Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 121

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


We recently had several articles created that fall into Category:Centenarians and its subcategories. It appears that many of the new articles, and the old ones, do not meet general notability guidelines. en:Wikipedia:WikiProject World's Oldest People recommends that those who do not meet the criteria for a stand alone article should be placed in a list article instead. Rather than create a Request for Deletion for each article affected, I wanted to see if we could agree here to follow the redirect recommendation. The only issue I see is that we do not have a list article for each country. That could possibly be solved with using a by continent approach. (Note: I have left a message at User talk: the creator of the new articles to join the discussion) --Tbennert (talk) 15:54, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You could make a group RfD request, or maybe just list the questionable ones here to save everyone else repeating the work of looking for those themselves. As far as notability, I guess the question is whether merely being a centenarian makes a person notable, regardless of whether there are reliable sources. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:12, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The question is - can we agree that oldest living people, with no reason for notability other than age, should be redirected to a list article? I'm not asking anyone to look at all the articles, or even one. The question is a general one. And as for sources there are usually some easy to get for the age, so there are some reliable sources, but only for age. --Tbennert (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No we can't really agree with that as some definitely are notable. Those who are not can certainly be. -DJSasso (talk) 14:22, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that someone who wasn't notable before does not become notable, just because he/she turns 100. But now just imagine, there is a person you see on TV/in the media all the time (a socialite), and that person just turned 100... Life expetancy is different, per country; so, in a country where people "die young", turning, say 80 might make someone notable. However, this is hard to verify, and hard to put in a category, even without Simple English. Looking at the sheer number of people we have there, we should think about re-classifying. --Eptalon (talk) 09:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They do if newspapers write articles about them. People often confuse the Wikipedia's concept of Notability with the general concept of notability. Things are notable if they are written about in reliable sources when it comes to Wikipedia. Now of course not all Centenarians are written about when they turn 100. But those that become the oldest in their region often are. -DJSasso (talk) 11:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have blocked the IP user and deleted the articles on individual people. They were poorly written BLPs. The user has been blocked before on the English Wikipedia for similar issues, so I have done the same here. I have not deleted the list articles, though. Those can be handled via RFD if desired. Only (talk) 15:23, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Corbyn is 60th good article

Hello all, just wanted to let you know that I promoted Jeremy Corbyn to Good Article status. Thanks to all for helping. It was the first promotion this year, does the community think we should re-vitalize the process? --Eptalon (talk) 12:02, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a good idea to look into some new very good articles to be featured on the main page as well. --Eurodyne (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can you think of any candidates, which could be made into (Very) Good Articles, with relatively little effort? --Eptalon (talk) 07:39, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all, In regards to being BOLD I shall do just that infuture however I will say that in terms of doing things around here I'm still new to it and not everything is the same as with EN, Anyway thanks all. –Davey2010Talk 13:37, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hi, Apologies if I'm doing this wrong but not really sure how to do it,
Anyway should Chris Brown (entertainer) be moved to Chris Brown and then the disambiguation (Chris Brown) be moved to Chris Brown (disambiguation)?,
The musician is currently PRIMARYTOPIC at EN and as most links at the disambiguation (other than his album) are all redlinked IMHO it would make sense to move,
I originally asked Auntof6 and they redirected me here, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:52, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Because essays, guidelines etc all vary on different projects and I didn't want to be BOLD incase I was missing something (and in all fairness as I said above I was advised by an admin to come here - Had the admin agreed with me then I obviously would've moved). –Davey2010Talk 22:09, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I didn't envision a vote, just a discussion to see if anyone had concerns. The subject of what constitutes a primary topic can be contentious.. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See en:WP:BRD. Same applies here. :) Either way its moved now, if you object then revert me and continue discussing but I don't see this as controversial. -DJSasso (talk) 12:51, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

Now you can even quicker request QD! Wielbiciel Papieża (talk)

That's not necessary for this project. Please seek consensus before attempting significant changes to our structures before implementing them. Only (talk) 13:52, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming a page

I can't find the "Move" command to re-name a page. I just created a page (Eppelsheim) but only after I had checked it and publish it did I notice that I had accidentally given it the title Epplesheim -- that is, that I had transposed the E and L. Could someone please move this page to Eppelsheim? thank You. Kdammers (talk) 14:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. I'm not sure why you're not seeing a "move" tab; it should be up top next to "history." You're an autoconfirmed user so that should be available to you. Only (talk) 14:46, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Kdammers: It depends on the skin you use. With some skins, the move option is in the "More" dropdown at the top of the page. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:40, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Kdammers: You can also press Alt+Shift+M. —Justin (koavf)TCM19:09, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Hi I have been away for a while and found out about this deletion: Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2017/Ananta Bijoy Das. I have made some comments there. —Neotarf (talk) 21:17, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Neotarf: I have removed the comments you made there. If you would like the article restored, you can use WP:Deletion review, or create the article in a way that shows notability. Also, keep in mind that the deletion was only because the article didn't show notability, not because the subject isn't notable at all. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:22, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. —Neotarf (talk) 21:44, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: Create

Proposed simple.wikivoyage logo (created by a WMF employee who thinks the "compass" logo is fugly; I agree).

Should voy:simple: be created? The language on en.wikivoyage is kinda simple, but not simple enough for English learners. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 00:16, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for new languages should be discussed on Meta Requests for new languages. --Eurodyne (talk) 00:56, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, this question needs to be discussed first either here or on English Wikivoyage.
By policy, "simple" test projects cannot be created on Incubator. They must be developed as subprojects within already-open projects. Then, if they meet the current requirements for approval, Language Committee will evaluate them.
  • In theory, Simple English projects could meet current requirements.
  • In this case, a test project could be created either as a "Simple" section of English Wikivoyage (perhaps as a namespace) or as a "Wikivoyage" section of this project. See Alemannic Wikipedia as an example of a Wikipedia project that has successfully incorporated Wiktionary, Wikibooks, Wikiquote, Wikinews, Wikivoyage and Wikisource as subprojects.
  • The reason this has to be discussed here first is that LangCom will not address the possibility of opening (or reopening) Simple English projects unless there is an active test running somewhere first. So one of the two wikis has to agree to host the test. StevenJ81 (talk) 19:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, as I wasn't aware of this procedure. Any how, I agree with the comments below and do not see a need for another simple project at this time. --Eurodyne (talk) 19:13, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I will throw my hat into the ring here on this one. While I appreciate that having Simple English available as an educational language (like we use in Wikipedia), is a bonus for those who have English as a second or subsequent language, I don't believe that having a travel site in Simple English will have much benefit. I know as a speaker of English as a second language, that if I was travelling somewhere new or that I needed a travel guide for, regardless of how much I was learning English, I'd want that information in my own language. I'd want to be comfortable with what I was reading and how I was understanding it, not have to read it in a second language. While understanding the wish to get a new Simple project off the floor, this should not be it. DaneGeld (talk) 21:22, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Since I'm sysop on Incubator and more or less clerk for LangCom, I usually try to stay neutral on such things. I will say this, which I mean neutrally: If your first language is a fairly well-documented European language like Danish, there's every reason to react the way DaneGeld does. If your L1 is not one that readily has travel guides available, maybe a Simple English one can be useful. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:42, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would be against creating a simple English version of Wikivoyage, unless you mean just creating a simple version of the main page (like there is on Commons). It is next to impossible to keep things simple enough here, and I wouldn't want to see that task duplicated on another site. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:01, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nope I am pretty against any more simple projects, I have seen how others have gone and since closed, hell trying to keep this one straight is hard enough that I often wonder if we should even keep this one going as it isn't fulfilling its purpose all that well to be honest. I have always thought they should just have simple tabs on all the main wiki language sites for simpler versions of articles instead of separate projects. -DJSasso (talk) 23:15, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Djsasso: I've said the same thing for years. See w:en:User:Koavf/simplife.js. —Justin (koavf)TCM23:49, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have been with this project for a very long time, and I have seen most of the difficulties that it has gone through. For any new "simple" project, I would say there are two basic problems: 1) Is there an audience? 2) do you find enough motivated people to pull it through? - You'll need to motivate 30-40 people, to end up with 10-15 committed (hopefully long-term) editors. This community has not agreed on a word-list-type approach (simply not practical for scientific/technical articles), yet we keep SEWP going. I have seen Simple French fail, and Simple German hasn't even started (I felt there was initial support from some of the community, but not enough). I'll just say: it will be a lot of work, over a long period of time, probably years. During the first time, it won't be cool or anything, it will simply be "look another small project with 10 editors". The project will have a neutral to bad reputation, so keeping editors will be difficult. If you still think that given these conditions you can motivate enough people that half a year form the start you get between 10 and 20 long term (regular) content contributors, then go ahead. --Eptalon (talk) 19:37, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at StevenJ81's comment about my mother tongue, Danish, being a "fairly well documented European language", it saddens me to note that even the Danish version of Wikivoyage is in Incubator, with practically no articles, and hardly any contributors. If you can't get regular contributors for a mainstream language like Danish, I fear to say that a Simple English Wikivoyage would sink like a Lead balloon. DaneGeld (talk) 19:59, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I recently created User:Artix Kreiger/Sandbox and there is a random category.How do I get rid of it? Artix Kreiger (talk) 21:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Artix Kreiger: This is because the page includes {{Infobox officeholder}}. Templates can add categories. Really, the template should be changed to not include that category in your sandbox. —Justin (koavf)TCM21:57, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, where is it? I can't find the place to remove it. Is it software? Artix Kreiger (talk) 22:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Artix Kreiger: Your page has {{Infobox officeholder...}} at the beginning. You can either 1.) take out the template or 2.) change the template so that it doesn't have these categories. I'll try that now. —Justin (koavf)TCM22:15, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Artix Kreiger: Another option is to just not worry about that category. However, you should disable the other categories on the page. @Koavf: If you change the template, be sure to change it so that the category is not suppressed in mainspace. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:39, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
fixed. Artix Kreiger (talk) 23:33, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: Yes, thanks for the reminder. It will involve some text like "{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACENUMBER}}|0|[[Category:foo]]|}}". —Justin (koavf)TCM23:48, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Another option is {{main other}}. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:56, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]



