Wikipedia:Simple talk

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Blocking proxies[change source]

Why do people block proxies. (talk) 07:17, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please read m:No open proxies. MathXplore (talk) 07:20, 13 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I cannot use meta because of parental controls. (talk) 16:28, 14 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just explain it to me in worde, why are proxies always blocked. (talk) 14:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
m:No_open_proxies#Rationale says "Because MediaWiki (the wiki software) depends on IP addresses for administrator intervention against abuse, open proxies allow users to completely circumvent administrators. The use of scripts or unapproved bots allow malicious users to rapidly rotate IP addresses, causing continuous disruption that cannot be stopped by helpless administrators. Several such attacks have occurred on Wikimedia projects, causing heavy disruption and occupying administrators who would otherwise deal with other concerns." (oldid) Does this answer your question? MathXplore (talk) 07:19, 19 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So vandals circumvent blocks using open proxies.
But what is an "open" proxy. (talk) 09:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In this case "open" means "can be used by anyone". MathXplore (talk) 12:56, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I noticed that we have a document like Wikipedia:Open proxies. MathXplore (talk) 07:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your wiki will be in read-only soon[change source]

Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 09:24, 15 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh no! Read-only!? Why??? (talk) 09:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The message explains why. the Wikimedia Technology department needs to do a planned test. This test will show if they can reliably switch from one data centre to the other. [...] Unfortunately, because of some limitations in MediaWiki, all editing must stop while the switch is made. --Ferien (talk) 15:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, but that does not stop it being scary. (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
How is it scary, may I ask? --Ferien (talk) 20:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I like editing. (talk) 06:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Windows Home Server[change source]

Should we delete the page since it is a disambiguation page without any relevant articles existing on this wiki?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:51, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Modified version of Twinkle.[change source]

A few weeks ago on Discord, I raised an issue about the simplewiki-Twinkle bug. First, I fixed the problematic twinkle rollback on the user's contribution page. Today I fixed a few things about the error message when reverting. See the second link for more information. I tested it on test2wiki, but more testing is needed. Until mediawiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js is fixed, please test my fix to make sure there are no errors. Please paste the following code into Special:MyPage/common.js.

mw.loader.using(['mediawiki.util', 'jquery.ui']).then(function() {
	return mw.loader.getScript('');
}, function(err) {
}).then(function() {
	return mw.loader.getScript('기나ㅏㄴ/test.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');
}, function(err) {

You will need to turn off Twinkle in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. I hope my fix is helpful to SimpleWiki:) Thank you --ginaan(T/C) 15:34, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK Queues[change source]

I would like to propose that we add an eighth queue. The holding area currently has about 3-4 queues worth of hooks, and this number is increasing more than it is decreasing. We need another queue to hold some of these hooks. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why do you need another queue? Instead of that you could update it more often when there are more hooks, and at the current speed when there are less hooks, without needing to post here every time the speed changes. So either 2,3, or 4 times a month depending on available backlog. As long as 4-5 queues remain full at all times, it shouldn't be a problem. Kk.urban (talk) 16:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That sounds like a very good idea! So, to clarify, the admins would update it faster when the backlog is bigger? That makes sense. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, exactly! Kk.urban (talk) 17:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's increasing because I'm back ... yeah! fr33kman 16:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To be honest, I'm not even sure we need a seventh queue - it was originally created for a daily DYK system but we would likely never have enough editors for that idea. Instead, the frequency of DYK can be increased, as Kk.urban says, although it's important to increase the frequency gradually so we don't burn through all our hooks. Having too many hooks in the holding area is a good "problem" to have IMO, as it gives us plenty of hooks to cover a variety of topics in the specific queues. --Ferien (talk) 19:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

DYK update frequency...[change source]

Hello, at the time of this writing, there are 46 hooks in the holding area. Given that per "release" we get 6 hooks, this means that we curretly have hooks for 8 updates. What would you think of a weekly update of DYK hooks? Eptalon (talk) 15:31, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's 5 hooks per release, so with 7 queues and 61 hooks currently in the holding area, that's already enough for 19 updates. That's until mid-July at twice per month, or mid-February at once per week, and the number seems to keep growing. Are these all being verified to have an 8th-grade reading level? Kk.urban (talk) 04:29, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I know mine are checked and those I approve are. fr33kman 04:52, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I guess we have a lot; I've got a prepared list of almost 100. I'll cut my noms to a max of 2 at a time from now on. fr33kman 04:57, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not saying it's a problem! As the articles are all simple enough, I think Eptalon's suggestion is good. Kk.urban (talk) 05:06, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Realisation[change source]

I looked at my talk page's history, and I saw an edit war reverting falsely reported claims that I was a blocked proxy. (talk) 18:13, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wouldn't call 3 vandal posts with quick reverts on 2 separate days "an edit war".. Pure Evil (talk) 21:40, 24 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Clearing white space[change source]

