Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 124

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

New user group for editing sitewide CSS / JS

Removal of right to edit site-wide CSS/JS

Per m:Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS, the right to edit site-wide and other users' CSS/JS will soon be removed from sysops to mitigate security issues, and only granted to a new interface administrators group. This group is now live on the wiki, with local bureaucrats (and stewards) being able to add and remove them from users. This does not affect the ability to edit ordinary system messages in the MediaWiki namespace. On our end, we as a community should consider the bar we want to set for granting this set of user rights.

This transition period is expected to end by around next week, following which all sysops will not be able to edit site-wide CSS/JS without being a member of the new user group. Chenzw  Talk  15:53, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Another non-issue that is fixed. As we never had any issues, I would suggest we either give out this flag to all admins per default; alternatively, admins needing/wanting to edit these templates can request the flag (I see no reason to not grant it). Thoughts? --Eptalon (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I think transition period is four weeks.
Reading through the discussions over at Meta, I'm told (pace BEANS) that the concern is that someone would hijack an account with the rights and cause trouble. So probably this should be handled more like "flood" or "account creator" (albeit generally only available to sysops), and granted as needed, only for the period needed, and always auto-expiring. StevenJ81 (talk) 22:38, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I'd just grant the flag just to all admins. Also, I'd like to get the flag and it's nice to see that wiki hasn't changed in years. Manpower is being wasted to fix non-existing problems. -Barras talk 12:16, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Enabling a helpful feature for Template editors

CKoerner (WMF) (talk) 21:28, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Is this backwards-compatible with everything that has ever been created before deployment day? StevenJ81 (talk) 15:06, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

How to create new article

I am new to Simple Wikipedia, and I can see that it is probably relatively new as there are many articles that can still be added. But, I have been clicking all over the place and can not find how to create a new article. Please help. Chloe2330 (talk) 07:57, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Use the search box, to search for the term. If you don't find it, you'll have a red link. Clicking on the link will create the article. Saving your creation will mean the article exists. --Eptalon (talk) 08:02, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@Chloe2330: Yes, there are many articles that could be created here. You might first want to get familiar with the kind of simple language that's required here: I've left a welcome message on your talk page that includes links to pages that can help you learn about that. I also have information here listing other things that are different on this Wikipedia. If you have questions about any if this, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:42, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Public domain sources published by the US govt

There is much information that I would like to paraphrase, simplify and add to the Simple English Wikipedia from the public domain and published by the US govt. Are there any special rules about this on the Simple English Wikipedia that I need to know about? I will provide full attribution and reference this content. Such content may alert a copy violation detector and I don't want to create a problem for other editors. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) (talk) 19:28, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

@Barbara (WVS): You may want to include the source itself as a citation (even tho you don't legally have to) to make it less likely that someone will push back against it. en.wp has templates like w:Template:PD-USGov-CIA-WF which could be easily ported here if you wanted. See Category:Attribution templates for the options that we have locally at the moment. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 19:32, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. I will be able import and create attribution templates as needed. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
I think you are pretty free as to what you create here. Note however that this is a small Wiki, so images/media go to commons, and larger source material should probably go to wikisource. As to the language, try to use shorter sentences, and avoid double meanings (yes, there are several manuals on how to write in simple English, but they ar easy to find). Other than that: be bold. If we need to tweak our edit filters we will know soon enough. --Eptalon (talk) 20:08, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

I’m back from my wikibreak

Vermont (talk) 22:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

About time slacker! Get back to work! *kicks Vermont back to the admin place* (no really though, welcome back) :-) Operator873talkconnect 22:39, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

Check Wikipedia schedule for Simple

For those who use Check Wikipedia, I learned that the info for our site is updated twice a month: a couple of days after the first, and on the 20th. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:35, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

How simple?

