User talk:Osiris/July 2012

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 7 |
Archive 8
| Archive 9

Thank you

Hi, Osiris. Thanks for fixing the "External links" heading at Teatro di San Carlo. Old habits die hard. :) I saw a discussion on English Wikipedia about the Indian Education Project's latest plans (I was also one of the interviewees for this report) and came here to find out what writing in Simple English is like. As an experiment, I created a few articles here and rewrote/expanded another. It's very difficult, but quite fascinating. I'm not sure if I succeeded entirely. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Your article looks great. It is extremely difficult, but you get the hang of it after a while. It's probably more so for ESL people, which is why I am puzzled by the IEP choice in language - but I'm open to the prospect of the project going ahead if there is adequate voluntary support for it. I'd be interested to read your thoughts on the first program if the interview you gave is still available...? Osiris (talk) 10:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
I must confess, I was also surprised they decided to go for Simple English WP. Several of us advised against it back in March [1]. No one from the IEP or the WMF even responded to that discussion. Then—whoosh—3 months later, they're here proposing their program. The interviews on which the qualitative report was based were carried out mostly by email or telephone. (Mine was done by email.) Some of the people in India and at the WMF headquarters in California were interviewed in person. None of the interviews were published by the WMF, only the final report. I'll be happy to answer any questions you might have, though. The WMF also commissioned and published a quantitative analysis of the first IEP program. You'll find it here. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 13:57, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
It'd certainly be interesting to see what kind of improvement could be made on those statistics with a smaller and more tightly controlled group. I think the plan presented is generally well thought-out with a view to prevent problems that arose last time, and an initial group of 50 students restricted to sandboxes would be easily manageable... but I also think enwiki would be the ideal place for it. I get the feeling, though, that the program has lost a lot of good will over there. Why did other wikis come to be considered? If the same program was presented to the enwiki community, would the level of support be different? I can certainly expect that the concerns about the lack of infrastructure wouldn't apply so much... Osiris (talk) 04:36, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
In its new form (and provided the IEP stick to it), I think Simple English could handle it. Obviously, you have to be prepared for some slippage, but with only 50 students and confined to sandboxes it should be OK. I agree with you, though, English WP would be better. For one thing, we have a well-developed subject based WikiProject system. There's also going to be a steep learning curve to write properly in Simple English—for the students, the professors, and for their Ambassadors. Why add the complication? Plus, the original program was heavily sold to Indian universities on the basis of the "prestige" of writing for English Wikipedia. Their Campus Ambassadors were likewise marketed as a brand: "It feels youthful, energetic and hip, intentionally designed to sell the Wikipedia enterprise effectively to urban college students." You can read more about this in another report from the WMF produced before the pilot actually got underway. The India Chronicles. I wonder if Simple Wikipedia will attract the same kind of committment from the professors and the students.
As for English Wikipedia, this greatly revised program and vastly reduced numbers would have support there. Sure, there will be some grousing from some editors. The IEP did lose a lot of goodwill because of their extreme mishandling of the project at every step and the weeks it took us to even get them to acknowledge that something had gone seriously wrong (the WMF gave a masterclass in "minimizing rhetoric") or even to communicate with us. But most of us involved in the cleanup/damage limitation would be in favour of them running this newly designed pilot, and I do believe they've learned a lot of lessons. However, on English WP it would be under intense scrutiny at every step of the way. Perhaps that's what they want to avoid. I don't know.
Frank Schulenerg's comment here frames their choice quite differently: "If a community – or even smaller but very vocal parts of it – is generally not open and opposed to letting newcomers join Wikipedia, then initiatives like the Education Program just don't make much sense." He was, I'm pretty sure, referring to English Wikipedia. It is of course a gross exaggeration for him to say that. I honestly don't think he knows how many of us spent hours communicating with and trying to help the students and their almost equally inexperienced Campus Ambassadors. Or the folks at WikiProject Computing who spent hours moving inappropriate "How to" articles to WikiBooks so that the students' work wouldn't be wasted. It is true we were not open to newcomers (or anyone else) adding copyvio to English Wikipedia. For legal reasons we had to remove it immediately. In some cases, the only way to make the students stop, after being advised multiple times, was to block them. That was the real crux of the issue.
Anyhow, it will be interesting to see if in the coming months the volunteer Ambassadors they've lined up (and the professors) put in a preliminary effort here after all. If they do, and you're confident they can train the students to write in Simple English and adapt to your culture, then you should definitely go ahead with it. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:10, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────┘
Yes and I think that will ultimately be the deciding factor: whether that group of volunteers establishes themselves as active editors here beforehand. At the moment, unfortunately, only two have responded to my encouragement on their talk pages. I'm concerned that they may have felt disparaged by the comments on their abilities, but I'm hoping to remedy that with some positive direction. If within a couple of months we're still without an adequate level of commitment, I might suggest to Nitika and Hisham that the proposal be moved to the English Wikipedia. If you're right and there is support for it over there, I will certainly lend a hand wherever it might be needed. Thanks for that insight, Voce. Regards, Osiris (talk) 05:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I think it was a great idea for you to add some personal encouragement. Let's hope it pays off. I was rather dismayed at some of the sarcastic and highly personalised comments on the IEP proposal page, but I doubt if that's primarily what's holding them back. Quite a few of them have very, very, few edits in article space at English Wikipedia too—well under 300 and in some cases, under 20. Some of them may not even have seen their talk page messages here. Possibly try contacting them on English WP? Best, Voceditenore (talk) 10:29, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Good idea, will do that. Osiris (talk) 03:41, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

