone was born in (I again always follow enwiki when choosing categories of people I do not know).
Some examples with famous people:
  • Albert Einstein, born in Ulm, had many citizenships: "People from Ulm", "Jewish American academics", "Jewish German academics", "German physicists", "Swiss physicists" (simple)
  • Pope Francis, born in Buenos Aires, Argentinian nationality with Vatican citizenship as well: "Writers from Buenos Aires" (simple) "Clergy from Buenos Aires" (en), not "XYZ from Rome"
Politicians are a tricky category, because it is a job where places matter a lot. Barak Obama, born in Honolulu, is categorized under three "from" categories (Honolulu Illinois and Chicago), both here and on enwiki.
I hope this helped a little.
Dream Indigo 20:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I posted too early I did not finish, oops! Give me a minute, please. Dream Indigo 20:32, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I clicked ctrl+s or some shortcut with my elbow by mistake (just guessing) and there was nothing I could do to stop it from posting my draft-answer. Sorry for that! Also nationality and citizenship are two different concepts, I know that, but I did not want to post it so early, so please forget that. Now to my actual answer. Think of this more like a brainstorming moment.
Hello again, @Kk.urban :)
You raised a great point, I have always wondered something similar.
I have always followed enwiki and categorized people by their nationality and/or citizenship, rather than by their ethnicity. Category:Japanese politicians is a sub-category of Category:Politicians by nationality. If one has a double citizenship, I put them under both categories. I would put the Japanese-Canadian politician either under "Canadian politicians" only or both, depending on their nationality and/or citizenship on a case by case basis.
We have some categories by ethnicity on simple, but not as many as enwiki (none for Asian-Americans; our "Chinese academic" should probably go under "American academics", unless they have Chinese citizenship or nationality; I would probably put them under both).
About categories that use the word "from", I noticed that they usually refer to the place someone was born in, sometimes the one they grew up in (I again always follow enwiki when choosing).
Some examples with famous people:
  • Albert Einstein, born in Ulm, raised in Munich, had many citizenships: "People from Ulm", "Jewish American academics", "Jewish German academics", "German physicists", "Swiss physicists", "Educators from New Jersey" (I would personally remove the last one) (simple) "Scientists from Munich" (I would have chosen "from Ulm") etc (en)
  • Pope Francis, born in Buenos Aires, Argentinian nationality with Vatican citizenship as well: "Writers from Buenos Aires" (simple) "Clergy from Buenos Aires" (en), not "XYZ from Rome"
  • Leonardo da Vinci, born near Florence, Italy, worked in Milan, Rome and France a lot: "People from Florence" (simple) "Painters from Florence" (en), nothing about France/Milan/Rome
  • Adolf Hitler (right now I can't think of many other super-famous people that moved from one place to another), born in Braunau am Inn, Austrian and German nationalities: "People from Upper Austria" (simple) "People from Braunau am Inn" (en), not "XYZ from Berlin"
Politicians are a tricky category, because it is a job where places matter a lot. Barak Obama, born in Honolulu, is categorized under three "from" categories (Honolulu Illinois and Chicago), both here and on enwiki.
I hope this helped a little :)
Dream Indigo 21:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no right answer. We have to exercise judgement. Rathfelder (talk) 15:47, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-simple and Non-notable stuff ("behind" Expand)[change source]

One article, from a cluster of c. third tier of Austrian football.--Please click on any of the instances of "Expand".--Please allow for making those "Non-expandable". (And then show, or tell (or "diff") in regard to how that can be changed.)--Justification for proposed edits: Who cares if there were some three hundre people at a game. And who cares if the referee of an ordinary game was Jack Smith or Fritz Smith. 2001:2020:30B:FEA2:F46F:4ED5:7BA5:9B10 (talk) 03:38, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure what you are proposing. Are you suggesting articles like this don't have the audience numbers and goalscorers? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The articles have "{{Football box collapsible".
One suggest that the source-code be changed to {{Football box non-collapsible. 2001:2020:339:AB7A:39B2:E82A:785:A661 (talk) 15:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:30B:FEA2:F46F:4ED5:7BA5:9B10[reply]

