Wikipedia:Simple talk

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


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 Note that you should not change the archives, so if something that has been archived needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.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?

User:Simpul skitsofreeneea[change source]

They are making everything long and convoluted again. See page history of Delusion. Kk.urban (talk) 01:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I agree, and think that none of their work is suitable for this wiki. The author can't write simple prose. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:34, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Agreed. It's becoming complex again. No that it was ever made simple in the first place. fr33kman 11:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And the page History of schizophrenia is full of random unrelated things. Like Sigmund Freud started smoking tobacco in 1880-1881, America was discovered by Europeans in 1492. So what? Kk.urban (talk) 22:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I agree. Their prose is not simple, even though they have been subject of a discussion here previously. Nothing has changed. The article is even more complex and confusing than ever. See also the entire discussion in Talk:(1874 - 1641), which is very confusing to read through. I think that it's time to discuss a community ban.— *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 23:56, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would be in favour of a ban because this is exactly a topic on which we should have basic pages in simple English. It is one of the most common forms of mental dysfunction, and the editor has been given more than enough time to adjust. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:02, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree that a ban might be the only way forward here. The articles are getting to the point where they are just too hard to understand and contain information that is just not relevant to the subject. fr33kman 20:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would support a CIR ban. I do not like banning people who are trying to help, but this person cannot write in Simple English. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:55, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree. fr33kman 17:01, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
well as an assessment of my own faults or not faults using The https://goodcalculators.com/flesch-kincaid-calculator/:

"The meaning from the etymology of the word: schizophrenia, is by splitting the word into the parts schizo and phren 51.2. The meaning by joining the parts together again is splitting psychic functions. Schizo means splitting and phren means psychic functions 52.9. Dr Eugen Bleuler invented the word 56.9. Dr. Bleuler used word parts from ancient Greek 84.3. Making new words from ancient Greek words is known as neoclassical 68.8. (whole passage: 62)

The fundamental meaning from the definition is "association-splitting". 0

The word -phrenia means for some people a condition 62.3. A health condition isn't necessarily a problem or bad 45.4. For other people -phrenia means a disorder 39. Disorders are always thought of as bad or a problem by doctors 76.2. (whole passage: 62)

Phren in the original work by Dr Bleuler means the psychic functions, today this is the functions as they are in psychology 49.1. The ancient Greek word (as the English language translation) phren meant "midriff (diaphragm), heart, mind, thought" 63.7. The word phren is also used to describe part of the inside of some-ones body (human anatomy): the phrenic nerve, which is connected to the diaphragm 45.1. (whole passage: 49.9)

the whole passage is: 8th & 9th grade Flesch Reading Ease Score: 60.9 (my version)

The same section: Meaning:

"The word schizophrenia comes from two Greek words that mean to split and mind, because there is a 'split' between what's going on in the person's mind and what is actually happening 55.9. A person with schizophrenia does not change between different personalities: they have only one 31.9. The condition in which a person has more than one personality, meaning they act like a different person at different times, is dissociative identity disorder 20.7. There are no medical tests that can be used to say if a person has schizophrenia or not, so getting a diagnosis depends on which list of symptoms are used 49.5. It also depends on the doctor or psychologist who talks to the person 66.7. The lists of symptoms include wording like "Disorganized [not organized, or oddly organized] speech present for a significant portion of time" 33.2. It is difficult to agree on what exactly "disorganized speech" is and how disorganized it has to be. It is also difficult to agree on how long a "significant portion of time" is. Because of this, two doctors or psychologists trying to make a diagnosis may often disagree 55.2. One will say that the person is schizophrenic and the other will say he or she is not 78.6."

the calculation for the whole passage is 10th to 12th grade Flesch Reading Ease Score: 51 (version 10 October 2023 before I made any changes)

Obviously the other passages maybe don't show I made an improvement. I'll make the calculations after saving this reply. But the criticism is not true in the example of the Meaning section. I deleted the 0 Flesch-Kincaid sentence "association-splitting" and re-calculated: the Flesch Reading Ease Score: is instead 59.4 paradoxically. Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 02:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made a calculation of the whole articles minus the reference numbers: my version is 41.3 the version before I made any changes: 38.6 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 02:43, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For example:

In 2002, the term for schizophrenia in Japan was changed from “Seishin-Bunretsu-Byō”　精神分裂病 (“mind-split-disease”) to “Tōgō-shitchō-shō”　統合失調症 (“integration disorder”), in an attempt to reduce feelings of shame or embarrassment. 24.1 College graduate ( Very difficult to read )

was eliminated by my changes. The scores are independently verifiable at the link: User:Simpul skitsofreeneea/schizophrenia datum where I have copied the articles. Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 02:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Obviously I haven't achieved:

We currently aim for a score of 70-90.

— Eptalon (talk) 23:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC): Talk:Schizophrenia#Way forward..

Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 02:54, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Though ocviously:

Nothing has changed. The article is even more complex and confusing than ever.

— Fehufanga 23:56, 22 November 2023

isn't true by the F K calculation (which was a topic in Talk since 00:52, 23 January 2012: Talk:Schizophrenia#Readability) Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flesch-Kincaid says it's 10th-12th grade (or 57.11)

— Eptalon (talk) 09:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC): Talk:Schizophrenia#Todo_list..

but inputting the article copy (I didn't delete the numbers which are the references - deletion reduces the score slightly) v. 00:17, 6 November 2023 is 50.3 10th to 12th grade ( Fairly difficult to read ), v. 09:16, 30 October 2023 which is the version immediately before Eptalon's post 49.1 College ( Difficult to read ). v 09:13, 11 November 2023 is 58.7 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 03:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC) v. 09:29, 7 November 2023 58.9 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 03:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC) 11:29, 15 November 2023 50.4, 11:30, 19 November 2023 50, 21:54, 21 November 2023 50.3, 02:10, 25 November 2023 (the current v.) 50.6, 01:33, 24 November 2023 (the v. before I deleted 0 as shown at 02:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC) (under this heading) 50.7 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 03:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC) 13:49, 13 November 2023 50.1, 11:35, 11 November 2023 50.4, 09:13, 11 November 2023 58.7, 12:24, 11 November 2023 50.3, 12:12, 10 November 2023 58.7, 12:59, 7 November 2023 58.9, 08:09, 6 November 2023 49.8, 06:49, 6 November 2023 50.1, 06:31, 6 November 2023 50.1, 06:26, 3 November 2023 50.3, 16:30, 2 November 2023 49.9 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 04:06, 25 November 2023 (UTC) 12:45, 8 November 2023 & 12:52, 8 November 2023 58.7 versions after the changes because of reference format problems. 18:50, 20 October 2023 46.6, 15:23, 18 October 2023 46.4 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 04:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC), 23:32, 16 October 2023 47.9 (before I made changes: 22:36, 26 November 2013 40.1, 20:52, 3 March 2013 40.2 - I reverted to version 12:52, 8 November 2023 58.7 version after the changes because of reference format problems Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 04:33, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • 02:10, 25 November 2023 (the current v.) 50.6,
  • 01:33, 24 November 2023 (the v. before I deleted 0 as shown at 02:14, 25 November 2023 (UTC) (under this heading) 50.7
  • 21:54, 21 November 2023 50.3,
  • 13 November 2023 50.1,
  • 12:24, 11 November 2023 50.3,
  • 11:35, 11 November 2023 50.4,
  • 11:30, 19 November 2023 50,
  • 11:29, 15 November 2023 50.4,
  • 09:13, 11 November 2023 58.7,
  • 12:12, 10 November 2023 58.7,
  • 12:45, 8 November 2023 & 12:52, 8 November 2023 58.7 versions after the changes because of reference format problems.
  • 12:59, 7 November 2023 58.9,
  • 09:29, 7 November 2023 58.9
  • 08:09, 6 November 2023 49.8,
  • 06:49, 6 November 2023 50.1,
  • 06:31, 6 November 2023 50.1,
  • 00:17, 6 November 2023 is 50.3 10th to 12th grade ( Fairly difficult to read ),
  • 06:26, 3 November 2023 50.3,
  • 16:30, 2 November 2023 49.9
  • 09:16, 30 October 2023 which is the version immediately before Eptalon's post 49.1 College ( Difficult to read ).
  • 18:50, 20 October 2023 46.6,
  • 15:23, 18 October 2023 46.4
  • 23:32, 16 October 2023 47.9
  • before I made changes: 22:36, 26 November 2013 40.1,
  • 20:52, 3 March 2013 40.2

Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 04:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So the score for current History of schizophrenia is 44, v. 15:17, 31 October 2023 42.9 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 04:53, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Current version intro: 47.9, Classification: 68, Meaning: 60, History: 53.9, About schizophrenia: 57.9, Management by treatments, prevention, outlook and hope: 0, Risk factors and possible causes: 69.4, Society and culture: 31.5 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 05:04, 25 November 2023 (UTC) v. 05:07, 25 November 2023 Management: 24.1 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 05:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC) article score after change with "Management" 58.7 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 05:11, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not a fan of these calculations. When I ran my stats on the intro a few days ago I had a score somewhere in the 40s. I also had an average sentence length of I think 21 or 22 words. Reducing that to 10-15 will improve that score. Eptalon (talk) 11:08, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

intro's:

  • 14:02, 17 November 2023 35.5
  • 11:56, 15 November 2023 47.9
  • 06:55, 6 November 2023 50.3
  • 00:03, 5 November 2023 49.1
  • 21:54, 1 November 2023 52.3
  • 20:28, 1 November 2023 51.1
  • 16:03, 31 October 2023 49.2
  • 11:29, 31 October 2023 49.4