alt=

What does the alt= do to the presentation of images on a page? I haven't noticed this before. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:40, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Alt text is meant for readers who cannot see the image (like if they deactivated images). Should not be used with a thumb description. Hope I helped you, you can find more information here ;)--weltforce (talk) 09:53, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

It allows visual aids to be conveyed in text or audio format. It's for users who can't see properly or have certain images disabled in their user preferences. If I had the time, I'd write a description of the information the image is trying to convey. Adding the parameter without any value just means that readers using a screen reader (about 3% of internet users, according to recent studies) doesn't have to listen to the name of the file read out (e.g., "File, colon, <name of file>, dot, j-p-g"). The use of |alt= was endorsed as a MediaWiki software guideline during the Usability initiative and was then added to the standard guidelines for images and accessibility. Osiris (talk) 10:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, that's interesting. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Please review User:BPositive/Puneri_Pagadi

Hi Osiris. As I had promised you that I'll be starting changing on this wiki in July, here I am! I've read most of the rules on this wiki before starting. Your tools and links are really good. I appreciate your efforts. I have started off this article in my sandbox. Please read it and let me know if I am on the right track. Thanks, BPositive (talk) 07:45, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, Osiris. Yes, no harm in introducing red links :) How about a DYK nomination for this one? It's an intellectual property and this fact may well go into the hook. It's around 600 characters right now. I can expand it to meet the criteria. :) BPositive (talk) 08:50, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Sounds great! Will look forward to seeing what you come up with. I have created intellectual property if you need something to link to. Osiris (talk) 04:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
You are simply awesome! Hats off! :-) Thanks for creating that page. I shall be working on the article and nominate it by the end of this week. :-) Cheers, BPositive (talk) 05:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiProjects

Hey mate I am just wondering how the WikiProjects work on here. I know on the English Wikipedia we have "Wikipedia:WikiProject Football" but on here I dont see that. I am just wondering if I should start one or if it is not necessary? Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 15:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey. Unfortunately we don't have a WikiProject system. Not enough editors to maintain them. The guideline is that you can create a project in your userspace if you need somewhere to coordinate with other editors over a particular topic. But there's no way you can tag articles or anything. Osiris (talk) 03:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Okay. Will do that then. Cheers. --Arsenalkid700 (talk) 05:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Publish

Hi, do you think this (Cardiff Central) would be OK to publish?--Chip123456 (talk) 20:33, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, looks good. You might be able to simplify it a bit further, but definitely okay to publish. Osiris (talk) 02:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 Done. Cheers,--Chip123456 (talk) 06:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Recent block

Hi. Thanks for blocking that vandalism-only account. You may be interested in blocking its socks:

Regards.‴ Teles «Talk ˱@ L C S˲» 02:39, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!  Done. Osiris (talk) 02:45, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank you.‴ Teles «Talk ˱@ L C S˲» 02:50, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thank you for being so friendly and posting those reminders on both my english page as well as here. Unfortunately, the only reason that I'm currently not editing is that I have a lot of backlog that is due by the coming week and I'm swamped with too much work, I promise you, that come next week, when my load diminishes, I'll create my first article on Simple, I've already read all the policies that you gave me links to, I'm sorry for not being able to give time right now, but will do asap. --Debastein (talk) 10:45, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem Debanjan! :) It's totally up to you when you start, the message is just there to help you when you do. Will look forward to seeing what you come up with in the coming weeks! Regards, Osiris (talk) 04:42, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

You can un-flood me now

There's more to do, but I'm through for now. Cheers! --Auntof6 (talk) 08:17, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for Support!

Thank you so much for such warm welcome, I will start editing soon :)
Keep Supporting,Keep Inspiring! AbhiSuryawanshi (talk) 15:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem Abhi! Face-grin.svg Looking forward to seeing your work. Osiris (talk) 15:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

How to do "clean-up"?

User:Omisonarahanamaruki has worked on three articles this month -- see here. I hoped to encourage more work by adding a few changes.

I don't understand where the number comes from in the template here. Please explain.

Perhaps it will help me to understand if you will use the same template at Talk:Tadaomi Yasuda? and Talk:Kengo Takushima?

I recently learned that Auntof6 was inconvenienced by the way I write on talk pages. If my serial diffs were annoying, please excuse my clumsy way of writing. It will improve slowly. --Horeki (talk) 14:51, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Location of the "permanent link" button
Ah! Sorry, Horeki. Should have explained better. The number is the oldid= number (or "version" of the article it was based on. It's generally preferred (though not absolutely required) when giving attribution. You can get it by clicking on the "Permanent link" button (pictured), which I believe is labelled "この版への固定リンク" on jawiki. The number will appear at the end of the URL in the address bar. So, on the template, when you click on the Japanese title, it will take you to the specific version the author based our article on. It's not absolutely required though, so you can just give the title of the article on jawiki.
So the possibilities are:
  • {{translated|ja|[title of article on jawiki]|oldid number}}
  • {{translated|ja|[title of article on jawiki]}}
The only reason I use this is so that the page gets added to Category:Translated pages. So you could even continue to use the template you have been using before but just add the category as well. Osiris (talk) 15:10, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

You can feel free to compose your messages on my talk page in whatever way helps you to express yourself best. I can definitely understand how some might find it irritating, but for myself it's not a problem. Osiris (talk) 15:10, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Alright this is hard :P

I've got some questions, so kindly bear with me. I've just had a look around, and just went through the Aircraft and Mahabharata articles for an idea on how its written. Well, its like holding a kicking baby close to your chest to sum it up :D . RESIST the urge and flow of words :P

  • Is the lack of info on most articles due to a lack of specific editors, or they simply couldn't be written simply?
  • Do the simple concept apply to refs as well? :S
  • How strictly should I adhere to Basic English and BNC spoken freq?

That's all for now, though I'm bound to ask more while I edit :P --Écrivain (talk) 10:05, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

That's an excellent analogy! It does take some getting used to... The lack of information is just because there aren't a lot of people around to add it. With careful use of vocabulary and wikilinks, you can pretty much describe anything in simple terms.
The basic-English wordlists can be helpful when you're picking terms to use, but you don't have to stick to that all the time. I find a thesaurus to be the most useful tool for finding simpler synonyms. A lot of the time you'll have to use harder words and that's okay. Linking to wiktionary - [[wikt:]] - can come in handy in those cases, or you can explain what a word means in parentheses.
There's nothing different about the use of refs here. Quotations, though, are pretty useless unless they're in basic words. Osiris (talk) 16:01, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

George W. Bush

What do you think of my edits to the George W. Bush article. Are they good, bad, or mediocre? --RJR3333 (talk) 03:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