That would just mean that info would show at all times? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
After removing, "Fetahu Goal 18'
Stadium: Red Bull Arena

Attendance: 346
Referee: Oliver Fluch"

, there is nothing more to show.--This is Simple-wiki; English-wiki is the one with all the bells and whistles. 2001:2020:307:D000:DCAF:57A3:2E7D:F00C (talk) 01:40, 5 May 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:30B:FEA2:F46F:4ED5:7BA5:9B10[reply]
We aren't "simple" we are the "simple English language" Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:17, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Complaint Iranian wikipedia[change source]

Hello Dear

This is Subhan Ahmad from Afghanistan. I hope you feel well. First let me thanks you from your attractive services and then let us inform you that as a wikipedia editor i have found that some iranian wiki editors and admins are trying to rob Afghan data according history, geography and more and added them to thier own Fersian data. Although we try alot to edit some of thier falls tips and data as mentioned and present them as correct but still they edit them wrong and beside warn us to be aware. Subhan Ahmad KDR (talk) 16:05, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Welcome to the Simple English Language Wikipedia. I'm not sure I can help you with things happening on the Iranian Wikipedia. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello there,this is Simple English Wikipedia, one of the several language versions of Wikipedia. Wikipedias are made by volunteers who work together. In the case of content on the Iranian-language Wikipedia, you need to talk to the people that are active editors at that Wikipedia, there's little we can do for you here (we similarly need to talk to those people). As to the content of an article, statements in the article need to be verifiable, using reliable sources. Very often, there will be more than one view on an event, so there will also be reliable souces covering the other views people have on that event. Wikipedia tries to be unbiased, what we call Neutral point of view. Usually, there is no harm in pointing out that other people have different ideas, to say what these ideas are, and to add reliable, thid-party sources.
I don't know what you mean by 'rob Afghan data according to history, geography and more'. Wikipedia is an encycopledia, and sources do not have to be in the lanuage of the Wiipedia project. Eptalon (talk) 09:24, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About wrting an article[change source]

Hello, I wrote an Simple Wikipedia article Jaedong's Family. I'm confused about where to write an information about its sequel show. 린눈라단 (talk) 16:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sequel is obviously partially lost, so some information of the sequel is not available. However, it has been covered several times in some South Korean (South Korea is a country where the show was made.) newspapers. Should it be described in one infobox? 린눈라단 (talk) 16:39, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main show was an animated web show?--The main show will possibly not survive AFD/ RFD.--My guess is that it has already been shot down, at English-wiki. Not wiki-notable, is what I am leaning towards. 2001:2020:307:D000:DCAF:57A3:2E7D:F00C (talk) 01:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, the show was broadcast on Tooniverse in early 2000s after released on a website. --린눈라단 (talk) 02:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tooniverse? Is that something wiki-notable? 2001:2020:335:CF1A:8DF0:11A:E9B2:8AD1 (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, see en:Tooniverse on the English Wikipedia. There were also a number of articles focusing on the show or season 2. 린눈라단 (talk) 01:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not everything that has been shown on Tooniverse, is wiki-notable. (Or one might say that, almost nothing shown on Tooniverse, has later become wiki-notable.) 11:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC) 2001:2020:345:F8B4:5180:685C:26D2:409A (talk) 11:04, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My intention was that the show was broadcast on multiple stations, and there were multiple articles proving to be prominent on a website. Again, there are several articles that focus on the show; an article about the show, a other article about show, an article about the Jaedong series (includes the show) --린눈라단 (talk) 14:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also apologizes for confusing you. Tooniverse is one of the channels(thr channel and EBS) that broadcast the show. --린눈라단 (talk) 14:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bowls is now a good article...[change source]

I have just promoted Bowls to Good Article. Congatulations to all those who helped... Eptalon (talk) 11:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviving the GA process...[change source]

Hello, earlier today, I ptomoted Bowls to Good Article. There are other articles at the proposals page. Please take a look, and leave comments. My idea would be to get 1-2 articles promoted to GA status per month.