Does anyone know how to get rid of the huge white space left of the infobox on Idaho County, Idaho? Kk.urban (talk) 05:10, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Kk.urban: Well, the things there are lists, not text, so I guess you'd have to change the formatting to put more items on a line. That might not be good for mobile users, though. I wouldn't worry about it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It has been resolved through the edits by Pure Evil. Kk.urban (talk) 07:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Doesn't look any different to me, but OK. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:16, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Before the edits, the lists were showing up below the infobox rather than to its left. Kk.urban (talk) 21:05, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
hint: try to avoid the col templates. They simulate the table markup but are much less forgiving. Tables still have issues but far less problems to deal with. Pure Evil (talk) 22:52, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hello! i'm new to the simple english wikipedia, mind showing me around?[change source]

just giving me a quick few things I could edit, I already made 2 minor changes KeroppiKid (talk) 17:02, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, @KeroppiKid, and welcome! Before jumping in too deeply, make sure you understand how to write in simple language for this Wikipedia. Wikipedia:How to write Simple English pages can help with that, as can some of the pages listed in the "Related pages" section there.
If you're interested in ways that this Wikipedia is different from English Wikipedia, you can look at this list I maintain of things that are different here. The list itself is not policy or guideline, but it links to some relevant policies and guidelines. If you have any questions about it, feel free to ask on my talk page.
Again, welcome, and thanks for wanting to help here! -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:07, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are several recent edits to fire engine that made the page harder to read, but I'm not sure whether or not to revert them. They also added more information. Kk.urban (talk) 21:06, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear god.. that was a fun cleanup.. Reverting would not have been a bad idea but I decided to give it a go and c/e it instead. The OP's love of the caps key was a bit much and their love of repeating things was a bit more, but I think I got it cleaned up to a much more presentable level. Pure Evil (talk) 22:49, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Kk.urban:, Apart for doing what @Pure Evil: did, it would be best to either revert to a less complex revision of use WP:SI to simplify. fr33kman 23:51, 26 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But wheres the fun in that. Plus the practice is good for anyone. Pure Evil (talk) 02:06, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Formatting[change source]

In Wikipedia:Deletion review the current formatting is that new requests are added to the bottom while closed ones stay at the top, while Wikipedia:Requests for Deletion uses the opposite. Shouldn't it be the same across both pages?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 08:22, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't think it really matters. The archiving is a little different, because the entries on deletion review are not transcluded pages and they get archived to archive pages. We don't really even need a recently closed section because the closed ones can be moved directly to the archives (instead of being moved to the recently closed section and then having to be moved again). -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:10, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fair point.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:47, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Move "Älta"[change source]

Can anyone please move Älta, to Älta, Sweden (or to Älta, Stockholm.--Nothing links to "Älta". (The title, is making 'problems' for the article that I am translating, 2001:2020:333:9D9C:15DD:4D77:B686:E42 (talk) 12:54, 27 September 2023 (UTC)/ 2001:2020:333:9D9C:15DD:4D77:B686:E42 (talk) 12:55, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
More information: "Alta" will thereafter become a disambig page, with dozens of articles. 2001:2020:333:9D9C:15DD:4D77:B686:E42 (talk) 13:16, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done, it seems. 2001:2020:333:9D9C:DCA4:6A63:6836:6470 (talk) 14:31, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do you guys take down vandalism so quick?[change source]

I see active vandalism on a page, and before I can do anything about it, an admin immedietly reverts it. Does it send you a notification if vandalism or edit warring on a page is detected? 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It depends on the kind, but usually it doesn't. The ormal case is that an admin sees it, recognizes it, and takes it down... Eptalon (talk) 17:47, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
the first thing I do is block (if appropriate) then fix damage. I've also got a recent changes feed open on another screen so i don't have to leave other things I'm doing. fr33kman 17:51, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
can you send the link to that screen? 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 17:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply] Keep a window open with that active and click on the live edits button. i have two physical screens on my pc, one with just that and Discord open. you can also use SWViewer but if you're going to use that remember to whitelist enwiki. SWViewer shows all edits on all small wikis so best leave it for now fr33kman 17:59, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
it's also a bit like tag-teaming without the tagging fr33kman 17:53, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
also if ya know any checkusers on this site can you ask if they can check this "zepez" person? i have a feeling it was the IP person from the other day who vandalized your talk page 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 17:56, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
we know who it is, no need to CU fr33kman 18:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Note alos, that per polcy Checkusers cannot link ip-addresses and usernames (to the general public). In many cases, users are known by their behavior... Eptalon (talk) 18:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
well surely you can link zepez and this ip by the fact they both posted dick pics on the same page right 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 18:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
and that it was literally signed zepez 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 18:30, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If a vandal links his name to an IP that's up to them but it's against our rules for us to do it. fr33kman 18:35, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
makes sense 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 18:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Any new accounts made by this vandal need to be blocked[change source]

Block this IP address immedietly:

He targets the Simple English Wikipedia, but his trend is putting pictures of his penis on articles.