The sources detailed look  good. Some are just bare URLs though, so it might be more effective if you say what they are... Osiris (talk) 06:33, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hey, I'm having an issue with the talkback template. Does it exist here? And what is the best script here to use for Twinkle? --Debastein (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey, yeah it's under the same name {{tb}} and also {{wb}} (which I prefer). It looks like you might have caused some blanking with this edit, but somebody has fixed it for you. Twinkle is undergoing a bit of improvement at the moment, but the scripts from EhJJ are the default ones, which still work. You can add a talkback script by importing User:PiRSquared17/friendlytalkback.js. Osiris (talk) 06:21, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry for adding the warning

Please take the following information out of respect :) ;

I am sorry for adding the warning to the user's talk page but removing 7,407 characters doesn't seem like a clear mistake to a user who is unfamiliar with regular contributors. I have to disagree with how you linked "WP:Don't template the regulars" though as the user was not acting like a regular or an experienced editor. Specially, since a "regular" to me is a user who has contributed for over a month and has made more than 50 changes/edits. Thank you for your understanding. I am also sorry for the poor choice of template as it was the closest thing to removing content from a talk page. Have a great day, Riley Huntley (talk) 07:31, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Riley. Please don't fret over that, it wasn't a big deal. Just try to take a bit more care in the future when it comes to dealing with mistakes. In this case, when it's a registered user with no history of bad edits and no heated arguments are happening on the page, one would reasonably assume it to be a mistake. It was obvious to me this user had edited an old revision of the talk page (looking back, specifically this one) since it removed several comments in different threads. I've made this mistake several times myself. Best thing to do if the user doesn't realise what they've done is fix it for them.
Who does my "regulars" link refer to? Depends on the context. To me, someone who's been editing long enough to know not to remove other people's comments will probably find a templated warning explaining it to them a bit patronising. This particular user has been editing Wikipedia for about a year. He's new to simple, but the policies are the same. I hope you don't mind that I removed the warning. Hope to see you around, Osiris (talk) 09:32, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

My new articles about Nastassja Kinski and Sharon Tate

Do you like the two new stubs I created or are they potentially deleteable? --RJR3333 (talk) 21:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you but...

Can you reply to my comments on the article bullfrog? Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 15:31, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Done, though I must apologise as I don't have the time to keep reviewing it at the moment. Best of luck though. Osiris (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Roman Polanski edits

How do you like my edits to the Roman Polanski article? --RJR3333 (talk) 23:51, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Look pretty good to me. The career section could probably use a bit of paragraphing though... ;) You could easily simplify some of the words (e.g., this wiki seems to have a thing about using "movie" instead of "film"), but I wouldn't say it's overly complex. Very well referenced. Because you use the same source several times, you might find it easier using shorthand footnoting so you don't have to keep repeating the details of the source. Osiris (talk) 16:15, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I took Polanski out of the categories "sex offenders" and "French criminals" because I felt it was a violation of npov and blp. Do you agree with my decisions or disagree? --RJR3333 (talk) 21:32, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't know the specifics of the case. Was he convicted? If he's French and was convicted of a crime then he's a French criminal by definition. No sense in whitewashing it. Same goes for sex offender. If he was convicted of a sex offense then he's a sex offender. BLPCRIME relies on a conviction. This of course depends on what sources are available, but shouldn't be hard to find a source for convictions given his fame. Osiris (talk) 06:29, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Also I changed his movies from one section to each movie having its own individual section. Right now most of those movies are just one sentence long but I'm planning to expand on them. Was that change ok or should the movies have just remained one section?--RJR3333 (talk) 08:08, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I added some psecifics to the Talk page of the article. I leave it to others to incorporate this into the article. --Eptalon (talk) 09:06, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

To paraphrase it very shortly: In 1977, he pleaded guilty to having sex with a 13 year old, but fled to France after being released on bail; in the 1990s, he settled the case with her, in 2008, he was arrested in Switzerland, which refused to extradite him to the US, because there were major problems with his case, and because the US refused to provide evidence to substantiate the extradition claim. In the 1970s, Polanski spent about 50 days in a psychiatric ward of an US prison.--Eptalon (talk) 09:11, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