I changed the intro to 21:54 without a part which actually is an error (the score after is 52.4): the whole article score: 59.3 Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

intro's:

Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 18:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

with 18:28, 21 February 2023 input as the intro + "Bleuler 1908 sentence" retained from the previous v., the whole article is reduced as 57.8, same score without the 1908 sentence Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 18:56, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I went to read the Schizophrenia article and saw that it's very problematic.
  • In general, the prose introduced by Simpul skitsofreeneea is convoluted and lacks grammatical coherence. For example, we have this from the lead: Schizophrenia is in head and speak and thought not a good thing to have. That is what doctors say. The doctor who say: psychiatrist. Doctor (name don't/doesn't matter). Schizophrenia is some kind of problem of health. This problem is with these things: minds and behaviours. What does this even mean? Schizophrenia in head and speak and thought not a good thing to have. is not valid English. in head speak and thought is not understandable immediately to me, which makes it less simple. Why was it necessary to add (name don't/doesn't matter)?
  • The formula for FK boils down to (removing coefficients and constants). Using fewer words in sentences and shorter words can increase the score. The FK score doesn't take into account whether or not the text is comprehensible. In this case, the text is very difficult to understand, but uses short sentences and words, which gives it a "good" FK score. FK score isn't everything if the article is barely understandable.
  • Also, @Simpul skitsofreeneea please stop bludgeoning discussion you participate in. You are not obligated to reply in every single one of them, and repeated long walls of text don't give a good impression.
At the very least, Simpul skitsofreenea should be blocked indefinitely for lacking competence to edit in proper Simple English and unwillingness to listen to advice. A ban from editing psychology-related topics is also an option, but their editing in other topic areas don't convince me that there's anything different: [1], [2] — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 04:53, 26 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree wholeheartedly. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Fehufanga: Is four users a big enough consensus for a block? It seems like the only objection so far is the user themself. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:03, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The debate began: 01:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC) the version at that time was 22:21, 21 November 2023 Flesch-Kincaid score was: 50.2, so I made changes to improve the score: is now 77.6. Why you don't just change the wording yourself to improive the wording, if you know so much about the F K score? You want to threaten me again with banning, but what difference do you make to the article? The article is now reverted as of: 02:42, 27 November 2023‎ QuicoleJR to F K 49.1. Your criticisms is of the intro but what about the wording in the other parts of the article? As a matter of fact there isn't any problems there to find. But you're here a pack of wolves explaining to me my problem oh one editor scent to another this message and then another another scent: did you detect something you could criticize is that it? Here I reverted 02:42 with the problems shown solved (it took aout 10 seconds to solve) the intro: F K 87.5 the whole article score 77.6 exactly the same as in the prior state. Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 11:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You all nose, I don't know, that's all I know. But the article intro is now correct while you all wait to send another message here. Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 11:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If there is any problems indicate exactly what those problems are on the talk page of the article. I improved the article as you indicated was 50.2 i changed to 77.6 is changed again from 27 November is still 77.6. I would argue but how to convince fascist wolves of a reality if all they want to do is send messages here. If there is a problem show what it is. The F K score is correct, the wording is improved, if you aren't happy show the problems: you state "the article" I don't see where in the article the wording is wrong. For all I know you are just a stupid lot of people who don't understand the subjet so there is no way to improve the article for someone to understand if you are the people reading it. Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 11:47, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do not call people fascists. That is a very quick way to get blocked. Read WP:NPA. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:53, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is very easily provable: I improve the article all you do is send messages here: you detected the prolems but did nothing about them: instead you choose to character assassinate my efforts. How to commend such choices. The facts in the article aren't wrong. You're simply a destructive set of people without the thought of a constructive effort. Wouldn't you agree? Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 11:53, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Simpul skitsofreeneea No I don't, because nobody is obligated to repair your broken English, and frankly at this point, repairing your prose is going to be a timesink to the community. We are volunteers, after all.
There are many problems in the Schizophrenia article. I chose to point out the lede because that stood out immediately as problematic to me. There are many other problems in the article that I didn't point out, and anyone who understands regular English or Simple English should know that these are problematic. If you still want me to point out an example: The meanings is false, and, or, meanings is impossible: "meanings" is plural and "is" is the third person singular form of "be". They do not agree. This is not proper English grammar.
@QuicoleJR We'll leave it to an uninvolved admin judge that one enough time has passed. I still support at the minimum an indefinite block for incompetence and lack of understanding of English, let alone Simple English, and the unwillingness to heed to advice. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 21:50, 27 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The lack of understanding of English is because of the needs of improving the F K score. If someone were to compare en with simple the score of the former is 30.9 and the latter is 77.2. The languagw on en is presumaly perfect. You're judging my ailities for obedience to the rules of grammar and knowledge of the English language from the need of the F K score.