He did this on:

@Fr33kman's user page

My user page AND my talk page

The Pol Pot article

This is a petition to globally block this IP address. He also does sockpuppeting quite a bit, and I suspect him of using a VPN.

He also submitted a global block against me. (I posted this at the Teahouse and they said to post it here.) 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 18:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

please post requests like this on wp:an. Simple Talk is for discussing the encyclopaedia fr33kman 18:23, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Just to add - Not an admin but blocking (and globally banning) would be a waste of time as by now they're probably on another VPN and that this will be a repeated cycle until they get bored. Not ideal but might be best to protect your user/talk pages and just keep reverting the IPs. Of course we could block to avoid further use but I doubt they'd ever be back on the same IP. –Davey2010Talk 18:31, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thing is if it was protected i would be unable to edit it
im not autoconfirmed 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 18:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

AINT NO FUCKING WAY[change source]

DID HE JUST DICK PIC THE ENTIRE SITE??? 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Or everyone who was looking at Simple Talk, BUT STILL 𝕂𝕖𝕣𝕠𝕡𝕡𝕚𝕂𝕚𝕕 (talk) 19:01, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Its not helpful to keep posting messages about this. Please see WP:DENY. Kk.urban (talk) 19:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Don't swear, it could be seen as vandalism fr33kman 11:44, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Latin names vs common names[change source]

Some of the time species' articles are titled under their scientific names redirected to common names and some of time it's the other way around. Should we standardize? The WP:MOS is silent on the matter. fr33kman 11:43, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is Simple English. I expect there are more searches For the common name. I also know that finding the correct name can be difficult, so the people search for the binominal Name. Eptalon (talk) 12:07, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Its not unusual for the same species to have more than one common name Rathfelder (talk) 15:06, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
True in that case it makes sense to have the scientific name as the article name with common names redirecting into that. I'm looking to change the MOS here. fr33kman 23:44, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would do it the other way around, many people know dandelions. They will loook for them under that name. If I go looking for Taraxacum, I find that it's a whole genus (likely of many related plants "looking similar"). Almost know one will go search for T. officinale (one of the two most common species). So likely the common name is the better choice. And ofc we need redirects from less common common names to more common ones... Eptalon (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think we should have a rule about this. I've been writing Froggie of the Day for years now, and I think we should accept that some organisms will have the common name and some will have the Latin name, and trying to push them all in the same basket will make trouble:
  1. Many species have more than one common name: Some frogs have literally ten of them. The wider the animal's range, the more names it has. Litoria bicolor is northern dwarf tree frog, dwarf tree frog, lined grass frog, green reed frog, Pandan frog, bicolored grass frog and northern sedge frog, and it only lives in one country, and that's only the names it has in English. The gray tree frog has eleven common names, and it lives in the U.S. and Canada.
  2. Many common names have more than one species: "Red-eyed tree frog" is Ranoidea chloris, Agalychnis callidryas, and Agalychnis taylori
  3. Many species have no common names at all, only Latin names.
  4. Scientists cannot make up their friggin' minds and keep changing the Latin names: The owl genus Megascops used to be part of Scops, and Litoria used to contain about a dozen other frog genera before they split it up in I want to say 2015. Sometimes I use the frog's common name because the Latin one has changed four times in the past ten years. Again, the gray tree frog has had eleven Latin names since 1801.
This is one of those times when "just do what feels good" might really be the best way. If Simple's MoS has a rule about this, I think we should just take it out. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:28, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will add that at, the reason the manual of style got added to the AE list (topics officially declared contentious and subject to special administrative sanctions) was because of article names and capitalization. I don't know if it was specifically the names of articles about organisms because I wasn't in that fight, but there were fights about that, and they did get intense. This might be one of those times when a smaller project just not having a rule about something might prevent trouble. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:37, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm inclined to agree that a pragmatic approach may be best. We have to exercise judgement and accept that there is no rightanswer. Rathfelder (talk) 19:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
agreed fr33kman 19:44, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Move (reason: disambiguation-page coming up)[change source]

Ås, to Ås, Krokom Municipality.--Please make that move. Thanks, 2001:2020:31D:A604:F4BB:B3D4:A163:DE29 (talk) 23:14, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done Kk.urban (talk) 23:25, 29 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Vik, to Vik, Sweden. Please make that move.--(Only one link, that i will have to fix, afterwards.)--Thanks, 2001:2020:31D:A604:992E:8B9:C210:51B (talk) 15:51, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Done Kk.urban (talk) 15:53, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can you block 2401:4900:701C:1CA4:A50E:4F32:846B:1397 user, they are spamming in one page only. Bakhos2010 (talk) 04:20, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

They’re globally blocked now. Tropicalkitty (talk) 04:22, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh good Bakhos2010 (talk) 04:23, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Bakhos2010: For future reference, this is not the place to ask for blocks. After leaving appropriate warning messages on the IP's talk page (which was not done in this case), you can report at WP:VIP. -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:47, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Auntof6 Alright my bad Bakhos2010 (talk) 05:39, 30 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]