Does this project have any WikiProjects, and if not, would I be allowed to start one? A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is sort of. We don't officially do WikiProjects here because we don't have many editors so there isn't really much point, there are less than 30 active editors here so most discussion just occurs on this page. That being said we do allow for creation of them in userspace, but any time that has been done it just sits there inactive. Read Wikipedia:WikiProject for more information. Personally I wouldn't bother starting one and just tell people you are working on X articles instead and ask for help from people interested. -DJSasso (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver, here are several suggestions in light of DJ's remarks (above):
  • If creating new articles is your mainline, visit underpopulate categories in topics of your choice.
  • A freestyle personal kind-of project to improve existing skimpy pages (not all designated as stubs): What I do along these lines:
  • From "Tools" in the left-hand navigation bar, go to "Special pages" > Maintenance reports > Pages not connected to [Wikidata] items
  • This page displays in reverse-chronological order, so skip the recent week's creations which may not be keepers due to non-notability.
  • For "Namespace" choose "Article" ("Category" is also fun) - "view" 500, then "view next 500" (there are several hundred still languishing there at present)
  • Pick some page and open it. It needs at least an interwiki connection (if available - otherwise Create the item :) in Wikidata, which is why it appears on this Special page. Ideally there'll be a substantial article in a language you can read, and that plus the item's Wikidata statements provide content for improving the simplewiki article. Do check for Categories and Commons even if you don't touch the text content, and possibly post templates re:sections needing content, missing citations, etc.
The beauty of this process is the win-win results:
  • The page gets its interwiki links, which is how simplewiki readers who read another of the available languages will find another version without having to know its exact page name.
  • A skimpy page gets attention and improved with some easily accessed comment, and more editing practice (and credit) for us.
  • Either way, it shows up in the simplewiki "New changes" and might attract the attention of additional readers and contributors.
I hope you'll give it a try! -- Deborahjay (talk) 16:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver: Please note the following about Wikiprojects here:
  • We do not use categories for individual WikiProjects. There is Category:WikiProjects for the project pages and Category:WikiProject user templates for WikiProject user templates. You might want to look at that first one to see if there's already a project for the area you're thinking about.
  • We do not use categories for WikiProject participants. Participants can be listed on individual project pages.
  • We do not use WikiProject banners on article talk pages.
If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:21, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is all very helpful, however on en-wiki, there is a system of banners which I am used to that do a number of useful things, they keep track of the state a project, the quality of the articles in the project, net amount of work needed, give centralised watchlists, article alerts for changes in the project and graphs, but I could probably achieve all of this with the existing category system if I really wanted it here. My speciality is the southwest of England, I suppose I am probably the only one here with that interest area, in am going to start with List of Places in Cornwall, and see if I can tidy things up a bit everywhere else while I am doing this. A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I understand how the banners are used on enwiki. However, since Wikiprojects here are unofficial, we do not use banners, and we do not use any categories other than the two I mentioned. You will need to keep track of everything in your userspace. We do not want enwiki's Wikiproject system duplicated here. That said, we welcome concentrated work in any subject area that people are interested in. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You hit the nail on the head. We could do it here if we wanted to. But we don't want's system here. We are a stripped down simple version of and that is one of the things at the moment that we feel we don't need. -DJSasso (talk) 13:35, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Minor syntax issue when using custom rationale for Twinkle QD

Twinkle seems to be producing slightly incorrect syntax when using the custom rationale option for a QD request. See the discussion at User talk:Tbennert#QD requests for details. It's not damaging anything and that option probably isn't used much, so it's not a high priority, but fixing it would stop the QD'd pages from showing up in Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. If any Twinkle-savvy editors would like to figure out how to fix this, that would be great. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category Redirect pages appearing perpetually on Special:UnconnectedPages

I've undertaken the Wikignomework of Pages not connected to [Wikidata] items appearing among the WP:Special pages. Upon sorting by Category - many categories are Redirects, largely due to naming conventions. As they have zero chance of connection to a Wikidata item, they're simply clogging the page and misrepresenting what actually remains to be done. Is it possible for the bot (or ?) maintaining this page to skip pages designated as Category Redirects, or is there already an alternative page display I need to engage? -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is an automatic listing so as far as I know there is no way to do that. Likely what would need to be done is have a bot scan that listing and remove the categories and redirects and generate a separate page but I don't see that as super likely to happen unless someone at en has already done that for their version of that page. -DJSasso (talk) 16:38, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Deborahjay: Thanks for working on that -- I like to work on those, too. As far as I know, the creation of that list (as well as most or all of what shows up under special pages) is not controlled at the individual wiki level: it's run the same for all Wikipedias. I think I opened a ticket along these lines, but right now I'm not on the computer where I could search for it. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:17, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Djsasso: Whatever generates the list can perhaps be modified, as it's true for all Wikipedias (unless there's something I don't understand). The simplewiki is glutted with hundreds of near-miss Category names: all the "athletes" > sportspeople, the "films" > movies, the "populated places" > settlements, so the list I linked above is hard going for maintainers, besides giving wildly inaccurate figures. @Auntof6:, I'm curious to know how that ticket (?) gets handled. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 18:47, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The settlement and athlete ones are left from when we standardized the names of categories here. The athlete ones were renamed because "athlete" doesn't mean the same as "sportsperson" everywhere, both because an athlete is a participant and coaches, managers, etc. are considered sportspeople, and because to much of the world "athlete" specifically means track and field participant, not sportsperson in general. I suppose we could delete those redirects; we didn't do that before because having them as redirects keeps them from being created incorrectly. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:09, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Deborahjay: I found the ticket at, but it was closed as a duplicate of something I can't locate in the system (due to my ignorance of how to properly search, probably). If you're able to track down the duplicate thing, let me know: I'm curious how it was resolved. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:37, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attention patrollers and page creators

When patrolling or creating pages, please take a moment to check the categories (or lack thereof). All pages articles, categories, and templates need appropriate categories. I've been noticing issues with categorization of new pages.

  • No categories: All articles, templates, and categories need to be categorized.
  • Only automated categories: If the only cats are from infoboxes or navboxes, more cats may be needed. If the only categories are from stub templates or maintenance tags, more cats are always needed.
  • Incompletely categorized: Pages should be categorized as fully as possible.
  • Redlinked cats: Redlinked categories should usually be replaced or removed. To resolve a redlinked cat, you can replace it with a cat that we have here, create the cat if it fits our category structure and there are three things to put into it, or remove the cat.

Note: Pages with issues from the 2nd and 3rd groups will not show up as uncategorized.

If you don't feel comfortable taking care of categorization issues, you can ask for help or put either an {{uncat}} or {{Improve categories}} template on the page. If you put one of those templates on a template page, be sure to either put it on the template's doc page or put it inside noinclude tags.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask. Let me know if you'd like tips on how to fully categorize any type of page. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:05, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Making a bot would be a great idea here. 1) Filter all new pages, where the last edit is at least a day old: 2) remove all red-linked categories 3) If the categories on the page only come from templates, or the page has no categories, it should be listed on a special page. ('Pages needing categorization')--Eptalon (talk) 08:51, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I am just learning about categories, even though I have created many pages before on en-wiki, there I can reliably expect someone else to categorize it within 15 minutes or so. I can't be the only one that works like this, so having an automated system to deal with it could be a good idea.
An idea is to automatically inform the page creator that they forgot to add categories, and link to help pages. (with a switch to avoid spamming multiple notices).
Part of the problem is that many of the categories used on en-wiki don't exist here, so when coping a page over, it can be easy to just leave redlinks on it in the assumption that the category just hasn't been made yet. A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 11:09, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notability Question

I was recently going to create an article for a famous artist, however upon beginning creation I saw that the article had been created several times and deleted due to "lack of notability". I'm wondering what the criteria is for a person to be considered notable enough for an article. Alternatively I've seen several articles for obscure artists that I would not consider "notable". I was wondering if someone could help show me where the line is. Thanks - BlueHerring 21:39, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you mention the name of the article, I could look at what was in it. It might have been a test page with no substantial content. Be aware that the requirement is that the article shows notability, not just that the subject is notable. For example, if we had an article about a notable person that only said where they were born, that wouldn't show notability no matter how notable they are. Also note that "famous" is not the same as "notable".
Information about notability is at WP:Notability. That page gives general notability guidelines, as well as guidelines for some specific subject areas. There are guidelines for other areas on enwiki, such as sports, and we follow those when we don't have our own guideline here. The important things are that the article indicates what is notable about the subject, and that there are reliable sources to back it up. Feel free to ask if you have other questions. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:19, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You've made things much clearer for me, thank you! I appreciate you taking the time to answer my question. BlueHerring 22:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An obscure stub from enwiki merits a page here?

