Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 135

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


FR Yugoslavia national football team

Hello. Yesterday, an IP editor made FR Yugoslavia national football team. I tried to redirect it to Serbia and Montenegro national football team, but the IP who made the page reverted it twice. I tried to solve the situation by asking on one of the talk pages, where I got no reply. I want to know other peoples opinion on if we should redirect or not.

Note that all 3 IPs that have edited the page are blocked on enwiki as part of a school block, with one being previously blocked for disruptive editing. ShadowBallX (talk) 16:18, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected and blocked. -Djsasso (talk) 16:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Simple English

I have two questions.

1) Why are some words which are not proper nouns capitalized in the list of basic English? These include 'purr,'* 'college' and 'embassy' as well academic subjects like 'chemistry.'

2) The notice on a page of someone (presumably "anyone" rather than"someone") who has recently died reads in part "a person who died a short time ago." This does not seem like simple English to me. It has a relative clause, a use of 'short' that might not be clear, and what probably looks like an extra adjective ('ago') stuck on at the end. which not the common location for adjectives in English. Why don't we use 'recently'? That would reduce some of the complexity. It ranks 638 on the New General Service List (https://www.newgeneralservicelist.org/).

  • As a side issue, I don't know why 'purr' is on the list but 'growl' and a dog's 'bark' are not -- but that issue probably extends beyond Simple English's purview.

Kdammers (talk) 02:53, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The entire list you are referencing comes directly from a very well known source done by the researcher Ogden. You would have to read their research for answers to your questions regarding what is on the list etc. Looking at the source they are capitalized there so we capitalize here. -Djsasso (talk) 12:24, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We are not bound by Ogden's lists. Their purpose was to show his ideas on a simplified English vocabulary. Because we have many young readers, and readers for whom English is not their native language, we try to write so they have a better chance of understanding. Doing that is not easy, and Ogden's ideas have their uses. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:48, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tech News: 2021-08


00:17, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Spider-man 3

So we just learned the name and release date for Marvel's Spider-Man 3. Here is the link. They also added a funny video to it. Does it warrant an article now or should we wait for a trailer? --Hellothere4 (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - Has already been created, and moved to new name. See Spider-Man: No Way HomeBelwine (talk) 21:40, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category, do we have it?

Do we have a category for people who died of COVID-19, like Cody Anderson? Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here:Category:Deaths from the COVID-19 pandemic --Hellothere4 (talk) 23:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I will implement it ASAP. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IP(s) Creating Articles

  • In the past there has been discussion on various IPs creating stub type articles. I am running to this similar behaviour here, and I am wondering if this IP is a bot. I don't want to associate this IP by saying 'this is likely X editor using them' just yet. I am just wondering if the Abuse Filter to stop X in Y stub creations can be put in place, as mentioned before, this action put strains in Patrollers, and I don't think having a one line article is helpful to begin with. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:31, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It might be simpler to simply block the IPs as before. It is likely a bot. --IWI (talk) 07:18, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    We know who it is as this was talked about here awhile back, and they are doing it slowly now as opposed to before when it was likely a bot. I am monitoring the situation. One liners are helpful and perfectly acceptable. Tsugaru you need to get out of the mindset that short articles are bad. -Djsasso (talk) 11:57, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, if they're doing them at a slower pace without the assistance of an unauthorised bot, then it is okay. I hadn't looked at the timeframes in depth. --IWI (talk) 12:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I notice that sometimes the articles are being created quite quickly (1-2 every minute), and sometimes they are created every now and then.
    I was thanked by another user for an edit I made to one of these articles so I am quite sure about who it is. —Belwine (talk) 12:08, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    They are mostly creating one every 5 or so minutes now. Creating an article that is one sentence only takes seconds. Before they used to create 3 or 4 a minute. -Djsasso (talk)
     (change conflict) The point is whether they are creating on a mass automated scale, which doesn't seem to be the case now I am looking into it. As long as a page demonstrates some kind of significance past the A4 threshold (which all legally-recognised geographic places do), then it is fine. Of course, we would prefer a little more, but it is fine. --IWI (talk) 12:14, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yep last time the issue was they were clearly using a bot. They even appear to have mostly fixed the bad grammar they used to use as well. So really our messaging to them last time appears to have worked but I am watching to see if that changes. (and I assume other admins are as well). -Djsasso (talk) 12:17, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Hi Djsasso, I'm sorry if my opinion on short articles made you angry. That was not the intention here, it was just my personal opinion, however I did mention about the abuse filter above I'm not saying it should go on right away, there needs to be a community consensus to do so, and I respect what ever the consensus is. I'm not saying to not create 1 liner articles, I just meant that they should not be created in many at once. I am really sorry If what I said seemed rude. On an unrelated note, I asked earlier on Auntof6's talkpage, about a way to move the 'mark this page as partolled' bar into a different menu, so I don't accidentally click on it when viewing a page. Is there a mod for this? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not angry at all, but I often see people complaining about short articles. And short stub articles are very important. I think what leads people to think this is that they compare our articles to en.wiki articles. But most people weren't around in the early days of English Wikipedia. Their articles all mostly started the exact same way, but because they had many thousands of editors compared to our tiny numbers they moved past that point for most articles in a couple years. We on the other hand are going to be in the stage of having many short articles for many years, likely decades. Doing them fast is fine as long as they are not using automation to do it and they are not making a mess of the articles. And no there isn't a mod for moving the link that I am aware of. -Djsasso (talk) 11:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good articles