The movies section actually looks like it's going into too much detail, to be honest. It should be a summary of Polanski's career. Anything to do with production of the movies, even the details about Polanski's role, should be moved to the articles about the movies. I'm not sure whether you're taking any of my comments on board, but I'll still give my opinion when you ask for it. Osiris (talk) 09:57, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Ok I trimmed the details about his movies and changed it to, with a few exceptions, simply stating the date and name of each film, and not giving each film its own section. Is that an improvement? Or does it still need more trimming? --RJR3333 (talk) 17:23, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me! Osiris (talk) 09:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Does a list of movies Polanski made need a source, because I was told on regular English wikipedia that it does not? Is that true? --RJR3333 (talk) 03:48, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, you don't "need" a source, but without one there's nothing stopping anyone challenging an entry on the list and removing it. I suppose you could say the films serve as sources on themselves, but you're supposed to use secondary sources. Osiris (talk) 06:59, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Since you said the movies shouldn't have detail in his biography I went ahead and trimmed it down to just showing what movies he made and there and nothing else. Before I had a sentence about each movie he made. Was that an improvement or not? --RJR3333 (talk) 19:37, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Detail is great, as long as it's to do with Polanski himself (biographical), rather than detail about the films (like storylines, etc). For example, whether any of them won him any awards or were particular milestones for his career. You could say how eclectic he is in genres, how happy he was with the completed works, what styles he used, how much acclaim or respect the films got him... As long as it's all about him. Have a look at the corresponding sections in en:James Whale, Ralph Bakshi or Satyajit Ray for some ideas. Osiris (talk) 23:51, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Free

Finally schedule freed up, (relatively so as to speak). Will start editing from tomorrow. Might need your help extensively. I've read the policies, but using simple words for me, would be a huge challenge. --Debastein (talk) 21:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Excellent! Face-grin.svg I'll be around I think, will give you all the help you need! Osiris (talk) 23:53, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

You can remove my flood flag now

Thanks for giving it to me. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:17, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

No probs. Thanks for all the work you did! Osiris (talk) 09:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
You're very welcome -- I'll continue some other day! --Auntof6 (talk) 09:25, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

What would be more simple?

Sorry to bother you with this but I don't want to clutter WP:ST. Since you have helped me out there I was wondering if you can help me choose which sentence is more simple.

"Amphibians were dominate during the Carboniferous and Permian Period."

or

"Amphibians were on top of the food chain during the Carboniferous and Permian Periods."

Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 19:15, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

You mean dominant in the first sentence, right? I like the second one better. Osiris (talk) 19:28, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
Yea sorry and thank you! Best, Jonayo! Selena 4 ever 19:51, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Automatic taxobox

Hey there,

Unfortunately no one has compiled a list of all the templates needed, so I'm currently importing each one that is directly transcluded by the templates. I'll need to do a bit of testing as well to ensure this is working properly, since a lot of it is specifically coded to work on the English subdomain of Wikipedia, so it's important to bring in a few common taxa that are likely to be used (and are referenced to in the documentation). Also, it looks as though there might be a template name conflict which we can discuss once I figured out which template is causing the conflict. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 06:37, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

It's hard to say. I'd imagine I've imported at least half of them for sure, and a lot of them we will probably find out somewhere down the road didn't get imported (which is why I'll need to do sandbox testing afterward)...I'm starting to get down to the obscurely named ones that show up only on some instances of the taxobox (often enough, though, that we'll need them. If you'd like me to take a break so as not to scare folks too badly, I can do that. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 06:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
No problem! Simply glad to be of assistance here. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 06:47, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
"07:07, 20 July 2012 Osiris (talk | changes) moved page Template:Taxonomy to Template:Taxonomic ranks without leaving a redirect (i'm going to assume it's this one)"
That's it, thanks! Hopefully that will not inconvenience too many users. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 07:17, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Request

Do you mind blocking User:1ravensnflfan and his IP following his recent sockpuppetry on enwiki followed by this? Thanks. Eagles247 (talk) 19:52, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Ugh, never a dull moment with that guy. Unfortunately, I can't block him on this wiki unless he repeats the offence here. He's already on thin ice here for other things (the same things you blocked him for over there). I know he's been editing sporadically as an IP, but it's not descended into sockpuppetry yet and he hasn't violated any of the restrictions I've imposed on him. Osiris (talk) 22:29, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, I noticed this wiki has a "one-strike" rule, which this user has obviously violated since his behavior from enwiki carried over here. Eagles247 (talk) 01:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, he's violated it many times. But I decided to be lenient, and gave him a final warning back in April. In the few edits he's made since then, he hasn't violated his restrictions, at least that I'm aware of. I also gave him the option of mentorship under another editor, but he didn't comment on it. Osiris (talk) 01:55, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