Does a page such as Chusquea albilanata belong in the Simple WP? Though unnoted as such, it's apparently an exact copy of w:Chusquea albilanata though with a more (very!) general parent category and no Stub template or Infobox. I discovered it by browsing "Pages not related to items" for potential interwiki linking in Wikidata, but perhaps it needs evaluation by a local Admin. How to treat it here? -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:37, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If it is notable then it belongs here just like on I will however take a look and see if I can clean it up a bit. -DJSasso (talk) 13:30, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would hope that we can have any article that is legitimately notable on en-wiki, the (comparatively) lower number of articles is because this is a newer project with less volunteers. Not because of a higher standard of notability. That being said, copying over an article which says:
Chusquea albilanata is a species of Chusquea bamboo.[1] Bambusa farinaceais endemic to Colombia and Ecuador in South America.[2][3]
Could use some simplification! A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 14:19, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There is probably only one word there we could actually make simpler. Scientific articles still end up requiring some complex English because of the nature of science. -DJSasso (talk) 14:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That would be something like: endemic --> found in? A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 14:47, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yup that is exactly the word I was thinking of. Was just trying to figure a good way to word it but that works. -DJSasso (talk) 14:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but that's not just simplified, "found in" isn't what "endemic" means. The dictionary I looked at,, gives "belonging exclusively or confined to a particular place" - so it's "only found in". Why do you think "found in" is a good solution? -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well I wasn’t sure. but maybe "only found in its natural habitat in" could be better, given that botanical gardens worldwide have specimens, so its not really 'only' found there, although that is its natural habitat. A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 15:40, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OP restates: My point here is that the content isn't too complex - it strikes me as almost meaningless. Adding the Infobox just gives more detail. I thought of posting to the enwiki w:Reference desk/Science: "what's the relationship of w:Chusquea albilanata and w:Bambusa farinaceais? because nothing on either page or the Infobox connects them. It isn't my place to ask the particular editor: "What were you thinking by creating this page?" - so I'm asking this forum. Evidently I'm the first one to question its value. If the reasons given above are valid, I'm going to change how I've been trying to help with new pages. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that is good point given that Chusquea albilanata is not part of the en:Bambusa genus and that "Bambusa farinaceais" appears to be a different species altogether. The only similarity is that they are both bamboos? A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 15:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we would merge with other genera into a family article, if it were worthwhile. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:46, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is a stub. Stubs aren't necessarily going to have all the information an article needs right off the bat so I am not sure what it is you are trying to get at. As I mentioned above, if it is notable, which generally plant species are, then they get an article. Wikipedia doesn't have a deadline so it can sit as a stub until such a time as someone expands it. -DJSasso (talk) 15:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is an example of a recently created page I encountered, and I was perplexed how to deal with it (besides creating the interwiki link in Wikidata, which I do a lot and then =ideally= get info from other language versions to improve the new page here). My query is: how would you (i.e., Admins and more experienced simplewiki eds) treat it? Thanks! -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:59, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Me personally, I make sure its a notable topic, then I tend to see if there isn't a more specific category I can put it into. Usually I do that by copying over the categories from en and using preview and see what is blue, if nothing is blue I look at the en page and see what parent categories are for the most applicable category on the page and see if that exists here on simple. I continue doing that until I find one that exists. In this case I found one for the family instead of the very generic plants. There are probably more categories that could be added, but I leave that to the people who edit these sorts of articles. I may or may not add an infobox depending on the topic and how detailed what is there is. A single sentence leads me to put an infobox on more often than not. In this case I can see why it was left out, we didn't have the infobox until I imported it. -DJSasso (talk) 16:05, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well as DJSasso said a notable topic can sit as a stub indefinitely, and as the policy is all accepted species are notable, it can stay as a stub. That being said, this particular article appears to have some incorrect information in it and could do with some rewriting. A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 16:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I can't comment to the exact content itself. I am not plant expert. I was talking in generalities. -DJSasso (talk) 16:10, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

... Artix Kreiger (talk) 17:32, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Uh what? -DJSasso (talk) 17:55, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Probably the notable species there would be en:Chusquea culeou; one of the few frost-resistant species. Anything called "bamboo" in Europe/the US is likely that plant.--Eptalon (talk) 19:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, I probably would not have noticed this conversation if I didn't have the day off... Thus, should I stop making these articles? or continue to be left in the dark by the OP in these conversations?Artix Kreiger (talk) 19:38, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, the page does no harm, even if it is not the species I would have expected. If you really have too much time and interest, perhaps try writing a short article on en:Chusquea. People usually edit the pages/subjects that interest them. Many ornamenal bamoboos are from the chusques family...--Eptalon (talk) 19:45, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ok I guess I will start writing that. btw, is the import function limited to admins only? Artix Kreiger (talk) 20:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, import is only for admins, and in most cases isn't useful for articles because it doesn't import them in simple english. Its usually better just to start fresh. -DJSasso (talk) 20:30, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And if you need a template imported just message me on my talk page and I will take care of it, those taxonomy templates were pretty complicated to work through. -DJSasso (talk) 20:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I started the page (simple copy/paste, with atrib); still needs simplification. The problem with import is generally that you get many revisions you don't really need...--Eptalon (talk) 20:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

JavaScript pages with deprecated parameters have been flagged in Category:Wikipedia protected edit requests

A couple hundred JavaScript pages have been flagged for containing deprecated JavaScript parameters. Many are user pages. See Category:Wikipedia protected edit requests to see if any of them are yours. If anyone understands this stuff better than I do, feel free to elaborate: I'm just raising awareness. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:14, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many of them look like they are in the userspace of users who are no longer active here / have been inactive for a long time.--Eptalon (talk) 10:51, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah these have been there for awhile. I have been meaning to fix them for people for two years....but I keep putting it off because really they probably don't care since they aren't around. -DJSasso (talk) 11:56, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest the scripts haven't worked in years so I am tempted to put them all up for deletion. Can always undelete them if the editors ever come back. The other option is to just remove the edit requests. -DJSasso (talk) 12:00, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about two articles

Dear All,
I made an article DJ Mixify and Khodadad Movaghar I want to know if it's possible to give the answer back to me if it will be delect or not I'm waiting since several days. (I hope it will not be delect ) Thanks a lot پریسا دارک لگ (talk) 20:00, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome. In general, we do not delete new articles if they are notable. The one about the General Khodadad Movaghar, probably is; I am not too sure about the first one you created about the DJ. In any case, most articles go through a deletion process, and the articles currently nominated can be found at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion. Since I cannot write Persian, adding interwiki links would be helpful, though. --Eptalon (talk) 20:20, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear All,
I made an article Jaleh Movaghar and I'm waiting , could you please tell me if it will be delect or not ? (I hope it will not be delect) . Another question please : about DJ Mixify Somebody told me Cinaps TV ans Télé Bocal it's too much local TV Channel and it 's no good as sources for Wikipedia but DJ will got on MTV Base America and MTV Itaie site (coming soon) an artiste page and even on MTV channel TV I want to know if it's possible to made then the article DJ Mixify . Thanks a lot Best پریسا دارک لگ (talk) 20:04, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I think it is a good idea to look at our deletion policy,as well as our page on notability. If an article fails the notability guideline, it will probably be deleted. For people, to be notable means that (among others) there are independent sources/articles about them. There might be an article in Arabic or Persian language wikipedia (sorry: I see the script is Arabic, but I can't tell which of the serveral languages that use the script it is; Urdu, and a few Indian languages also use the script). In short: use your favorite search engine, if you find the Simple English Wikipedia article among the first 10-15 hits, there is a good chance the subject is not notable enough. Best regards. --Eptalon (talk) 20:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear All,

 I wrote 3 articles : Parisa Music Mixify, Lea and Amirdcl , before writing my articles I read notability I choose 2 albums with a notable label and TV MTV Base Italie and Radios  but I'm not sure if those articles will be delect or not could you please give back the answer to me and tell me please ? Thanks a lot. 12:07, 26 October 2017 (UTC)Aminnie

Hello, Is there anybody here , could you please answer for the article Parisa Music Mixify if every thing is all right for this article or if it will be delect ? I'm waiting since two days . Thanks a lot . پریسا دارک لگ (talk) 19:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear All,

    I made an article Amir Mohammad Zand which was delect and I made again the article after reading Wikipedia:How to copy from another Wikipedia . Could you tell me if this time the article is correct and well enough to not be delect ? Thank you  Aminnie (talk) 20:56, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Asian Month

Is anyone interested in participating in the Wikipedia Asian Month edit-a-thon? Our Wikipedia is not signed up, but if anyone is interested in creating qualifying articles here, I would be willing to sign us up and be the organizer. Unless someone else would like to be an organizer, in which case I would work on some articles.