Are the very good articles those I can use as examples of how to write for the Simple Wikipedia? I've been using tools to help me write Simple English. I may be writing too simply. Can an experienced editor take a look at a few of my contributions to let me know if I am doing okay? Barbara (talk) 11:37, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

I looked at a few of the changes you made to articles about the female reproductive system. I think the level of simplicity is good.
One thing I did notice is that you changed wording in articles (for example, Uterus) to be primarily about human anatomy, whereas the article should apply equally to animals who also have the organs. Although it is we humans who write the articles and we may be more interested in our own anatomy, from an encyclopedic point of view we should not give humans more weight unless there is an objective reason to do so. Can you revise the articles you changed to reflect that? If not, we can revert them for now until someone wants to re-add the information to be more inclusive. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:07, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
When I began editing the Uterus article it did not contain any information on animals. The sentence that was there was unreferenced. I removed the sentence as I found references to support the information that is there now. I will be more than glad to cover animals in the organ articles I work on. It would be discouraging to have my contributions reverted. In the meantime is there a template that can be added to the top of the article that would indicate that information on animals is lacking? Best Regards, Barbara (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Uterus is only one of the articles I looked at. In Vulva, you removed the mention of animals (mammals). I don't know of a specific template to say that particular info is lacking. I only noticed this because you asked. Other than that, I think you've done good work here! --Auntof6 (talk) 20:45, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Editing of sitewide CSS/JS is only possible for interface administrators from now

(Please help translate to your language)

Hi all,

as announced previously, permission handling for CSS/JS pages has changed: only members of the interface-admin (Interface administrators) group, and a few highly privileged global groups such as stewards, can edit CSS/JS pages that they do not own (that is, any page ending with .css or .js that is either in the MediaWiki: namespace or is another user's user subpage). This is done to improve the security of readers and editors of Wikimedia projects. More information is available at Creation of separate user group for editing sitewide CSS/JS. If you encounter any unexpected problems, please contact me or file a bug.

Tgr (talk) 12:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC) (via global message delivery)

Is consensus to give this permission to all administrators? If not, how should we process requests for this permission? Vermont (talk) 13:12, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
As I think I've mentioned elsewhere, if the community notionally agrees that all sysops should have this permission, then the preferred way to execute that (for the purposes of security) would be that if a sysop needs the right, s/he contacts the 'crats, who without further delay would grant the flag for however long the sysop needs it. Ordinarily, though, it's better (for security) if people not making active use of the flag not have it in their account. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:58, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Yeah we should just handle it as we always have for these types of flags. If you need it add it and then remove it. -DJSasso (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Could you add it to me for a few hours? I need to use it to fix Operator873's broken user scripts. Vermont (talk) 16:35, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Above is confirmed by me Operator873talkconnect 16:37, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
@Vermont: Added it for an hour. Hopefully you are still around. -DJSasso (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
It's fixed. Thanks! Vermont (talk) 16:58, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposal to delete Simple English Wikiquote and Wikibooks

There is a now a proposal to delete Simple English Wikiquote and Wikibooks. Agusbou2015 (talk) 22:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Proposal withdrawn, and the projects will not be deleted. StevenJ81 (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Read-only mode for up to an hour on 12 September and 10 October

13:33, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Infobox person template

Would any roaming sysop please import a fresh copy of Template:Infobox person when able? I want to start working on fixing the deprecated errors and have learned it's best to start with a fresh import. Thanks! Operator873talkconnect 02:41, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Done; doesn't look like there was much change. I imported both the template and its doc page. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
A million thanks Auntof6. Operator873talkconnect 04:54, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Notice on the National Museum


Please, someone could turn the article Notice on the National Museum into Simple English? Thanks, Erick Soares3 (talk) 01:50, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

IRC Participation

Have you checked out the Wikipedia community IRC channels?