The next Big Weekend – 10 to 13 August

You are invited to take part in the next big weekend, the Big Space Weekend, on 10 to 13 August. Our goal is to increase the number and quality of space-related articles. For full details, see Simple Talk. DJDunsie (talk) 20:33, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

{{taxonomy/Amphibia}}

Funny you should mention that, I was just noticing that and addressing it. I missed several templates that are called by the taxonomy pages and am about to import those. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 23:33, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Can do! And I found a solution for the color problem, just need to find the code that contains the problem. So that'll be pretty simple once I find that. Bob the WikipediaN (talkcontribs) 05:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Copying

My Bad, but if i write in different language, but the same content, it would be alright? Thanks 122.179.170.197 (talk) 07:23, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

If you write in Simple English? Of course! Face-smile.svg Osiris (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, i will :) 122.179.170.197 (talk) 07:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
One more thanks for the revert, guess i am gonna stay in this site for long now :)) 122.179.170.197 (talk) 09:08, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
No problem! That is an automated anti-vandal bot you trigged by inserting the word "rape" into the article. If you are going to stick around, you can avoid getting reverted like that by creating an account. Osiris (talk) 09:12, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh sure. 122.179.170.197 (talk) 09:44, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Hendrik Verwoerd article...

...wording about South African referendum on whether to remain under sovereignty of the British monarch or become a republic

In the article I created about Hendrik Verwoerd I referred to the referendum Verwoerd submitted to the South African electorate about whether to remain under the sovereignty of the British monarch or become a republic, and used the word kingdom in describing the status of South Africa at the time. Originally I chose the word monarchy, but monarchy is not a word that is used very often so I thought it might be inapropriate to simple English wikipedia, kingdom is a much more common word. However, a user on regular English wikipedia once criticized me for using the word kingdom to describe Canada because he said Canada only uses a foreign monarch as its head of state and has never had a monarch of its own, therefore it cannot be a kingdom, if what he said were true then it would be inapropriate to refer to South Africa as a kingdom for the same reason. So is it better to refer to the South African state from 1910-1960 as a kingdom or a monarchy? --RJR3333 (talk) 01:57, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

I use a very small screen, so can I separate your heading?
Theoretically, a kingdom is just a type of monarchy, and South Africa was (by definition) a kingdom since its monarch held the title King or Queen of South Africa. The Queen of Canada is not a foreign monarch - it's a native office coded by the Constitution Act... - it's just that the person who holds the office happens be from another country (and Canada can change that whenever it likes by altering its order of succession). So the realms don't share monarchs, they actually all have their own. That's all in theory, though, and South Africa is a unique case. I would either use "monarchy" or "Commonwealth realm". Osiris (talk) 02:41, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
On the regular English wikipedia Tharkuncall told me "Then I'm afraid that I don't understand your point. Canada is certainly a sovereign country, but it is not a kingdom because it has no monarchy of its own" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AElizabeth_II&diff=54902959&oldid=54902060 when I called Canada a kingdom. Based on that I cannot believe South Africa was a kingdom, so I decided to keep the wording away from kingdom and say "under the rule of the British monarch". --RJR3333 (talk) 08:03, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Tharkuncall would be incorrect. South Africa wasn't "under the rule of the British monarch". It stopped being under British governance in 1910, when the South Africa Act when into effect. It stayed under the British monarchy until the Statute of Westminster in 1931, and the status of the King of the United Kingdom was removed from the constitution by the Status of the Union Act in 1934. It was - from that point - under the rule of the King of South Africa. Osiris (talk) 08:33, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Alex Jones article

What do you think of my changes to the Alex Jones article?--RJR3333 (talk) 11:38, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