Basic info: The idea is to expand coverage of Asian topics. Anyone who creates at least four qualifying articles on a participating Wikipedia will receive a "specially designed Wikipedia postcard from other participating countries". Requirements for articles and other information are listed on the page linked above and in the Q&A.

If interested, please let me know ASAP so that we have as much time as possible before the edit-a-thon ends at the end of November. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to stick to expanding everything on this Wikipedia, not focus on one topic. I can't speak for others, but I think we have enough work on our hands. DaneGeld (talk) 10:58, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there is a lot we need to do. If we do it a topic at a time, there's nothing wrong with that. We have people who mostly work in their own area of interest: this isn't much different, except that it's part of a larger effort and there's the potential for small prizes. This is sort of a month-long version the "big weekends" we've done in the past, where we took a few days to improve specific areas, except the only prize for those was recognition. No one is required to participate. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am interested. Artix Kreiger (talk) 14:11, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. Do you want to be an organizer, or just create articles? (As I understand it, all articles submitted need to be approved by a local organizer: if we have only one organizer, then the organizer can't submit articles because they can't approve their own. Still, it's OK if you want to just create.) Be sure you're familiar with the parameters at the links above. Later today I'll work on getting us set up. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Slight delay: I had a minor emergency and it will be a day or two before I get us signed up. That won't hurt anything, though, because we have all month to submit articles. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:56, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can't hurt to focus but I myself probably won't be taking part. -DJSasso (talk) 16:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't found this edit-a-thon's list of suggested topics, but probably there'll be one of New Articles Created. This would be a good source of well-written, guaranteed-notable articles to simplify here. -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:58, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea! I don't know that there will be a list of suggested topics, but the Q&A gives a small amount of guidance as to what qualifies and what doesn't. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:44, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't gone through and looked but I am sure there are some Asia articles still not done on Wikipedia:List of articles all languages should have/Expanded/Geography as well as some on the people list if people are included. -DJSasso (talk) 17:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, whatever you decide to do, please enjoy it. I won't be participating personally, but for those of you who do, please don't forget those of us sweeping the corridors while you're wallpapering the lounge! :P DaneGeld (talk) 22:52, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely interested! Zhangj1079 (Saluton!) Lest We Forget 23:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category cleanup help...

Hello all,

I have developed my bot so that it can flag uncategorized pages, and that it recognizes pages that have categories that do not exist on our wiki. There is a new maintenance category Category:Pages with inexistent categories where these will be added, grouped by month.

I think this is a better solution than simply have the bot remove the inexistent category. Just wanted to let you know. --Eptalon (talk) 11:03, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Great idea. (But change "inexistent" to "nonexistent".) StevenJ81 (talk) 13:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yup need to fix the category name as inexistent isn't a word. -DJSasso (talk) 16:21, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted the categories before I realized they were part of this effort. I will restore them and move them to the correct spelling. Questions:
  • Most of our maintenance cats are assigned by templates. Do we want to do that here instead of just adding the hardcoded category? Do we want separate templates for the two different issues?
  • When checking for uncategorized pages, does the bot recognize when there are cats that have been assigned by templates? There are a lot of pages whose only categories come from infoboxes.
Thanks for setting this up. It will be another tool to complement Special:WantedCategories. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:45, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We already have a template and category for uncategorized pages called Template:Uncategorized and Category:Category needed. Missing, I am not sure we need to categorize. Personally I don't have an issue if some red categories stay for a little bit, I don't see the need for a bot to rapidly tag something because of that. Obviously they need to be cleaned up and removed/improved but that task isn't any more important than many others. To be honest I actually find red categories useful as they help to indicate when a new category needs to be created and used to watch them for that reason until people over the last few years started stripping them off everything. I really don't want to see maintenance categories hardcoded on pages, however. -DJSasso (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, I regularly monitor Special:WantedCategories. Before I started, there were over 2,000 entries there. Nowadays it's usually around 70. I never blindly remove the redlinked cats. I evaluate to see if we have an equivalent differently-named cat that can be used, if the cat fits in our category system and can be created (if there are three entries that can go in it), and other things. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:01, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that is sort of my point. Special:WantedCategories has become useless because its always empty. When it had 2000 it would help us determine when to create categories. And I know you never blindly removed them, but it was good for situations where we had two articles and weren't quite ready to create the category for example. -DJSasso (talk) 18:04, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to clarify:

  1. The bot uses MediaWiki Library functions to get the categories a pages is assigned to, not WikiText. It gets a list of categories to work with; without loading the wikitext there is no way to know if a category is template-assigned, or not.
  2. The bot loads the wikitext for those pages it deemed to contain non-existent categories; it will then add the cleanup category ... for Month/Year as Wikitext to the page
  3. It will loop through all pages in the cleanup category, and remove the category for those pages that no longer contain inexistent categories
  4. It will flag pages with no categories with the 'uncat' template, dated as usual.
  5. I am able to assign the base name of the maintenance category freely, resp. month categories/counter categories/... will be created by the bot if they do not exist.
  6. I currently run the bot by hand, it uses either the recent changes or new pages list, which gets filtered, according to certain criteria. With a time window of 1 day, and 250 edits, a run takes in the order of 4-5 minutes.--Eptalon (talk) 23:04, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You should not be adding hardcoded maintenance categories to articles like Category:Pages with nonexistent categories from November 2017. We don't put maintenance categories directly on pages, we use templates. -DJSasso (talk) 15:50, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DJ, what you're saying, then, is that he should be dropping a template on the page instead. Frankly, I don't really have a problem with his adding the category directly, because what has to happen then is that the maintenance category be created, then the category moved from the original page, which is easy with HotCat. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:53, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I don't think the job he is doing should be done at all. But if he must do it yes it should be done with a template because that makes it easier for bots and such to deal with and is the standard, there is no reason to deviate from the standard for a single category. -DJSasso (talk) 15:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the job needs doing, yes. And yes, using a template is probably easier to handle. As to the maintenance category not existing, I do not see a way around the bot creating them. ALso fixed the edit messages now. --Eptalon (talk) 16:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

New here

Hi, everyone

I am new here, though fairly experienced on regular en-wiki. I saw this new page tagged by filter as "copy/paste from another Wikipedia"? So what's the approach here about copying and attribution?. The above article is indeed copied directly as null citations exist throughout. Thanks. Ammarpad (talk) 16:57, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Computer Fizz, nice to meet you! Welcome the Simple English Wikipedia. A copy paste means, well, that they copied and pasted it from the regular english wikipedia and that it will not be very easy for everyone to understand. It has to be rewritten in Simple English, think of it as its own language. For example, the word "edit" will rarely be used here, except by humans, instead it says "change". This wiki is for people who are just learning english, and we have just over 100k articles if I recall correctly. If you have any questions, just ask me. :) Computer Fizz (talk) 17:02, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Transwiki attribution for full details. That page indicates the best practice for attribution. There are other ways you can do it but this is what we suggest. -DJSasso (talk) 17:08, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ammarpad and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia! Thanks for your question. You can copy articles into this Wikipedia from the main English Wikipedia - all we ask is that they are made more simple by changing the words used. There is a template we use here which goes on the article's talk page, {{Enwp_based}}, which says that the article is based on a version from the English Wikipedia. It links to the particular version the work was taken from. DaneGeld (talk) 17:12, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Woow, thanks with all these welcoming responses. Three times I tried responding but each time I am caught in edit conflict "change conflict". So thank you all, you're doing great work here. Ammarpad (talk) 17:23, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We also know that if you import a page here from enwiki, it might not be simplified immediately. If you put an {{Under construction}} template on it, we'll leave it alone until you finish simplifying. Alternatively, first bring it in as a subpage of your userpage, simplify it, then move it to its appropriate page in the mainspace. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, StevenJ81. Ammarpad (talk) 07:28, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Asian Month at Simple English Wikipedia is on!

Thanks to those who expressed interest. Here is what you need to do to participate.

  • Go to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month and read the general info and rules.
  • Click on the "Sign up now" button to sign up as a contributor.
  • When you have an article to submit, go to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month, click on the "Submit contributions" button and follow the prompts. I haven't done that yet, so I don't know what the prompts are.

At some point, the organizer will look at submitted articles and determine whether they meet the edit-a-thon's rules. If so, they will be counted in the event. Currently, the only organizer for Simple English Wikipedia is me, but I'm hoping for at least one more so that I can submit articles, too.

That's all I know right now. I'm learning the process as I go. If you have any questions not answered at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month or in the Q&A that's linked from there, let me know and I'll see if I can find answers.