As to sources for such articles:

  • If w can get statistics about what articles have been viewed most, edited most, edited by the most number of different people, we can identify "target" articles that would likely be worthy to work on.
  • Also, controversial subjects likely get more views, and edits.

Sending a message to the LGBTIQ+ community hasn't been done yet; there's one article waiting, but it has issues... Eptalon (talk) 11:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! As it's only one nomination at a time, I couldn't get another one together until this had been passed/failed. I should have a steady stream of articles I have improved and think meet the criteria. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can we get those statistics, Eptalon? It seems like an interesting idea. --Yottie =talk= 13:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon & @YottieI think we can get those statistics via Xtools. DIVINE 13:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is Special:MostRevisions which will give you the most edited pages, although I don't find that to be super helpful. Enwiki has a tool called ORES that can give a good idea as to the quality of an article.
Fwiw, incentivising quality articles is how we create them, and I think opening up closures to any user in good standing would help move the reviews on, which to me seems like they drag on a bit. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:57, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was more thinking of:
  • Articles most accessed
  • Articles most changed
with say the last 7 / 15 days. Most likely this is a database report
I know Enwp has some statistics generated a few times a month Eptalon (talk) 14:39, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
see [2] where you can gain similar info. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:01, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. According to that report, the most viewed pages (articles only) in the last month are: Slash (punctuation), Black, 2024, 4 (number), SOLID (object-oriented design), David, Colour, 6 (number), English language, 20 (number) and 24-hour clock. The most edited pages (articles only) in the last month are: Beauty and the Beast (1991 movie), Miss La Union, Elliot Rodger, Olivia Rodrigo, Deaths in 2024, Vanderpump Villa, Ovarian cancer and Alessia Cara. --Yottie =talk= 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fwiw, I don't think we need to be super constrictive as to what articles can be GA (in terms of popularity). I would just encourage people to make articles, collaborate and improve them as much as they can. I have almost 150 Good or Featured articles on enwiki, so if anyone wishes some help, I am always here to help (if you think it would help). Obviously, just the one on simple wiki, which I hope to rectify soon! Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't say that GAs should be popular or controversial articles, what I see though: we should really aim at getting 1-2 of these per month. Eptalon (talk) 12:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:45, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
we tried getting an lgbt-themed article there (so far no luck), so it would really be interesting to see if it is easier to get a controversial article to GA status Eptalon (talk) 13:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Advanced tool question[change source]

Hi, Are there any tools out there that can remove "link=commons:Category:" from List of Toki Pona words ?, Unfortunately WP:WPCleaner lists it as a bogus file option but doesn't offer to remove them and so I was hoping we had another tool that could ? maybe AWB ?, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 13:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a regex, then you could do it with AWB. The links themselves are wrong though, surely? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:58, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I don't have AWB and have never used it, No idea the links bizarrely work and they do go to the categories but to my knowledge wikiprojects don't link in this way ? (ie it should go straight to the file), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 14:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! I made a change to the first image on the page - is that what you are expecting? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Lee, It was exactly that, Many thanks, –Davey2010Talk 14:30, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, just need to remove anything in the link parameter. Might be something you could just do with find and replace. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Find and replace wouldn't work as each image has a different category linked, I've hidden out the links for now, Not ideal but it works –Davey2010Talk 15:34, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010: I think I can make a regex to do that. I see that the links are all in comments now. Do you just want those comments removed? I could put it in a sandbox and do a test run for you to check. Just let me know if you want the comments removed or something else. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:44, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Auntof6, I've just undone the hidden stuff - Yes please just the "link=commons:Category:" stuff removed please if possible, Okie dokie I'll be out all day so I'll reply once I get back home, Many thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010Talk 07:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010: OK, check User:Auntof6/sandbox2 and see if it's what you want. If so, feel free to copy/paste it to the article. I'll save what I built to do it, so if it needs tweaking just let me know. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 you are absolutely amazing thank you so so much for doing this, I greatly appreciate your help and efforts, I've pasted the content and blanked your sandbox, Thanks again for doing this I greatly appreciate it, Have a lovely day, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 16:36, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010: You're welcome. :) It's fun figuring out the regexp code. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:03, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lacking[change source]

We lack some of the literary glories of the American 20th century (I don't mean we have nothing at all):

  1. Another Country (James Baldwin)
  2. Rosemary's Baby (Ira Levin)
  3. The New York Trilogy (Paul Auster)
  4. Jazz, 1992.