They look good. There are a few words and phrases that need to be explained though -- like "paleoconservative" and "watchdog", and especially words used colloquially that hold a different meaning than their ordinary usage would, like "bashing" and "came down from on high". These would confuse the simple-English speaker. I must say, though, you're getting very good at sourcing all these unreferenced BLPs. Osiris (talk) 00:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I've sourced all of Jones's movies now. I also defined "bashing" and "came down from on high" and "paleoconservative" and "watchdog". How does it look now?--RJR3333 (talk) 14:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

My Article

I see you do not want that I create new or very knowledged Article's Magnolia (talk) 16:32, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

You can create as many new articles as you like, but they need to be written in simple English. Osiris (talk) 00:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I think this is not the reason for delete my Article...In circumcision it was very simple einglish and also my other articles. Magnolia (talk) 02:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Your article Circumcision in islam was composed exclusively of hadiths. There was no original content. And, being hadiths, they were in very complex, poetic English - a style that does not belong on Wikipedia. Please try reading over the links I gave to you on your user page, for advice on writing articles. Osiris (talk) 02:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Chris Hansen

What do you think of my changes to the Chris Hansen article? I want to be VERY careful with this one because my handling of it was the reason I got blocked from regular English wikipedia, so I would like input from other people. --RJR3333 (talk) 03:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Importing templates

Did I see you say recently that it's easy to import templates? Is that a better process than manually copying and pasting the template and doc? If so, can I ask you to import a few? Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, what do you need? Osiris (talk) 05:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! Here's the list:
If you need to specify a category, you can put them in Category:Sportsperson external link templates. If not, I can take care of that later. Thanks again, and no hurry! --Auntof6 (talk) 05:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 Done. Will have to fix the cats manually. Osiris (talk) 05:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Wow, that was fast! Thanks! I'll take care of the cats. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
On a (semi-)related matter, do you have any thoughts on this taxobox thing? Trying to decide whether it's worth it. Could you take a look when you have some extra time? Osiris (talk) 05:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Sure, I'll look at it. Probably not until tomorrow, though. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Funny thing -- none of those templates are showing up in the categories I put them in. Can a cache issue cause that even after 3 days? --Auntof6 (talk) 02:24, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. Looks that way. I just swung a dummy edit at Template:USFSA name and it's in there now.. Osiris (talk) 02:27, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Maybe it's because they were imported? I'll make dummy edits to the others, too. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:33, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Possible. The convert templates we imported seemed to have gone in theirs okay ...although we didn't change the categories after importing them. Osiris (talk) 02:39, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Australian place names

Since you and I are the only two active in this area, should we agree on a standard for naming places? I have always used place and state, with the exception of the state capitals. Enwiki used to do this but changed a while ago and now only includes the state if it needs to disambiguate from a similar place name. I personally do not like this, it means some places are titled one way and some the other, and the editor needs to know about other places. For consistency I would like to suggest that all Australian place articles are named "place, state." We could use redirects from place to "place, state" articles. Thoughts?Peterdownunder (talk) 02:19, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I've been meaning to ask you about this, because it's been on my mind too (was involved in some move requests on enwiki recently). I think I'm pretty much the opposite though... I find having the state name at the end clunky and unnecessary. I also find it odd, as in it goes against what I would expect readers to type into the search box, or how I would normally refer to those places. If the names are being redirected to their primary topic anyway (e.g., TownsvilleTownsville, Queensland), we'll still face the same problems with "other stuff" that the reader might have wanted (e.g., other Townsvilles). We'll have to use hatnotes and disambiguation pages either way we do it. I realise the benefits of consistency, but I also prefer the precision of plain titles when I consider what the reader will probably type. But that's just my personal preference, and I'm not strongly attached to it. I would definitely like to see us put a standard in place. Osiris (talk) 02:52, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
I will still argue for consistency, it means that all Australian places are the same, especially with so many places not having original names. It also give a consistent way to deal with redlinks. I asked Mrs Downunder (who is a librarian) and she says place, state, definitely...and I would not want argue with her :). And thanks for adding Charlie McMahon, one of my favourite muso's.Peterdownunder (talk) 04:13, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Ha, I'll take your word for it ;) If you both think this is the best way to do it, I'll concede for the sake of a consistent approach - it would certainly help to make sure there are no duplicates. McMahon is annoying me at the moment... I'm sure I've seen more than a few articles about him in my time, but it's very hard to find one online. Osiris (talk) 04:40, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Big Olympic Weekend

Working Man's Barnstar.png The Working Man's Barnstar
Thank you for the contributions you made during the Big Olympic Weekend! Tbennert (talk) 03:00, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Fuzzy logic

I have asked a difficult question here. Maybe I didn't parse the issues well enough.