Several members of our community are very active on IRC and I wanted to invite those of the community who do not currently participate to join us. There are a few different channels specifically for Simple English Wikipedia. If you are an editor who enjoys monitoring New changes, you should really check out the Counter-vandalism Network channel called: #cvn-simplewikis connect. Would you rather participate socially while editing? Check out #wikipedia-simple connect. While standalone IRC clients are preferred by some, no special software is needed. Just click the word "connect" and join us via your web browser. If you have any trouble, feel free to reach out to either Vermont or myself and we will help you get set up. I'd really like to see an uptick in IRC participation and socializing. While we can't make decisions, influence guidelines, or attain consensus via IRC, it does help bolster interpersonal rapport. Hope to see everyone there! Operator873talkconnect 04:21, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Would you talk about the issues of privacy when using IRC? When I used it (which was only a few times), there was something about hiding your identity or something like that...? I don't remember the specific term(s). My discomfort with that is a reason I didn't continue. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:08, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
When using freenode, you can get a username registered, with a login/password. Several channels are restricted in who can join them; there's also one for checkusers, one for stewards. As a comparison: Mail is transferred as plain text, all systems it transits through see it (yes, there are ways to encrypr, but they are rarely used). --Eptalon (talk) 07:16, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Auntof6, If you means by /whois IRCnick and it shows your IP address, then you can get a cloak (not a proper way but it works) or use a VPN, but other than that I don't think there's any such issue. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 09:52, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
@Auntof6: I believe, like 1997kB was saying, you are referring to the visibility of your IP address. Anyone on the IRC server can use the /WHOIS command to obtain information about the connection you are using. The information obtained looks like this: Nick!Ident@IPaddress(orHostmask). With that information, another user might be use a website like our IP Address tool to look up your IP. As you'll note, I randomly selected an IP address from our New Changes feed to demonstrate no personally identifiable information about the user is available to the public.
In addition, Wikipedia editors are able to obtain a cloak to hide their IP address so the information would be changed to Nick!Ident@wikipedia/WP_nick. For example, my cloak is currently Operator873!sid305313@wikipedia/Operator873. My ident (sid305313) is set by the IRC client I use, is unique to me, but provides no personally identifiable information. If you need help obtaining a cloak, connect to IRC and limit your activities to /join #wikipedia-simple. From there, I openly welcome anyone who wants help getting their account setup and their information masked with a cloak to type in /msg Operator873 help me or say hello to me in one of the channels I mentioned above. IRC may be somewhat intimidating if you are not familiar with it, but the fact of the matter is IRC is fun, easy to use, secure, and safe. I remind anyone concerned about privacy issues that there are plenty of IP editors active across all WMF projects and most veteran editors are familiar with how to WHOIS an IP address and the information it provides. Only the Internet Service Provider information is readily available. And most typical residential IP addresses are not static.
Again, I welcome anyone to email me, leave me a message on my talk page, or find me on IRC if you have questions. I will help you anyway I can including getting the steps taken for you to feel your information is secure. Thanks. Operator873talkconnect 22:03, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Auntof6, what I believe you're referring to are IRC cloaks, which hide your hostmask (which could be your IP, gateway address, etc.) from common view. If you connect to Freenode (the IRC server Wikimedia uses) via their website or most other usual means website, the worst that can happen is people see your IP address in the hostmask. This usually isn't an issue for most people, although if it is I recommend creating an account with IRCCloud (, as they replace your IP address/hostmask with a series of letters from the moment you connect, and is generally user-friendly for those who are new to IRC-based communication. If you decide to try IRC, join #wikipedia-simple and ping me by typing "Vermont", and I'll help you get setup. Although nothing binding can take place on IRC, I believe it's a great way for editors to discuss and brainstorm solutions to problems, as well as collaborating together. Vermont (talk) 22:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
To support the above, I currently use IRCCloud as my IRC client. It's web based, and nothing directly connects to your computer from IRC. IRCCloud is a bouncer which means there is a middle man between you and the IRC server which makes your connection more secure. It also means you can connect from your smart phone or any computer you happen to be on. Operator873talkconnect 22:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
We used to have a very active IRC community for this wiki. I stopped using it because I found that an active IRC community lead to a lot of rule breaking such as making on wiki decisions based on discussions that occurred off-wiki. It often led to a lot of problems on wiki. -DJSasso (talk) 12:30, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes but I think that depends on the user and how they use it. One should always remember that IRC is not the community and the discussions in IRC are not formal. It is an informal way of interaction used to share information, help and opinion.-BRP ever 07:15, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Oh its definitely on the user, but I noticed the more active the community got on there the more and more people and admins alike started to do it. So I personally no longer take part. -DJSasso (talk) 18:30, 12 September 2018 (UTC)


i need a list of red links to create. thanks. Gassywood (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC) I like sports, history, and science primarily. Gassywood (talk) 21:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Have you visited the requested articles page yet? Operator873talkconnect 21:31, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
@Gassywood: You could also check Special:WantedPages, although you'd have to search for the kinds of things you're interested in. Another place to look is in navbox templates, because many of those have red links for articles we don't have yet. Try these for science-related Nobel Prize winners to start with:
Let me know if you want help finding other navboxes with red links. Hope that helps. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:05, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Long lists prone to vandalism