Source: Times literacy desk.

Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:43, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jazz (novel). 2001:2020:345:F8B4:5180:685C:26D2:409A (talk) 11:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have just made Another Country (James Baldwin). --Yottie =talk= 13:17, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quick Question[change source]

Is there any policy that states we can't have redirects in mainspace to another wikis articles?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@FusionSub: I don't know of a policy, but it's probably a bad idea. We would lose the red links that we use to tell use what articles we are missing. Plus, if we are going to do that, 1) which other wiki's article to we redirect to and 2) we might as well just populate this wiki with redirects, which wouldn't serve our target audience. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I looked at the Kingdom of Mewar and was like "Wait a second, isn't this not allowed" and checked WP:REDIRECT and WP:QD#Redirects but couldn't find anything so I asked here. Thank you for letting me know.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 11:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@FusionSub: I just deleted it as having little or no info. If you see any more, feel free to tag them for QD.
Note that I'm only talking about mainspace. We do have useful soft redirects in Wikipedia space (and maybe help space and/or others). -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I was questioning about mainspace since I knew the wikispace used soft redirects a fair bit. Thanks for that!- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 11:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for category to watch[change source]

Hello, fellow editors. If you watch maintenance categories, I'd like to suggest adding Category:Articles with invalid date parameter in template to your watch list. Articles show up here if there's an invalid date, but they also show up if a dated maintenance tag is added without creating the corresponding monthly maintenance category. The category has more information about when/why pages appear there. There are currently only 2 people watching this category. If more people watch it, I think we'd get the maintenance categories created in a more timely manner.

You would need to include category changes in what you see in your watch list. If you don't know what that means, or you don't know how to do it, feel free to ask. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Active talk pages[change source]

Some editors cover sensible talk pages with the standard TP cover. That's not sensible because it means the relevant content cannot be directly seen. Stop doing that, please! Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you be more specific, or give an example?
If you're talking about user talk pages, then users are allowed to remove content from their talk pages, including by blanking or replacing content with the talk header. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What to do?[change source]

When they make good faith edits, but their summary is offensive, is rollback with a warning suitable, or is it better to request revdel? [3]. DIVINE 09:32, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DIVINE: If the content of the edit is not offensive, then rollback will not work. As for revdel, it depends on exactly what is in the edit summary. Feel free to ask for revdel if you feel it's needed, but be aware that it might be declined. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Depends on how bad the edit summary is. I'd reacquaint yourself with what the level is for being revdelled. It is possible to revdel just an edit summary and not the change. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:52, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 @Lee Vilenski i have given example over there with link. DIVINE 16:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That link probably doesn't quite meet the criteria, but you can always ask at WP:AN. It's clearly not nice. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is likely an edit from LTA/GRP. He is banned by the Wikimedia Foundation and is not allowed to make any edits to any Wikipedia Project no matter if they are good or bad. (From his LTA page). 84Swagahh (talk) 18:47, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is from the third paragraph on the English Wikipedia's LTA/GRP page. 84Swagahh (talk) 18:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's GRP. I've revdeled it. fr33kman 19:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Depression Ten (2005) nominated for demotion[change source]

Hello everyone. I currently nominated Tropical Depression Ten (2005) for demotion due to it being nominated for a merger, article quality not quite as good (thorough) and enwiki has it merged as well. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 08:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, OK with me. Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:40, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed fr33kman 15:44, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Simple_talk&oldid=9534620"