Perhaps there is no place for fuzzy logic in our categories?

The categories at de:Kimmei, en:Emperor Kimmei and ja:欽明天皇 are specific. This suggests that we should follow the same pattern when we create articles about the other Asuka period and Nara period emperors.

Perhaps it would be reasonable for me to change the categories at simple:Emperor Yōmei, simple:Emperor Sushun and simple:Empress Suiko? Is there an alternative possibility? --Horeki (talk) 15:21, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Considering your change here, it looks like you have found the answer acceptable? Osiris (talk) 02:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Yes, thank you. --Horeki (talk) 14:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Circumcision

I think it will be better this this Article is neutral... why you wrote only the complications but not the benefits? I posted it? Why you only a non circ link have posted? My Pro circ link you removed...thats not ok... Magnolia (talk) 21:44, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

Amuca tribe

No...it was not from an another Wikipedia Article...because...they was removed by a unkown person...

what is your problem with me? 217.248.140.111 (talk) 14:55, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Delete

When you get a chance can you please delete the empty categories under Category:Unreferenced BLPs? Thanks! --Tbennert (talk) 05:35, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Articles about teams at the Olympics

Please take a look at the small changes I made in Australia at the Olympics and Australasia at the Olympics. The introduction and history sections are mirrored in other similar articles -- for example, see Great Britain at the Olympics and Japan at the Olympics. What do you think? --Horeki (talk) 16:31, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

flood flag?

Hi, feel like giving me a flood flag? I'm working on establishment and disestablishment categories now. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Have fun! Osiris (talk) 05:29, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. You can take the flag off -- I finished everything I had in mind for the births, deaths, establishments, and disestablishments categories. I need to find a new project now! --Auntof6 (talk) 07:08, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Queries

Hi Osiris. I was adding a name to 1686 and discovered a very messed up template/navbox there. Haven't got clue how to fix it. Does Simple Wikipedia have any "template technicians"? Also, another (rather delicate) query—I've noticed a new editor here who is a confirmed sockpuppet of an indefinitely blocked user on English Wikipedia. The user had been quite disruptive there in addition to multiple sockpuppetry. Their edits here seem reasonably OK, so far. Is it best to let sleeping dogs lie? Best, Voceditenore (talk) 09:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Voce. I've fixed that template. It's all this template's fault -- it carries countless subtemplates that we haven't finished importing yet. About the user: blocks aren't reciprocal unless the user repeats the same offence here. If they start socking here as well, they'll get a block to match the one on the other wiki.
By the way, it's wonderful to see you sticking around; your work is always excellent. Osiris (talk) 09:42, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Thank-you for the kind words. :) I enjoy adding new articles here every now and then. I figured that was the policy re editors who've been blocked from other Wikipedias. The sockmaster has four more puppets registered with Simple, but none of those seem to have edited at all. I'll keep an eye out to see if they start any shenanigans. Hopefully, they won't. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 12:16, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I think I know who you mean now. It looks as though he was blocked two days ago...? There's not much sense in you wasting your own good time on this, so I'll email a checkuser in case there is something going on. I'm not really sure what the protocol is on the inactive accounts, to be honest, but I'll inquire. Osiris (talk) 13:32, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Yep (re the time scale). I simply put the talk pages of the other four on my watchlist. If they start editing, I'll see a welcome posted on their talk page. But checkuser might not be a bad idea in case there are others here not picked up by the SPI at En WP. If the others are never used for editing here, I suppose it doesn't really matter and the one who is editing seems to be doing OK, at least much better than on En WP. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 14:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Osiris! I'm now back and active! I'm now going to take a look on Yellowstone, and then I'll fix the Twinkle problems. Just wanted to bid welcome you! Cheers, weltforce (talk) 14:37, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I fixed Yellowstone now. Thank you for your comments! --weltforce (talk) 16:29, 30 July 2012 (UTC)