I want to suggest that lists like List of countries by continents are long-term protected because they are prone to collect fluff and cruft over time, and the content rarely needs appropriate changes, and when it does it needs a regular user to do it. Have just picked up all kinds of little things in List of countries by continents, no doubt by our usual IP visitors. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:11, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

  • Support as suggested by Mac. May need to find or develop a banner tag to direct those not autoconfirmed to the talk page to propose additions. Operator873talkconnect 04:11, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I sympathize with Macdonald-ross on the issue. However, we are the wiki anyone can edit. And protecting pages just because they are lists goes against that key pillar. If it was getting hammered by vandalism of course I would protect it. But they odd vandal edit here and there really doesn't rise to breaking one of our key tenets. -DJSasso (talk) 16:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Article footer order

Do we have a defined order for the bottom of the page? I know the English Wikipedia uses stub templates after categories, but I have seen both before and after categories here. Nunabas (talk) 14:17, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Technically they should be after the categories. But there is a bug in AWB for our wiki which causes them to get moved above the categories sometimes. I keep meaning to bug the AWB guys to fix that. -DJSasso (talk) 15:41, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
And in case you were also asking about this, see WP:ORDER for the order of certain optional sections at the end of an article. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:53, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
That's what I ran across, but there is nothing documented about category, stub, or navigational template placement. Nunabas (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Navigational templates go after all sections of text, but before categories and stub templates. Most navigational templates are graphics-intensive, take up the full width of the page, and visually look like a big block, so you want all the text stuff before that. So the order would go like this:

  • Related pages section (which is Simple's version of enwiki's See also)
  • References
  • Other websites (which is Simple's version of enwiki's External links). Links to sister projects usually go at the top of this section, but occasionally go in other sections.
  • Navigational templates: usually succession boxes would go before the usual kind of navbox because they're narrower and less dense.
  • Categories
  • Stub templates

While we're on the subject, I'll remind everyone that any article with references should have a References section explicitly coded, including a header and {{reflist}} or equivalent. If that's missing, the software now displays references at the very bottom of the page, but we want the section actually coded. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:18, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Help needed: Something is broken and making Pakistan look wrong

For some reason, it looks like template documentation is displaying at the top of Pakistan. I suspect a template or module was changed. Could someone who knows the code better than I do take a look at it? I haven't checked to see if any other articles are affected, because I don't know what might be causing this. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:17, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Interesting. Without looking at the code, it looks like Template:Infobox country has a missing noinclude tag. Xenrose 00:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
I moved a noinclude tag in Template:Lang-ur, and that seems to have fixed it. Jared837 (talk) 00:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. It looks like the change by User:Wekeepwhatwekill caused the problem. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:32, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
Yeah I ended up updating that template as it wasn't using the module yet anyway. And ended up fixing a bunch of other issues that they made. Decided to take the time and make sure the all the other templates were on the lua module now since I think that might have been what caused the mistaken edits. -DJSasso (talk) 13:41, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
If the problem was in Template:Infobox county then no I hadn't. I hadn't touched that template. I did touch Template:Lang-ur, and the change I made was cosmetic. | I added in Template:Lang-x/doc , I did this as a test because I saw an error in the Zulu language template and was checking to see if that template was buggy itself, short story, it isn't. It's fine. The | second addition was to close the noinclude tag opened in the wikilink. Thats pretty standard in any mark up language, close the link so it doesn't spill into the next section. (For example, in my first attempt to make my signature I missed neglected to close a span and caused all text below mine to take on the same characteristics of my signature. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 14:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
That second edit wasn't done by you. That was Jared fixing your edit. -DJSasso (talk) 14:04, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
@Wekeepwhatwekill: Just to be clear, your edit that added documentation to Template:Lang-ur caused the problem, because you put it outside the noinclude tags. No worries, though: it's fixed now. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:59, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Dr.Kumar J. Doctor

Can someone figure out what this person's actual name is? We need to rename the page to 1) eliminate the title and 2) use his actual name. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:38, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Looks like the surname is Doctor here so it's probably best to move this page to Kumar J. Doctor. And I think this page should be taken to RFD as most of the sources are unreliable and the awards are not significant.-BRP ever 09:12, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I've moved it to remove the title. Vermont (talk) 09:33, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Proposal to adjust Level 2 warning templates