Assessment of articles[change source]

Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 19:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are focusing too much on the FK score. Smaller words do not mean the page is simpler. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The editor is putting too much weight on FK even after reminders that it is not that reliable. The editor is unable to engage with feedback on their writing, but only pushes back. Anyone may edit here, but this editor has shown again and again that they cannot or will not write in simple English. Long past time for a block and then a rollback of all of these articles. --Gotanda (talk) 00:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article sentences[change source]

Intro

  1. Schizophrenia (sz) is a problem.
  2. That is what doctors say and think.
  3. The type of doctor: psychiatrist.
  4. Sz is some kind of problem of health.
  5. This problem is with: someones mind and their behaviour.
  6. Doctors think the problem is with the brain.
  7. Not everyone needs to know they have a brain though.
  8. Doctors definitely do.
  9. Someone's brain is in their head.
  10. Doctors give drugs as tablets or injections.
  11. Other treatments also are possible.
  12. How sz happens in the first place, doctors don't know.
  13. Being sz is thought of as being abnormal.
  14. Most people recover and can live a normal life.
  15. Most of the time, the problems of sz starts in the late teens or early 20s.
  16. It is a common problem.
  17. In 2022, about 24 million people worldwide had this problem.
  18. It affects about the same number of men and women.
  19. In men, it seems to start about five years earlier than in women.
  20. Some people think they don't have sz, when a doctor tells them they do.
  21. The difference is the intelligence of the people and the doctors.
  22. Psychology is known as the science of behaviors, and science of minds, the problems of how to understand though what sz is is more a subject of psychiatry.
  23. Psychiatrists mostly think sz is an illness.
  24. They think: is illness, so needs medicines.
  25. Some psychology and psychiatry people in the past thought sz is not an illness though.
  26. They thought psychiatrists and drug makers-sellers hurt sz people.
  27. A doctor made the word and idea.
  28. His name: Dr Eugen Bleuler.
  29. He made the word sometime before April 1908.
  30. Sz is made up of all different things from science in doctors minds.

B

  1. Doctors learnt at their school
  2. Sz is a "mental disorder", and a "disease".
  3. Sz is "psychosis". [22][23][24][25][26][1][27][28]

C

  1. The meanings of the parts of the word schizophrenia and how the parts make meanings in the word
  2. The word parts are schizo and phren and phrenia.
  3. Schizo means splitting.
  4. Phren means psyche and phrenia means psychic.
  5. How the word parts have meaning is known as the etymology.
  6. The meaning only by joining the parts together is splitting of the psychic functions.
  7. Psychic is from psyche.
  8. Dr Eugen Bleuler invented the word.
  9. Dr. Bleulers word is neoclassical thought because it uses word parts from ancient Greek.
  10. The ancient Greek word phren (in ancient Greek this is: φρήν) meant "midriff (diaphragm), heart, mind, thought".[29][30][31][32][33][34][35]
  11. Dr Bleuler wrote a book about his invention.
  12. In the book that Dr Bleuler wrote, the word has a slightly different meaning though.
  13. In the book that Dr Bleuler wrote phren means instead firstly the word "associations". [32]
  14. Today, doctors don't think Dr Bleuler's meaning has as much meaning as the meanings that they think the word means today.
  15. Phren in Dr Bleuler's book means the psychic functions, today this is the functions in psychology. [36][31]
  16. The word -phrenia is only a condition (which isn't necessarily bad) [37][38] or a disorder (which doctors always think is bad).[39]
  17. The word phren is also used to describe part of the inside of some-ones body (human anatomy): the phrenic nerve, which is connected to the diaphragm. [40]
  18. The word schizophrenia is a noun. [41][42][43]

D

  1. In the past
  2. The first to use the word schizophrenia was Dr. Eugen Bleuler (born: 1857 died: 1939).
  3. This doctor lived in Switzerland.
  4. Also worked in a hospital in Switzerland.
  5. Some doctors went to a place in Germany known as Berlin when it was April 1908.
  6. Dr Bleuler went to Berlin also.
  7. Dr Bleuler spoke about his idea and the other doctors listened.
  8. Alot of what the doctors thought about was patients in hospitals with mind problems.
  9. Before, doctors were saying people had a problem which is named: dementia praecox.
  10. Dr Bleuler had the idea to stop doctors using the words: dementia praecox, because he thought it was a bad idea.
  11. Dr Bleuler's idea of the symptoms of sz was made by using ideas made by Dr Sigmund Freud.
  12. Dr Jung was with Dr Bleuler in the same hospital from 1900 to 1909.