Happy editing! --Auntof6 (talk) 02:38, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6: I'd love to organize, but I'd like to know if there are any requirements for organizing. Zhangj1079 (Saluton!) Lest We Forget 02:47, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the page that describes the organizers' responsibilities. I think I've done everything in the first section. The middle section is things to do during November. The last section is things to after November, including checking all the submissions. Really, though, I wouldn't mind doing most of the work if you just wanted to be available to check whatever I submit (since organizers can't check their own submissions). --Auntof6 (talk) 03:02, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. That's perfectly fine. The more contributions the better! Zhangj1079 (Saluton!) Lest We Forget 03:03, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. So if you want to be an organizer, please add your name where mine is at meta:Wikipedia Asian Month 2017 and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:16, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

massmessage issue

It appears that no massmessage messages have ever successfully been delivered on this wiki. See: Special:Log/massmessage. This was brought to my attention on #wikipedia-tech IRC by Danegeld, my comments are that there is probably an issue with the setup configuration of A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 22:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pickup! I have left a message about it on the Administrator's noticeboard. Hopefully, I have given the right message, since I was concentrating on the other thing too, but I think you said about reinstalling the MassMessage extension. DaneGeld (talk) 22:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well according to User:Legoktm (an actual expert) the idea I came up with is 'entirely wrong' so before we needlessly fiddle with the settings we should see what he has to say, although it is clearly an issue. A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver (talk) 08:51, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe it is necessarily mass message. The wiki just has hickups once in awhile and is in read only mode for a couple minutes. Looks like mass message just happened to try and write during one of those times. But I am no expert so I may be wrong. I would point out that log is just failures. Mass message delivers here all the time. -DJSasso (talk) 17:00, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's my suspicion as well. But that many read-only errors seems abnormal, so I filed phab:T180378 for further investigation. Legoktm (talk) 17:44, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template Infobox French commune

Why has changed so much the display of the Template:Infobox French commune? Now the display in Simple Wikipedia is very different from the one in English Wikipedia. --Jmarcano (talk) 13:34, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely because the page hasn't been updated with the code in about 4 years so likely somewhere there was a template that wasn't the same as what used causing the commune template to look different. I have brought everything I could find up to date now so I will see if it fixed it. -DJSasso (talk) 17:45, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Everything looks good to me now, if there is something specific you aren't seeing let me know. I should also note that it may be that the infoboxes on the individual pages may be out of date and need to be synched with what is currently on the en version which is why I always recommend anyone editing info in infoboxes grab the latest infobox on and update on both wikis so both are correct. -DJSasso (talk) 17:55, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does this wiki need new admins?

I am curious since most of the admin actions come from maybe 5 admins. Artix Kreiger (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No if anything we still have too many (total number active/inactive) for a wiki this size. There really isn't a lot that ever needs doing by admins so having more of them isn't a pressing concern. -DJSasso (talk) 18:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about joining WAM 2017


I would like to participate in the Wikipedia Asian Month. I'm currently writing an English article about an anime (a type of Japanese shows) character and I plan on translating it into Arabic.

My questions are:

1) Does writing about an anime character count as a suitable article topic for Asian Month? 2) If I write this article then translate it into Arabic, does that count as 2 articles? 3) How do I submit my article? Do I just submit it here ( Or do I have to join a community or something because I read that my community or my Wikipedia has to be registered or something and honestly I did not understand that?

Also, If you can direct me to a place I can get anime pictures that I can use on Wikipedia without getting my article deleted then that would be great.

Thanks a bunch. --Langotaku (talk) 16:37, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Langotaku: I suspect you meant to ask this on English Wikipedia (this is Simple English Wikipedia), but I will try to answer your questions:
  1. Writing about an anime character: I'm not sure if that would count. I think it would depend on exactly what is in the article. You could ask the organizers on the Wikipedias where you plan to submit the articles.
  2. Articles on two different Wikipedias: If you create an article in two different Wikipedias, it would count on both of them, even if one is a translation of the other. To reach the four-article requirement for receiving postcards, articles are totaled separately, so you must create four articles on the each Wikipedia.
  3. Where to submit articles: The link you gave is for submitting articles for English Wikipedia. English Wikipedia is set up for WAM, but Arabic Wikipedia is not. The list of Wikipedias that have signed up is at
Wikimedia Commons has images that can be used on Wikipedia. You can find anime images at c:Category:Anime. That is the only place to get images that are all OK to use.
I hope that helps. If you have further questions, please ask at a Wikipedia where you plan to submit articles, because each one might be doing things a little differently. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:53, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: Thanks a lot. That really helped. I'll try asking in the English Wikipedia too.

New print to pdf feature for mobile web readers

CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 22:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed very good article demotion

I thought I had posted about this before, but can't find where, so please excuse me if this is a duplicate.

I have proposed that Hanami be removed from very good article status. Please see Wikipedia:Proposed article demotion#Hanami for details and discussion. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:43, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Minimal basics for a new page creator

I've been working on articles from Special:UnconnectedPages and after adding to the Wikidata item, doing some basic cleanup and expansion here as required. Sometimes I'll want to advise a page creator on what's missing and needed for the article - for example, one with no apparent Wikidata item or page elsewhere in the WPs (e.g. User talk:Usangulbore for Sangul Utindaan). I'd like to link to useful instructions, but nothing I find among the Help:Contents links covers this at a very practical level. How do you suggest dealing effectively with this situation? -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:06, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It might fit as a section on Help:Starting a new page. -DJSasso (talk) 13:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa - I've just read through that page a couple of times, and there are several things I fail to understand (e.g. "link wiki pages"? "Protecting your page" via sysop rather than Template:In use?). Must give this some thought... I'll be back. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:59, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say that last part could be removed. I don't think I'd protect a page for that. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
...and my personal favorite: not including appropriate categories. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OP again: Nope re: Help:Starting a new page. What I'm seeking is a well-worded intervention for an already-created (and likely abandoned) page like those "not linked to [a Wikidata] item", to address the page creator via Talk page, to point out several essential requirements and their remedies. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:09, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite web in Change source

Does anyone know how to update the box that appears when choosing the "cite web" template in the Change source screen? Ours includes some fields that the one on does not. Most annoyingly I am getting a reference error on Irrawaddy River because I included more than one author. --Tbennert (talk) 04:45, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem was you were using the last name first name parameters for articles that had more than one author so it was causing an issue. But in the process of fixing it I found out documentation was out of date so that couldn't have helped when you were trying to fix it so I have now fixed both. I should note I never use the visual editor so I am not sure how it looks in the visual editor. Wouldn't be surprised if most of our templates don't work in it. -DJSasso (talk) 17:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the fix! I do use the "Change source" rather than "Change" if that is what you mean by visual editor. There are actually several other boxes that are different in our cite web template than on en. They don't cause error messages but they also don't display correctly. For this issue they have a + symbol next to the first and last fields so you can add more authors. It would be really great if we could import the updated fill in box, I just don't know where it pulls from. I'll do some looking around when I have time. Thanks! --Tbennert (talk) 19:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Asking Too Much Info

I wanted to donate to Wikipedia, however, in the process, you are asking for too much information. It makes me uneasy to put all my info out there for a $5 or $10 donation. Wish it could be done differently. — This unsigned comment was added by 2601:402:8202:53d5:80b9:f94b:32f6:25d2 (talk • changes).

Sorry about that, fundraising is organized by the Wikimedia Foundation, we have no local control.--Peterdownunder (talk) 04:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Script import?


Hi, Can scrips like this be imported here ?,
I'm assuming it'd need to go into my JS (or someone can import it in to Ohconfuciuss js) and the "" parts would need to be changed to ""
But other than those 2 issues the script should work on here shouldn't it ? Or is there a giant piece to the puzzle I'm missing ?,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:06, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible they could work here. You would have to try. Sometimes we are missing things that scripts rely on which is why twinkle doesn't totally work here. -DJSasso (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Djsasso, Ah right well this doesn't have anything to do with Twinkle unfortunately - This might be of help in getting it running?,
This script is simply to convert all dates to either DMY or MDY - As the articles are a whole range of both I figured this script might be a good way to tidy the articles up and to make them less confusing to our readers,
Also If this script is accepted/imported then I'd be happy to create the various policies tied with the script at EN to avoid issues like country ties and all that, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:48, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure how I misread the reply above but somehow I did! - If we're missing different parts then I guess it's kinda pointless importing everything, Okie dokie thanks for your help anyway, –Davey2010Talk 00:37, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was just using twinkle as an example. You could try copying that script to a .js file in your userspace and then importing it into your js for whatever skin you use. It might work. It might not. If I get some time I will try it with mine. But being the time of the year it is I am all over the place so I can't promise how soon that will be. -DJSasso (talk) 00:50, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I added it here. Put the following in the js file for the skin you use.
importScript('User:Djsasso/MOSNUM dates.js');
I haven't tried using it on a page yet but it shows up on the side like it should. There is no reason I can see it wouldn't work. I will try it after I post this. Don't worry about the policies etc. We technically already have them because we have a policy to use all policies when the policy doesn't already exist here. And for date stuff its probably just to use the ones for now. -DJSasso (talk) 00:59, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just tried it on one page and it works. Should be good for you. -DJSasso (talk) 01:10, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Djsasso, Ah brilliant thanks so much!, Okie dokie I'll leave the policy creations be, Thanks for kindly importing this much appreciated :), –Davey2010Talk 15:21, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure the importation of scripts can be done in a foolproof manner that defy the updating of the parent scripts... I already do that for m:User:Pathoschild/Scripts/Regex menu framework.js within my script, so it must be possible. but what's the correct syntax? --Ohconfucius (talk) 13:38, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject: Revitalize

Notifying the community of this WikiProject per WP:WikiProject. This post is to request it's move to Wikipedia-space.

