Wikipedia:Simple talk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


VisualEditor News #1—2015[change | change source]

18:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Simplify Fluffernutter[change | change source]

Would anyone mind simplifying Fluffernutter? Thanks, Eurodyne (talk) 23:13, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Using your same user name throughout Wikipedia[change | change source]

I use the same Wikipedia user name throughout Wikipedia, e.g. for Dutch, English, German pages. Now i tried to make an account with the same user name for the Simple English Wikipedia and it says it conflicts with a user name that is used on another Wiki. Can this policy be changed?

Best regards,

Han

If you own the SUL for that name and login on one of those wikis and come to this page, an account should be created automatically for you. If one isn't then that means someone else owns the global account for that nickname. -DJSasso (talk) 15:17, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Didn't even know that a SUL (Single User Login) for one user name on all Wikipedia projects existed. I merged my accounts and it worked like a charm. Didn't even know I had already five different accounts. Glad the Single User Login is default now for all new accounts made.

Thank you very much!

Best regards,

Han

Jgamleus (talk) 19:53, 20 February 2015 (UTC)

Edits on South Pole[change | change source]

An editor, User:Alex.panther87, has been adding problem information to South Pole. The paragraph added is:

  • Not all correct -- it states that years go by without sunrises or sunsets at the south pole
  • Not understandable -- there is one incomplete sentence and another sentence that doesn't make sense
  • Not really about the south pole anyway -- most of it is general info about Antarctica, the midnight sun phenomenon, and the Arctic and Antarctic circles

That last item is why I didn't try to fix the text -- IMO, it doesn't really fit very well into the article. I tried leaving a message about it on the editor's talk page, but that didn't seem to have any effect so I ended up leaving an actual warning. Could someone else watch the article for a bit so that it isn't just me trying to fix this? Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:11, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll put the page on my watchlist, and I'll watch for that username and article in #cvn-simplewikis. :) --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 10:44, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

heart attack vs myocardial infarction[change | change source]

I think the term myocardial infarction might be technical for some readers. Couldn't you replace the term with heart attack so the article can be less technical? Angela Maureen (talk) 19:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

I agree, and have moved it over. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:51, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I have moved it back. If you think it should be changed, please have a wider discussion first. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
People use heart attack to talk about more than one thing. There are health problems that cause the heart to stop in other ways. People call these problems "heart attacks". But, people only say myocardial infarction when they mean this particular heart-stopping problem.
This is why editors might choose the complicated name. However, the simpler name is easier to read. (I don't care which name is used.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
I think we need to make "heart attack" a disambiguation page. Many people call a "myocardial infarction" an "MI." Would it be better to use that name? StevenJ81 (talk) 05:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
The primary meaning of "heart attack" is myocardial infarction, so "heart attack" should redirect there. We could have Heart attack (disambiguation) if we have other meanings for it. If you're suggesting we use the term "MI" instead of "myocardial infarction", that can be done in individual articles (after using the full term once), but it shouldn't be the page name: see Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Acronyms and abbreviations for the guideline on that. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
@WhatamIdoing:, just FYI, the heart doesn't necessarily stop during an MI. That is cardiac arrest, a separate thing. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Yes, and that was one reason why I think "heart attack" is a better term for us, because it is not really ambiguous. Whereas an infarct, medically speaking, is a small area of dead tissue caused by an inadequate blood supply. But "myocardial infarction" is so much more impressive! Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)