E

  1. The things that happen with people to do with sz
  2. All the things that could happen at any time are:
  3. first (1): normal
  4. after first (2): with some symptoms
  5. after second (3): health becomes worse
  6. after third (4): patient hasn't become healthy again (an enduring problem of health)
  7. This is if somone's life is like counting 1 to 4.
  8. Anyone though could go from 2, 3, or 4 back to 1 again, depends on what happens to them.
  9. The doctor's decision makes someone be with sz: the word doctors use is "diagnosis"
  10. See the main article: Diagnosis of schizophrenia
  11. Doctors know about someone by what they see, hear, and already know or then know by seeing or hearing, mostly, but also by smell.
  12. Nurses and social workers also maybe help a doctor to decide.
  13. The things they found, after making the decision of "sz", these things are: the symptoms.
  14. Symptoms
  15. These are:
  16. "Persistent delusions" Someone has had thoughts and emotions.
  17. The thoughts thought are there to begin with because of something or things in the world including their own self.
  18. The thing or things in the world, and, or, self, go into this someone's mind from their eyes or ears, or mouth, or, skin: the senses, and, or, their self, and those things or thing become the subject of their thoughts and also emotion(s).
  19. This someone is thinking in their minds and the thoughts have the emotion firstly of not knowing.
  20. The thoughts and emotions on the subject happen for a while and after a while stop by believing something, a conclusion of all the thoughts.
  21. When this same someone meets a doctor the belief is thought by the doctor as being about a false reality or an impossible reality.
  22. The doctor knows about these thoughts from this same someone's speaking.
  23. The doctor does not agree with the thoughts of the conclusion.
  24. The doctor thinks those thoughts of the conclusion are a problem.
  25. The doctor would like to change the belief, but the patient won't or can't.
  26. The problem is named a delusion.
  27. "Persistent hallucinations" is the perception of things that psychiatric doctors think don't exist in reality or any known or possible to know reality.
  28. Hallucinations are usually experiences of things that from the senses don't exist from the physical word.
  29. Feeling, hearing, seeing, smelling, or tasting things that aren't there or anywhere.
  30. "Thought disorder": someone speaks: the words in the speaking doesn't arrive at the doctor in an order which means enough or something.
  31. The doctor thinks the same someone is thinking like they are speaking.
  32. If 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 is like the words in a spoken sentence, the number could be more or less than 10, the fact of consecutive is the order.
  33. Disorder is like the words are not consecutive.
  34. Or some of the numbers aren't included in the sentence.
  35. This is known as "disorganized speech or thought"
  36. Thinks or feels controlled and passive
  37. Persistent means that from the first time a doctor has found a symptom the amount of time if there is a next time or times after, is not a very brief time.
  38. All the possible known symptoms of the condition and, or, mental disorder and, or, disease known by doctors and professionals as sz are divided into three groups named:
  39. Psychotic: These symptoms are delusion, hallucination, disorganisation
  40. Negative: are less of or not having any of: thoughts, behaviors or emotions that someone who is healthy usually has. [58][68]
  41. Cognitive (or cognitive deficits): are problems with attention, memory, the concept of time, and with the ability to plan and organize.

F

  1. Doctors use the word insight to make the meaning of having intelligence and understanding
  2. The word insight means to have a true and real understanding of a problem or situation.
  3. For doctors, sz is about their jobs - employments where they earn money by people who are patients and things like science and research.
  4. People who doctors say have sz sometimes think they don't.
  5. Doctors describe these people as lacking insight.
  6. To lack something is to not have something.
  7. The words doctor use has meanings like: "The fact of penetrating with the eyes of the understanding", "deep", "the power or act of seeing into a situation".
  8. The whole idea is quite complicated.
  9. What doctors really expect from the idea of lacking insight is from at least since 1927, which is the year Dr. E. Minkowski described the idea of psychiatrists penetrating into the mind of patients for diagnosis.
  10. Dr. C. Jung (Jung is pronounced the same as young) had ideas sometime after 1909, which Dr. E. Bleuler described as "depth psychology".
  11. "Mental health literacy" (literacy being literature) could be very similar or the same as insight.
  12. The word insight means literally to see inside, which is in & sight, which is seeing.
  13. This is obviously not possible because the human eye is the organ of seeing.
  14. Situations where actually insight is really possible (which means the eye of the mind), by the definition of seeing inside, is mental visualization and dreams.
  15. Both Dr S Freud and Dr Jung inhaled the smoke of the drug tobacco.
  16. Dr Freud inhaled tobacco from about when he started as a doctor.
  17. Dr Freud's ideas were used by Dr Bleuler in his idea of the symptoms of sz.
  18. Dr Freud was probably a tobacco drug addict.
  19. Also Dr Freud used the drug cocaine before Dr Bleuler knew about him. Dr Jung maybe inhaled tobacco quite a few years after when he first became a doctor.
  20. Tobacco is a drug which is dangerous with addictive.
  21. Tobacco is part of the nightshade family of plants.
  22. Both Dr Freud and Dr Jung wrote about and researched dreams. They both thought thinking about dreams and the meaning of dreams was important.