Link is here

Essentially, it's to help rebuild the anti-vandalism defenses, since the ChenzwBot no longer operates, and to revert the vandalism that passed through and has stayed on pages. Adotchar| reply here 22:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From Wikipedia:Wikiproject: Many projects that have been created here in the past have been abandoned after a short amount of time. Because of this, WikiProjects are created in a user's userspace. Additionally, we already have a Wikiproject Anti-Vandalism. --Eurodyne (talk) 01:35, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Besides what Eurodyne quoted, we'd also have to create and maintain structure and such for WikiProjects if they were official. If your project is active and effective enough for long enough, it might be worth revisiting this. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:24, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To notify a page creator of its nomination for QD

After tagging a page for Quick Deletion, where to find a message template to for notifying the (IP account) page creator on the latter's User talk page? I don't find anything appropriate in WP:Template messages. -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's Template:QD-notice. If you use Twinkle, it takes care of that for you in addition to placing the QD template on the page. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:31, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No webservice

When I click Changes by user (on the Revision history page) I get a message No webservice. I would like to find out what changes I contributed to the page Wikipedia:Most wanted articles. How can I find this information? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 15:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC) Please ping me [reply]

You want to know how many changed you did on that specific page? You would have to count them all manually on the revision history. I don't get that error you are talking about, it might have been a temporary issue. That being said that particular page is historical as noted at the top it hasn't been updated since 2012. You are better off looking at Special:WantedPages to see what is most "wanted". -DJSasso (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Djsasso, thanks for responding and for the information provided. Just a couple of points:
I don't think I was looking at the same page as you as the links are different in your two posts. I will take a look. -DJSasso (talk) 17:22, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looks to me like that tool no longer exists or its maintainer has it off. I will see if I can research other information. -DJSasso (talk) 17:25, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am currently writing an article on this. User:Artix Kreiger/Graf. I was hoping that an admin could move the vandal history to somewhere else. Artix Kreiger (talk) 15:28, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No the history will always be there so people can see the history of the page. Your article if you move it there will just be over top of it. -DJSasso (talk) 17:26, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chart position on page

On Voov, the chart table that's supposed to display under the Countries section heading shows up under References instead. How to fix this? (And do we really post this sort of technical question here rather than elsewhere? I'll have more...) -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:03, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed: the table wasn't correctly closed. And, yes, this is usually a good place to ask technical questions or ask for help when you aren't asking a specific person. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's a great fix - I had also wondered how to tweak the column width according to the text content. -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:32, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to do that off the top of my head. I suggest looking for an example on some other page. I think long lists -- such as lists of politicians, monarchs, or award winners -- might be likely to have such examples. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please move this page

Could an admin please move the page Chinese character to Chinese characters in line with enwiki for having a plural title; there are many Chinese characters, not just one. Thank you, ««« SOME GADGET GEEK »»» (talk) 15:26, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Some Gadget Geek: Can you not move it yourself? Most users here can move pages as far as I know. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:20, 12 December 2017 (UTC) Please ping me [reply]
Done, although this didn't require an admin. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:08, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: How would a non-admin have moved that page over a redirect? —Justin (koavf)TCM17:13, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, you're right. I just dealt with the redirect automatically without thinking about it. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:26, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No worries--thanks for all you do. —Justin (koavf)TCM17:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign alphabetic in page title, template has no Edit option

This is about the page Álfheimr which I found in Special:UnconnectedPages and am about to improve for keeping. Two queries:

  • Does restrict page names to not using diacritics from foreign-language alphabets? Which page name version could/should be made a REDIRECT page?
  • This page belongs as a Location on the Norse Mythology template, but I don't see Edit as an option. What to do?

Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 12:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We support the use of diacritics as it would be confusing for the readers from those languages to see the names misspelled here which is what removing the diacritics from proper names usually is. I've updated the template to have an edit option and added the location. -DJSasso (talk) 13:09, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And I added a redirect at the version without the diacritic. StevenJ81 (talk) 16:05, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Deborahjay: I also fixed the template so now the "E" link will actually lead to being able to edit it. Thanks for commenting. —Justin (koavf)TCM16:21, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops I thought I changed that. Thanks for the catch. -DJSasso (talk) 16:27, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Categorization help needed

The list of uncategorized pages at Special:UncategorizedPages has grown to more than 400! Any help getting them categorized would be appreciated. If anyone isn't sure how to find all the right categories, feel free to let me know and I'll explain. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:23, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am in the process of going through the list, and also found a few entries I put up for deletion. We do likely have a problem of probably quite a few factually ocrrect, but very short (usually unwikified) articles there; for example Boshin Waror Earl of Bothwell. I would tend to delete such articles if they are less than like 3 sentences long, and unwikified. --Eptalon (talk) 21:12, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And if you did delete those you would be in violation of deletion policy. If its notable, it stays, deletion is not for fixing articles. Tag it if you must or ideally fix it, but deleting something notable just because it is short or unwikified is not a valid delete reason. -DJSasso (talk) 15:31, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Pages not (though already) connected to items

In Wikidata on 9 December I added ca. a dozen templates from from the set Template:ISO 639 name ... where ... = three lowercase letters. (N.B. I've since added several dozen more.) For some reason, seven of them (xdk, wrr, war, vro, ute, und, udm) still appear on Special:UnconnectedPages, in their original positions (presently #48-54). What's gone wrong here? Anything I'd benefit from knowing for the future? -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:46, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A few were not actually linked, probably just missed, and a few weren't showing as linked but once I purged the cache of the page they did, so will probably leave the list the next time it updates. Really you probably just didn't wait long enough to see the change. -DJSasso (talk) 13:44, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strange coding/spacing issue?

In Category:2017 movies, no space appears between the words movies and that in the sentence at the top, even though two spaces are actually coded there. Can anyone figure out why? --Auntof6 (talk) 02:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Auntof6: Wow, this is happening all over. E.g. Category:2016 movies. This must be someone messing with the local CSS. There is no space after internal links on category pages for this wiki at the moment. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 02:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)Don't listen to me. It was the placement of the template (and I think that template is poorly made and included some faulty tags itself). —Justin (koavf)TCM02:45, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Call for Wikimania 2018 Scholarships

Hi all,

We wanted to inform you that scholarship applications for Wikimania 2018 which is being held in Cape Town, South Africa on July 18–22, 2018 are now being accepted. Applications are open until Monday, 22 January 2018 23:59 UTC.

Applicants will be able to apply for a partial or full scholarship. A full scholarship will cover the cost of an individual's round-trip travel, shared accommodation, and conference registration fees as arranged by the Wikimedia Foundation. A partial scholarship will cover conference registration fees and shared accommodation. Applicants will be rated using a pre-determined selection process and selection criteria established by the Scholarship Committee and the Wikimedia Foundation, who will determine which applications are successful. To learn more about Wikimania 2018 scholarships, please visit: wm2018:Scholarships.

To apply for a scholarship, fill out the multi-language application form on:

It is highly recommended that applicants review all the material on the Scholarships page and the associated FAQ before submitting an application. If you have any questions, please contact: wikimania-scholarships at or leave a message at: wm2018:Talk:Scholarships. Please help us spread the word and translate pages!

Best regards, David Richfield and Martin Rulsch for the Scholarship Committee 19:24, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User group for Military Historians


"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:46, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, Could someone move JAY-Z to Jay-Z as there's no need for the caps (The musician goes by both upper and lowercase) and the article over at EN isn't in uppercase, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:58, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -DJSasso (talk) 00:17, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant thanks DJSasso :) –Davey2010Talk 17:08, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help for translating an article Dark Leg / Dark Punk (Band)

Dear All: I tried to translate from Wikipedia Spanish Dark Leg / Dark Punk and Wikipedia Farsi Dark Leg / Dark Punk an article but you delect it . Could you please help me to translate this article in Wikipedia Simple English , IT IS NOTABILITY article in Wikipedia Spanish and Farsi. Best Regards, Aminnie (talk) 08:20, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aminnie: The page you created in Spanish originally described an individual person but now describes a band (musical duo) with the same name. The original person is apparently d:DJ Mixify. The second paragraph of the es:Dark Leg / Dark Punk page is entirely about an individual person with no sources for its information. All the references are about the two albums. Now look at this Spanish to English translation of the original and most recent change of the lead sentence - both of which you wrote:
  • 18 November: Dark Leg / Dark Punk was a French DJ with her album "Mixtape Revolution" (Remix)."
  • 24 November: Dark Leg / Dark Punk was a French jazz and Electro band for [sic] the vocalist and guitarist Leg Guitar and DJ Mixify in [sic] 2013.
The Spanish is ungrammatical and there's no explanation or sources for the change from person to band. Also, why is there no page in the French Wikipedia?
  • The Farsi page (read in English via Google Translate) has different information in the lead sentence (about a band) and again, the second paragraph is about an individual.
So it's too soon to request a translation of that confusing and inadequate page from Spanish to make an article in the Simple English Wikipedia. Since you created the Spanish page before you created the Farsi, I suggest you fix both of those to the standard required here in Simple English. Then you can request help with creating a page here. -- Deborahjay (talk) 16:09, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Remember too that everything about DJ Mixify and variants thereof have all been deleted here as non notable. If it was notable, English Wikipedia would have it (properly sourced of course). Chances are it's another one of the same set. Someone has a serious wish to publish DJ Mixify and her school, music, poetry and has tried under several different names too. DaneGeld (talk) 17:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear All,

     I made changes on farsi wikipedia Dark Leg / Dark Punk and  Spanish wikipedia Dark Leg / Dark Punk , and also Italian Wikipedia Dark Leg / Dark Punk for the described an individual person but now describes a band (musical duo) with the same name , and I put the article on French Wikipedia Dark leg / Dark Punk . Could you please translate the article Dark Leg / Dark Punk and put it on wikipedia simple english please ? or would you let me do it myself ? Aminnie (talk) 15:21, 30 December 2017 (UTC)  
      Best Regards[reply]

Many pages up for deletion, please take a look and add comments.