Hello community. I've given this alot of thought recently, and I'm aware this issue was previously discussed a couple of years ago. However, I want to approach the subject of the Level 2 warning icon in user warning templates. It was previously proposed Information.svg be changed to Information orange.svg to mirror English Wikipedia. This proposal failed as the community felt the orange icon was too threatening. The problem is, with the same icon, there is no apparent progression from the point of view of the warned editor. Therefore, I suggest Information.svg be replaced with Nuvola apps important blue.svg on Level 2 warnings. This would make the warning progression look like this. The blue color is preserved, it doesn't seem to be as threatening, but does indicate a progression towards a limit. I feel this progression towards a limit is very important to deterring further vandalism. I request community input on this issue and consensus. Operator873talkconnect 16:49, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Comment - I am able to custom make an icon for this purpose, if needed. Operator873talkconnect 17:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Counter proposal: I suggest that Information.svg is kept as the Level 2 warning icon, but that Information cyan.svg is used as the Level 1 warning icon. This would make the progression look like this. Jared837 (talk) 17:30, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
That is partially the point, in the first couple warnings there really isn't a progression. (It is why many of us start at 2. The first one is more a heads up than a warning) It isn't till the 3rd or 4th that we have progressed. The wording itself is what indicates the progression. That being said I don't really think it matters one way or the other. -DJSasso (talk) 18:28, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I tend to start at 2 or 3 if it's blatant or really bad. Perhaps we should distinguish in warning templates. Vermont (talk) 18:30, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I only use 1 if it could in some way be seen as good faith which is rare. I almost never use 1. But then I also think too many here stick too stringently to the warnings. We were never meant to go step by step through them. They are only different levels so we could use stronger wording when necessary. There are times when 1 warning is necessary, there are times when 2 might be necessary, and there are times when no warning is necessary. -DJSasso (talk) 18:33, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
I strongly agree that often, 4 warnings are not needed. However, I have encountered issues with VIP reports being declined for users not being warned 4 times (both on SEWP and enWiki), and that being the only reason. This is why I tend to go step-by-step through the process as an anti-vandalism editor. Granted, sysops have much more latitude to make actions. Operator873talkconnect 19:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Oh I understand, some admins here started declining if they weren't all done, I try to encourage them to not do that but they still often do. -DJSasso (talk) 19:59, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Recently I've tried blocking editors for 2-3 hours after they begin a blatant vandalism spree, regardless of warnings. It seems to work well. Vermont (talk) 22:04, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
Yup you just have to block them long enough that they are bored and go away. That is why I usually use times like 31 instead of 24...cause it effectively blocks them for 2 days when it comes to bored kids in the school computer lab etc since the block will lift later in the day than when they are in the lab. Which for kids is enough time to forget that simple exists and not come back. -DJSasso (talk) 22:47, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • SUPPORT - As a vandal fighter, I support User:operator873's proposal for an orange-colored Blue triangle for the level 2 vandal warning indicator. It shows a step up in the warning by color so it's not mis-sable. It's not threatening at all! Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 20:53, 25 September 2018 (UTC) updated the text Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 20:53, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
@Wekeepwhatwekill: just a heads up, I was not proposing the orange icon. I was proposing the blue triangle. Operator873talkconnect 20:32, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
^^^^ @Operator873: The above comment is from an IP you reverted yesterday , he's been pestering @Auntof6: as well. He's been blocked as well too, so I'm thinking this comment is meant to be a poke at you. Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 21:40, 25 September 2018 (UTC) Striking out my comment Necromonger Wekeepwhatwekill 14:12, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
@Wekeepwhatwekill: I'm aware of the IP. WP:AGF and/or WP:DENY apply here. This sort of comment isn't really necessary. Let's stay on topic please. Operator873talkconnect 22:06, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia Asian Month

Hi all. Wikipedia Asian Month 2018 is fast coming up (in November). It's an online edit-a-thon related to Asian topics - participants create articles on Asian related topics, and editors whose articles meet requirements get a nifty little postcard(s) from Asia (I received one from South Korea for last year's competition). The requirements can be found in the linked page, on the Q&A, and on the local page (which will be updated soon).

If anybody is interested, please do not hesitate to leave a message here or contact me - I will be organising this year's event. Hiàn (talk) 19:00, 29 September 2018 (UTC)