G

  1. What other people do and people with sz do to help themselves and to stop themselves from having sz
  2. See the main article: Treatments and prevention of schizophrenia

H

  1. Things in life which make or maybe make sz
  2. See the main article: Risk factors and possible causes of schizophrenia
  3. Risk is if I or anyone should or shouldn't do something because of cause: decisions and choices.
  4. Cause is like this:
  5. 1 (s) → 0 (z)
  6. One is not the thing: not having sz.
  7. One is a value (like the $).
  8. Zero happens if the arrow happens.
  9. If the 1 and s split.
  10. Zero is s + z.
  11. Cause of sz is what the arrow (→) is.

I

  1. Society and culture
  2. See the main article: Schizophrenia in society and culture

20:10, 28 November 2023 (UTC) @Fehufanga: I made improvements to the sentences after your criticisms: indicate the numbers for the relevant sentences which you think are a problem then I will proceed to make the necessary improvements. Simpul skitsofreeneea (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Simpul skitsofreeneea Please stop making overly long lists in your posts. Almost everything you listed is problematic and not proper English. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 07:31, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Why hasn't this user been blocked yet? They clearly cannot edit constructively here. They attack and insult other editors (fascists, stupid). They refuse to accept help. They are still messing around with these pages. They need to be blocked and all of the pages reverted to before their edits or just trimmed to stubs. Trying to edit this mess into something readable is a waste of editors' time. We have been more than patient enough. --Gotanda (talk) 23:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have blocked the user for one month which gives us time to figure out what to do. fr33kman 23:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    For what it's worth, I reviewed Delusion while assessing the editor's unblock request, and the lede is unacceptable. I don't know whether the editor genuinely believes good FK score = simple article, but if that mentality persists then I don't see the editor contributing to Wikipedia for long. Chenzw  Talk  09:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello[change source]

do i need an account to create a page its about an obscure topic thats on english wikipedia but not here 104.235.59.6 (talk) 04:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

its about a video game 104.235.59.6 (talk) 04:22, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You don't need an account if you don't want one. Though I do encourage you to create one. -Djsasso (talk) 04:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
i ask because i was told my ip adress is a vandalism hotspot and i dont wanna risk it with an account. i could do a vpn but i have no money. 104.235.59.6 (talk) 04:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
One of the benefits of an account is that your IP address is no longer visible. If you plan on contributing regularly an account is a good option. Note: creating an account is free, no one will ask money of you for contributing to wikipedia. Eptalon (talk) 05:05, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You are not required to make an account, but making one is free and there are many benefits. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Weekly DYK?[change source]

Hello, at the moment, there are 115 approved dyk hooks. Sholud/can we get to a weekly cycle, ideally automated? Eptalon (talk) 12:11, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As this comes up often, my opinion is still no because we always seem to get ourselves into a position where we have a fair number of them we get excited and crank up the rate at which we show them, we then run out and go many months without any new ones. I still believe we should go at a much slower rate so that we always have a healthy backlog to display so we never get into a position where we can run out and have to wait many months for new ones. -Djsasso (talk) 12:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At the current rate, they will last until February 28, 2025. If weekly, they will last until June 28, 2024. If monthly, they will last until May 31, 2026. (That includes the queues.) Kk.urban (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We currently have half a year's worth of hooks stored, and that is assuming we switch to weekly. We also continue to get new hooks proposed and approved. I would say that this would probably be fine. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:18, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Another option would be increasing the size of the queue from 5 to 6 or 7. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Simplifying quotes[change source]

Do we simplify quotes as well when making pages? SIMPLEIST (talk) 14:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In principle we should, but its often tricky. Rathfelder (talk) 16:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not if you're actually quoting someone, but you can explain the quote. I watch out for cases where someone has tried to avoid simplifying by just using a quote with complex language, because that's not good. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:04, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can alwys replace complex words, with simpler ones, brackets.. Eptalon (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, if you know the right syntax for doing that. Otherwise, anything inside quotation marks should be exactly what was said. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Indonesian Archipelago[change source]

Should this be changed to List of islands in Indonesia? I think that in English, the archipelago is usually called the Malay Archipelago. Kk.urban (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kk.urban The article is practically identical to the version created by a blocked user in January. — *Fehufangą ♮ ✉ Talk page 21:47, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Simpler word[change source]

Is it okay to change {{Convert}} so it uses the word "people" per square mile/ square km instead of "inhabitants"? Kk.urban (talk) 02:23, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kk.urban: I would think so. Just be aware that the change might be undone if/when the template is ever refreshed. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:42, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Auntof6 Actually, I can't do it because it's fully protected. Kk.urban (talk) 17:35, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That would actually be in Module:Convert/data but it is also protected and needs an admin to edit it. Pure Evil (talk) 03:10, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The semi—protection of Generation X, the Millennials, Generation Z and the Generation Alpha pages here on the Simple English[change source]