Hello all,

At the time of this writing, there are 22 pages up for discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion. Those of you that haven't done so yet, plese take a look, and add votes/comments where you see fit. It will be easier to decide whether to delete a page, when there are comments. --Eptalon (talk) 10:32, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Eptalon: Thanks for letting us know. I am relatively new here and am wondering if deletions follow strict guidelines or whether it is more a matter of a popularity vote. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 17:01, 26 December 2017 (UTC) Please ping me[reply]
@Ottawahitech: RfDs are not supposed to be popularity votes. Some people may vote that way, but admins can ignore those comments. Actually, it is not really a vote at all. Comments in favor of keeping or deleting a page need to comment based on policies, guidelines, or other objective reasons. When admins close RfDs, they evaluate the comments based on which ones make the best arguments. If five users want a page kept because the subject is popular, but one or two give well-reasoned arguments for deleting, the page is likely to be deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All I really wanted to say: We have relatively many RfDs (currently 12 or so), and getting input from other editors is always helpful to the closing admin. I am aware that "saving" some of the pages is more difficult. When you leave your vote/opinion, what counts is the arguments you present. I expect that all will probably be closed in 2017, as closing them in 2018 is more work, if they were already running in 2017. --Eptalon (talk) 19:55, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merry christmas

Happy holidays, all! --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 23:35, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I second that. I wish you all peace and joy over Christmas, and a wonderful new year. Glædelig jul og godt nytår! :) DaneGeld (talk) 19:20, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merry Christmas everyone! Remember to spend time with family! Zhangj1079 talk 20:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Populating a proposed new category

I've just imported content on "Piyaa Albela" for which I've only found very high-level categories here (i.e., television series, India, soap operas). Opening a new category such as en:Category:Hindi-language television programs or en:Category:Zee TV television series, either of which have several hundred pages in English, would require populating it with at least two others. How would you suggest searching other pages existing in Simple English, other than trial-and-error? -- 'Deborahjay (talk) 13:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Edited to add: I've been able to proceed because a page creator wrote on my User talk page with links to three (new) pages to populate the subsequently created Category:Hindi-language television series (though first spent an hour writing to three page creators on why and how to keep their single-sentence new pages from deletion) - but my earlier query still stands. -- Deborahjay (talk) 16:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Deborahjay: Have you tried searching the term "Zee TV"? As far as Hindi-language television programs I don't see any inline citation in Piyaa Albela supporting the claim that this is a hindi-language program, but don't know how strict enforcement is of verifiability here. Is this what you were asking? Ottawahitech (talk) 16:55, 26 December 2017 (UTC) Please ping me[reply]
Thank you, @Ottawahitech:. I got "original language of the work" as a property in its Wikidata item d:Q29344599, referenced to its enwp page. In general, I'm keen on getting categories properly nested and was unsure whether and how I'd find other existing pages before creating a category. Per your suggestion I just tried a search of "Hindi TV" and came up with likely candidates. I'll try this systematically in the future. This is a daily exercise of mine here, improving a skimpy page from Special:UnconnectedPages when Wikidata shows a page in English or another language I read. -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:18, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of maintenance templates

Is there a guideline that maintenance tags such as notability, redlinks, and unreliable sources must not be removed by the same user who created the article? There's a series of recent edits on Mahabharat (TV series) where I'm intervening, and if it's as I've described here, a rollback x2 is in order - but then I'd contend that sources are notable, etc. How to proceed? -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:34, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's OK for the creator to remove tags if the issues are addressed. In this case, though, the tags were removed without any other changes. I've seen that editor do the same thing with at least one other article. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:09, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Great - this is a rationale I can apply according to whichever circumstances. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:14, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaning up after long-term abuse by Zeshan Mahmood

The user account Zeshan Mahmood is globally locked [1] because of cross-wiki abuse. In a recent sockpuppet investigations case on, it turned out that they have extensively edit from IPs. IPs that geolocate to the same area and that follow the same editing patter, have been active here as well: like this one or that one. It's likely there have been many more. This user's edits were occasionally helpful, buy they have often added spurious content and created hoax articles (there's one obvious example). I'm leaving it to the community to decide what is the best way of dealing with their legacy. Uanfala (talk) 16:44, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A triple feature for fans of Prashast Singh

In the past week+ we've had three new and related pages for Hindi films by one Prashast Singh:

  • Re HaiVaan ("for October 2018 release")
  • Bhaiyyajaan ("released digitally" by Amazon in 2017, i.e. made available for purchase?)
  • Himaang ("released" Oct. 2017 on YouTube and Amazon digital)

They appear to cite sources, but on inspection these are all self-posted announcements on movie and fan sites; the one link to the Times of India is simply a "coming attraction" with the exact graphic of the other sites, no commentary, no review. Other sites link to Facebook and Twitter. After my recent efforts to help new and IP account users creating pages on Hindi-language television series - most of which guidance brought about no improvements - I'm about out of good faith for what seems to be promotional content for non-notable solo projects, given their persistent lack of reliable third-party sources. I just don't know whether to go the route of QD or RfD with the necessary notifying, etc. What do you advise in these cases? -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:44, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think, using RfD is a good solution, except for the most obvious cases:
  • Release-date in the future -> Crystal ball, will get deleted after a few days
  • Direct-to-whatever, no theatrical release -> generally not notable enough, or the zillionth installment of a franchise; same as above
You cannot lose going through RfD; you only gain credibility.--Eptalon (talk) 22:13, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In some cases, movies not yet released can stay. See WP:NFM for details. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, Can someone block for a month please .... Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 23:38, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well apparently for the last 30 minutes it's only been me and the IP on here, I now have things to do so the IP now has the entire site to himself!, A few of his ontribs are gonna need revdelling as he's been claiming they've died. –Davey2010Talk 00:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Davey2010: - I am not an admin but I will help keep an eye on it. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 00:12, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done, BUT the place for this kind of request is WP:VIP, or at least the admins' noticeboard.. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks all, This request was posted here before I used recent changes .... . –Davey2010Talk 20:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Monitoring category content

I'm not sure if all of you know that there are options that let you see in your watchlist when something is added to or removed from a category (in addition to seeing when the category page itself is changed). To use this feature, first watch the categories you're interested in, then go to your watchlist, uncheck the box to hide page categorization, and click the "Show" button.

I thought I'd describe some of the ways I use this feature, in case anyone else finds them helpful.

Those are some of the ways I use the feature. If you have other ideas, I'd like to hear them. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eptabot without false positives...

Hello all, just wanted to let you know that the bot "Eptabot" is now running without false positives. I still run it manually, and it still does not have a bot flag. When run it will:

  • Check all pages in the Category:Pages with nonexistent categories, and its subcategories if they still contain inexistent categories; remove the pages that do not. (by removing the template)
  • Go through the last ... edits, and look for pages that contain categories that don't exist here; add the resp. page to the Category mentionened above, in a monthly cleanup category. The cleanup category will be created if it does not exist.
  • Flag pages with no categories with the (dated) {{uncat}} template.

I'll probably try another run in a few days. If this does not produce false positives, I'll probably flag the bot and inquire how it could be run periodically.--Eptalon (talk) 13:01, 7 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Which to link?

Kindly confirm or correct me on matters of making internal links to other pages:

  • A link is made once, with the first appearance on the page.
  • Multiple internal links to the same page are redundant and can/must be removed.
  • If a [short] page includes an Infobox whose content (e.g. place of birth, occupation) is repeated in lead paragraphs (i.e. above a Table of Contents box of sections), which is the preferred location for an internal link to another page: the lead / the Infobox / both?