The editors of Internet Protocol group addresses have been inserting their own point of view or questionable sources into the Simple English Wikipedia pages listed here. Nobody ever owns any articles although some of the IP’s act as if they do, making it hard for articles on any Wikipedia to have a neutral viewpoint. That includes claims in the Millennials article saying between 1981–1996 would be years between which they were born when in fact many more reliable pieces of information are saying 1980–1995 are the actual years for many world areas. These Wikipedia editing IP operators make it difficult for the encyclopedia to be true and neutral. Angela Kate Maureen Pears 19:51, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Protected for 3 months each. fr33kman 20:43, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Too much statistical detail[change source]

I think a few articles like Frederick, Kansas have way too much statistical detail. This is a settlement with less than 20 people, yet there are 395 words of population statistics. The US census has the same amount of statistics for every city, but it seems ridiculous for small places like this. Also, do we want to replace this with the new info for 2020, or keep the 2000 and 2010 info while adding 2020 also? I have already mentioned this at the English Wikipedia Teahouse, as the article there is similar.

I especially want to get the opinion of Junedude433 if they are around, because they created most of these articles about places in Kansas and transferred the statistics from English Wikipedia. Kk.urban (talk) 21:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Statistical data is easy to get (if it is collected). You do however need to make a difference between actual surveys, and calculated data (based on the last 2-3 data sets, and this growth, we expect the figures to be ...). Except for the most obvious, I would see this in a separate table, ideally updated by a wikidata bot (needs appropriate flagging); also the bot should only update numbers in the table. I don't know about the U.S., but actual survey happen perhaps every ten years or so. Eptalon (talk) 21:51, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
They take an actual survey every ten years (2000, 2010, 2020, etc). Do you think we should include the older statistics or just the newest data? Kk.urban (talk) 22:19, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Think about it differently: This a place were "currently" 18 people live. What can you write about the place? - Sure, some of them have a long hisotry, at other times, it was the breakoff religious ocmmunity who founded a new town, and nowadays, few follow their ideals, yet in other plaves its the place where half of the people work at the gas station three quarters of the way between A and B.Population statistics can be interesting, if you include hem in a table, that highlights the changes... Eptalon (talk) 22:39, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
18 people are 6 one-child-famililes... Eptalon (talk) 22:41, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Based on the statistics, we know there are 6 married couples, 2 of them have children and 4 don't, there are 4 children total, and there are 2 people living alone. Why we need to know that, is another question... Kk.urban (talk) 00:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Think about it differently: What can you aay about such a place, especially in America? - If it wasn't ofr stats there'd be very little left; still we decided geographic placces are inherently notable. 'New York City is a city in the state with the same name. Almost 9 million people live there. The city is located on the Atlanic Ocean, next to the city of New Jersey... Eptalon (talk) 00:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for waking me up, kk.urban. What was supposed to be a short nap actually took several years haha. I'll write some of my thoughts here.

1) The standard English Wikipedia, and basically every other one too, includes this data and goes back a few decades. Wikipedia has existed since at least 2001, and the 2000 Census was the most recent. For many city articles, they include the 2000 data because it was added in there back then, but it is also relevant and well-sourced. Personally, I see no reason to get rid of it, even if it isn't "current." Wikipedia articles have much information about history and the like, and demographics are deeply intertwined with it.

2) For the vast majority of the articles I've created, I copy edited them from the standard English Wikipedia. I found a way to write them that technically satisfies the simple language requirements and ran with it. I had encountered a few different discussions in the past about what articles on the Simple English Wikipedia should look like, with some saying the articles themselves should be simple, and others saying that it should only be the language that's simple - for this is still an encyclopedia. I can see the merits to both, but in practice, I stuck with the latter argument. Therefore, I kept the statistical data, even if it did seem a bit much for some of these articles.

3) Notability does not change across the wikis. A city or county is notable in and of itself, even if it's a small town in the middle of nowhere. I found your example of Frederick to be particularly interesting, because there's more that happened there than some of the other small towns whose articles I created. Even within that very county, I'd say Bushton, Kansas has even less to write about, since at least Frederick has an unusual electoral event. Regardless, if there is notability to be had, it only makes sense to create the article. Just because one person doesn't find it interesting doesn't someone else won't, or that it somehow isn't notable.

4) I, and other editors, can only write about things which are sourced (lest we suddenly stop caring about that). Census data is often some of the only things which are from reliable sources which are relevant to the location. My article on Lawrence, Kansas has much more because much more happened there. If there wasn't as deep of a history there, the history section would be much smaller. The statistical data may have an outsized effect on some of those towns's articles, but that's because the available information skews heavily towards demographics.

I do agree that I'd rather just have some sort of population table that gets updated. I think that would trim the fat of many articles. There is only so much that you can write about using raw numbers. I'd rather the actual body paragraphs of demographics be about genuine analysis, since the raw numbers could be much better expressed in a table. However, I do not know coding well enough to create something like that, so I have stuck with what exists.

Do with what you like about it. This is Wikipedia; nobody "owns" an article, and everything is done by consensus. My opinion shouldn't matter any more than yours, although I do appreciate getting pinged, since it makes me feel important and popular haha. While I personally favor keeping the information, I definitely could see why we should at least skim it. ~Junedude433talk 15:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Compare Rochefourchat. 1 hoouse, one person living there. Probably one of the smallest villages of France (not counting those that were destroyed during the First and Second WOrld War).... Eptalon (talk) 18:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no reason to suppose that most readers of Simple English have problems with numbers. Rathfelder (talk) 14:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Personally I think we should rise our standards as to what makes a place notable. The road where I have my cottage in Canada is a private community but I don't think a patch of dirt road with 15 houses on it is notable. fr33kman 19:54, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible additions to Wikipedia:RecentChanges[change source]

Wikipedia:RecentChanges already has Category:Wikipedia protected edit requests. It might be good to add Category:Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests and Category:Wikipedians looking for help. Kk.urban (talk) 01:06, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see no reason why not. fr33kman 19:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think this will effect faster responses because more people will notice. Some of the help requests have been waiting for months. Kk.urban (talk) 18:02, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks[change source]

Thanks to all who took part in my recent RfCU. I really feel we needed another active CU to take some of the pressure off of Eptalon who should receive a round of applause for his hard work!! Cheers! :) fr33kman 13:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

South and South-East Asia reliable sources[change source]

I have asked for help on the relevant Village Pumps for creating a list of reliable sources in those areas of the world as I feel we are not treating BLPs and notability issues of those nations fairly. We tend to grab a quick look and decide it's an A4. I think we owe due diligence to these articles. If anyone has information that can help please add it below. Thanks! :) fr33kman 19:47, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here are a few:
But, these will not address two of the most common areas where this comes up: current entertainment, and local government officials. --Gotanda (talk) 02:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Infoboxes[change source]

Why in infoboxes it's "spouse" or "Issues", shouldn't it be more simpler for others to understand? Like "Husband/Wife" or "Children" Kathleen782 (talk) 21:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, it probably should be. The problem is when infoboxes get updated from enwiki it'll be overwritten. Good point though. fr33kman 21:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kathleen782: BTW, it's "issue", singular, not "issues". It's a collective noun when used this way. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category:Uncategorized pages[change source]

I'm finding lots of Uncategorized pages which are not included in this list. For example: Marie-Jean Hérault de Séchelles last changed on 15 November 2023, at 04:13. Why doesnt this work? Rathfelder (talk) 10:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That category does not exist. Do you mean Special:UncategorizedPages? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:26, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
yes Rathfelder (talk) 13:44, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Those reports are not generated dynamically when you request the page: they are made on a schedule by the software (I think weekly?), so they will always be a little out of sync with reality. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:46, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know, but the current version was last updated at 15:10, 4 December 2023. Rathfelder (talk) 13:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Requesting a page rename[change source]

Hello! Can someone rename the page Parapneuroptera to Paraneoptera for me please? I believe the user who created it accidentally got the name of this group of insects wrong, because "Paraneoptera" is the more usual name for them and I cannot find any source for the name "Parapneuroptera". I cannot do this move myself, as I have not yet made 10 edits on Simple English Wikipedia. (If it helps to know, I am a user who is normally active on English Wikipedia, and I happened to find out about this page from a Google search for another group of insects, in order to update insect pages on English Wikipedia) Monster Iestyn (talk) 22:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done. MathXplore (talk) 02:37, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ 102.215.254.111 (talk) 13:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Should dots get connected?[change source]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rolly_Lambert_Fogoum, and
Rolly Lambert Fogoum.--Good luck while i try to improve other articles. 2001:2020:319:E17D:7D33:CE93:E460:835B (talk) 22:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Made You Look and Earth are now good artricles...[change source]

Hello all, I just promoted the articles Made You Look, and Earth to the status of good artzicle. The artilces are easy to read, and good examples of what writing Simple English should be like. Thank you to all who contributed. Eptalon (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am not sure what happened, but it looks like Earth had always been a GA all this while! It was promoted in Aug 2009 (discussion). Talk:Earth claims that the article was demoted from GA, but I searched through all archives and even revision history of WP:DEMOTE, and couldn't find any demotion discussion for this article. Chenzw  Talk  01:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Two new policies[change source]

Hi, I'm suggesting that we need to create two new policies. The first on meta would be the election policy of checkusers. I've written the minimum policy at meta:CheckUser policy/Local policies#simple – Simple English Wikipedia at a minimum of 25 support votes and 70% support. An election period of a maxim,um of one month and I'd also recommend a minimum period of experience of 6 months - 1 year as an editor with at least 1000 edits. The second policy I'd recommend is for IPBE IP block exempt which needs to be a local policy. fr33kman 20:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Plus our specifics: Checkusers must be administrators; put a link to our Criteria for adminship page as well; unlike other wikis, we don't have 'neutral votes' Eptalon (talk) 20:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Simple_talk&oldid=9242050"