And is the general rule-of-thumb for leaving a red link to a nonexistent page based on its potential notability for Simple WP in particular? N.B. Today's example comes from the Doreen Mantle page, which intriguingly (and to-me unfathomably) has been edited on a nearly daily basis lately but doesn't seem to grow. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:21, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First off it's getting edited every day because its a sock puppet that keeps editing it and getting reverted as he is a blocked user. As for links, you can link multiple times depending on necessity, if it is a lengthier page for example it might make more sense to link something again than make a user search through the page for the first link. However, if it is in a list of things where the same thing is being repeated over and over, no don't link all of them. As for infobox, dates, English wikipedia likes to put them only in the infobox, but we don't really follow that. I tend to leave them in both, but either option is acceptable. And yes redlinks are good, if it is something that is likely notable and could resonably expect a page to be created (in a perfect "finished" encyclopedia) then leave them. -DJSasso (talk) 12:30, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Here's my take on multiple links to a given page. Internal links are there so that the reader can follow them if they want more info while reading the text part of an article. That's why the convention is to link a term only the first time it's used: if the reader is interested, they'll follow the link the first time and don't need it again. The exception is what Djsasso mentioned: long articles. If an article is long, a reader might read only parts of it, or might be interested in following the link only in a section that describes the thing being linked. Therefore it can be helpful to link a term more than once in the text, so that there's likely to be a link in the section being read.
However, I don't apply that to infoboxes, tables, and similar things in an article, because those might be read without reading the text. I link everything in infoboxes, and usually do the same in tables. I also link everything in articles like 1942. You'll see, for example, that World War II is linked multiple times there. That makes sense to me because someone might scan that page for a specific date instead of reading the whole thing, and they'll find the link in whatever part they read. The same logic applies to some kinds of lists. --Auntof6 (talk) 13:39, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yup Auntof6 sums it up much better than I did. I agree with what she has said. -DJSasso (talk) 13:52, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox page is live in categories

What's the procedure for adding categories to an article in development, which appears in the current User:Wwikix/Sandbox? Isn't there some mechanism by which you list them with a colon (to the right of the double left-hand brackets?), and the eventual Move to Mainspace strips off the colons to go live, or something similar? I'd appreciate a clarification. -- Deborahjay (talk) 14:11, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know these should be commented out whilst in userspace (like EN) however (like EN) categories aren't really monitored ... So if you come across a sandbox with cats in then it might be a good idea to either comment them out or send the userpsace to AFD. –Davey2010Talk 16:21, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
When I see article-space categories on a userspace draft, I disable them by using a colon as you describe. (The guideline Wikipedia:User page covers this.) If you aren't comfortable doing that yourself, feel free to ask an admin. It definitely does not call for RfD (we don't have AfD). Moving the page doesn't automatically reinstate the categories: that has to be done manually. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:38, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
AFD is appropriate if the sandbox's sat there for months or years untouched that's what I meant, Obviously don't send it to AFD just solely on the cats. –Davey2010Talk 16:07, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hi, I recently noticed that Visual Editor is now enabled on Simple English Wikipedia, including userpages. THANK YOU very much for this change! It should make it easier to introduce new editors to Simple English Wikipedia. Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 16:48, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah we have had it enabled for a few years now. :) It is great for those who like it. -DJSasso (talk) 16:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Love it!

Thanks so much for Simple English Wikipedia. I feel comfortable referring to my English language learning students. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1c2:e00:86b:c443:27a3:d5b3:9c23 (talkcontribs)

Thank you! If you think they're old and ready enough, encourage them to edit as well! —Justin (koavf)TCM00:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, my name is Helperout and I am pretty new to Wiki, I would like to know how to edit and get step by step help on how to do it, I looked at other articles already I just don't understand, thank you! From - Helperout

Pages with references need reference sections

When you create a page that has references, or add a reference to a page that didn't have any before, please make sure that there is a reference section. This is usually done with the heading ==References== and the {{reflist}} template. If you don't include the section, the references still appear on the page, but not in the right way and sometimes not in the right place.

If you'd like to see a list of pages that are missing a references section, you can look here. If you fix any of the articles listed there, please mark them as done by clicking on "done" for the page. Note that sometimes there are false positives in that list because the software doesn't recognize all the ways that reference sections are coded. If you find any false positives, you can change them to a standard format just so that they stop appearing in the list. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:05, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have been slowly going through some of this. As always, I am a bit rusty so if you see me make a mistake feel free to correct me and let me know. Thanks. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 04:54, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It would be hard to get it wrong, as long as the section is placed correctly (after related pages, before other websites). One thing: it would be great if you can leave a blank line before the heading line. If it's too much trouble, though, getting the heading and template in there is more important. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 05:14, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Gordonrox24: If you are working from the Check Wikipedia page that I linked, please be sure to mark pages as done after you fix them. I was just looking at these, and I found some changed ones still in the list. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:15, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Strange, pretty sure I was clicking that. May have missed a few. Thanks. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 00:56, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox London station has errors. When you set the Symbol parameter as rail, it displays a redlink instead of the national rail symbol. Strangely enough, when I click on the redlink, it goes to the Wikimedia Commons upload wizard. So if I set the parameter as | Symbol = rail, it goes to this link. Is there anything wrong with this template? If you go to a article related to a National Rail station (e.g London Bridge station), it displays 12px in red. When you click on this, it redirects to the upload wizard in Wikimedia Commons. Is there anything wrong with the template? Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:22, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I am working on that. There was an issue on commons. Its being looked at. -DJSasso (talk) 18:23, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to have been deleted at [2] as a copyright violation. Pkbwcgs (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that wasn't really the issue, but yes basically we can't use that image because its on not commons. I have been working for a few weeks to see if that is true. But it looks like it will be just easier to remove it from the template here. I added it when I updated the template so I removed it again. -DJSasso (talk) 18:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mergefrom template display problem

Going by the samples on Wikipedia:Merging and moving pages, I applied the mergeto template on Gypsy culture successfully, but the mergefrom template on Roma people doesn't display the link properly. How to fix this? -- Deborahjay (talk) 17:03, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Deborahjay: Done. —Justin (koavf)TCM20:58, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a particular reason that we link to the date articles in the access date parameters? Nunabas (talk) 17:43, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you seeing something like this:
accessdate = [[January 27]], [[2018]]
It used to be standard to link dates like that (something about software seeing it and formatting the dates), but it's no longer needed in most cases. Those links can be removed from accessdate parameters, and from most other places in articles. I have AWB set up to unlink them automatically, for example, and I routinely unlink them in most articles I work on. The main place we still keep them is in articles like January 27.
If this isn't what you were referring to, please give an example. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The template itself is creating the links from the passed parameters. I did not want to change the template without asking first. Nunabas (talk) 19:30, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think I fixed it. Let me know if things don't look right. You might have to refresh pages to see the change. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That worked, and I was going to do that but was unsure if it was too bold.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nunabas (talkcontribs) 11:22, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Was actually on my list of templates to bring up to date. It is now up to date with Lua. -DJSasso (talk) 16:25, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnic groups in Africa needs cleanup

I just happened to create the article on Bushmen (or San people), which I added to Category:Ethnic groups in Africa. It probably belongs there. The problem is with the category, though: We find Category Austronesian peoples, with the Malays (nothing at all to do with Africa). We also find the category African Jews. In short, being an African Jew has nothing to do with belonging to Bantu, or Zulu, or San people. I would therefore propose to not list the Categories African Jews, and Semitic peoples in the category. --Eptalon (talk) 10:47, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, one option would be to split into People from Africa (for reallive people born in Africa, or having strong ties to Africa); there we could also put the Jews/Semitic people, and the Ethnic groups, which would only hold ethnicities, and not people (and therefore: no Semitic people/Jews) in that group. --Eptalon (talk) 12:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Malay peoples and Austronesian peoples are not ethnic groups in Africa, that's clear. When "Ethnic groups" is translated to "Ethnolinguistitic groups", then semitic languages are present in Africa, and may have been for a long time. Worth noting that Africa has more genetic diversity than all the rest of humanity put together (this has been known for about thirty years). The main problem I see is that language and political boundaries tend to label groups irrespective of any objective science. En's Demographics of Africa is a good place to look for info.
There are a substantial amount of Malays in South Africa and have contributed to the Coloured people there. —Justin (koavf)TCM19:41, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Separately, you have not noticed that we already have a page on the Khoisan. Please read that before going further. Macdonald-ross (talk) 16:34, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I added the little info of the San article to the Koisan article, and made one redirect to the other. --Eptalon (talk) 16:58, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apropos the Jews - there's a huge historical difference between the Jewish communities of North Africa (the Maghreb), Egypt, Sudan, and Ethiopia, distinct from those who migrated to sub-Saharan Africa in recent centuries. See en:History of the Jews in Africa, which looks like a fine candidate for a Simple English version and then its inclusion in whichever demographic/ethnic category applies. -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Even then: You may be Tutsi, Hutu, or Berber; which is probably independent of being Jewish (or Muslim, or Christian). So, the Semitic people/Jewish people do not fit the category well; And yes, Fully agree, Jewish (or Islamic) culture in North Africa is probably quite different from that in Central/Southern parts of Africa.--Eptalon (talk) 21:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to complain on Wikipedia

I have a question, can somebody help, to suggest how to complain in a formal way on a Wikipedia page, the page contains misleading information about a person alive.SandY181 (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@SandY181: Welcome to Simple English Wikipedia. You can post something on the article's talk page, but the best remedy for misleading or incorrect information is to fix the information and include references for the correct information. Articles here are created collaboratively: there's no one in charge overall to complain to about article content. If you'd like to be more specific about your concerns, someone might be able to help you better. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:00, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]