So I was thinking about starting a good article and I was wondering if I would be allowed to copy over the info box and any other needed tables from it's en wiki page to save time or is that not allowed for good articles? --Hellothere4 (talk) 18:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you can bring stuff like that over. -Djsasso (talk) 18:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thank --Hellothere4 (talk) 18:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is attribution needed for this (infobox)? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 01:10, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I thought attribution was always needed. --Hellothere4 (talk) 01:12, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's what I think too. I'm 99% sure it is needed, but I want to make sure for sure. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 01:13, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah an infobox would be past the threshold of originality as far as I can see. --IWI (talk) 01:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Depends what you mean. If you just mean copying the template to use to an article or creating the template itself. If you are creating the template then yes you should attribute. If you are just pasting the template onto the article then you would not have to (but it doesn't hurt to) because they are straight statements of fact. -Djsasso (talk) 11:52, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
A good way to attribute the source of content is in the Change summary. If you get in the habit of writing this before you hit "Page preview," then "Publish changes," you'll avoid skipping this step. Deborahjay (talk) 14:47, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Will I get in trouble for changing a redirect to a standalone? --Dingothegorg 16:06, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dingothegorg: What is the redirect you are planning on changing? —Belwine (talk) 16:14, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Belwine: I was gonna plan on making the Conure page standalone from the Parakeet page --Dingothegorg 18:08, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that would be perfectly fine. -Djsasso (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Is there a way to see the most linked non-existent page? ShadowBallX (talk) 19:42, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Special:WantedPages --Hellothere4 (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. ShadowBallX (talk) 19:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't just go through creating redirects though if that is what you are thinking of doing. (noticed you did that on the first one). The red links help to get us to create articles, redirecting can hide the fact we need the article. Of course there are times when a redirect is warranted. I am just saying be careful if that was your intention. -Djsasso (talk) 19:58, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I created the redirect was because I thought that since it was a list of the topic, a redirect to the list would make sense. I don't have the intention of just creating redirects. ShadowBallX (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I figured as much, I have just seen it before where people do things like that just to clear one of the many special pages of things to do and I wanted to catch it before it started incase you did want to do something like that. -Djsasso (talk) 20:10, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A question

How can i create a wikiproject?12345678910FruitTalk(My Changes) 20:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@12345678910Fruit: Go to User:12345678910Fruit/Wikiproject X (X being the thing you want to create a Wikiproject about) and then create the page. —Belwine (talk) 20:14, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@12345678910Fruit: Just note that we have some WikiProjects, but they are unofficial and they are maintained in userspace. Unlike WikiProjects at English Wikipedia:
  • 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.
  • 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, feel free to ask. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:31, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A question about disambiguation pages

How can disambiguation pages be created?--12345678910FruitTalk(My Changes) 13:10, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@12345678910Fruit: It's not much different from creating other articles. The things you need are (using "xyz" as a sample name):
  • A line at the top that says something like "Xyz might refer to:"
  • A list of articles whose subjects might be called "xyz"
  • At the bottom, {{disambiguation}}
You can always edit an existing disambiguation page to see an example, then just cancel out of the edit. --Auntof6 (talk) 15:02, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikifunctions logo contest

01:47, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

About Oakland Raiders

The Oakland Raiders are now the Las Vegas Raiders. Why is this article still called "Oakland Raiders" and not "Las Vegas Raiders"? --LadyLauren600 03:46, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't many editors here, that's why. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 03:54, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Oakland Raiders page redirects you to the Las Vegas Raiders page. It says so when you click Oakland Raiders. --Hellothere4 (talk) 03:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! --LadyLauren600 03:58, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Hellothere4: I just made the move. —Justin (koavf)TCM☯ 04:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
cool. --Hellothere4 (talk) 04:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting (and random) Simple English Wiki Fact

Simple English Wikipedia is currently ranked 50th for most articles on list of wikis. We are currently around 4000 articles ahead of 51th place Azerbaijani Wikipedia, and around 6000 articles behind 49th place Greek Wikipedia.

This is all on meta:List of Wikipedias. Do whatever you want with info, cause it exists. ShadowBallX (talk) 03:31, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infoboxes

Hi, Just wondering are infoboxes for vehicles okay or should they be left out ?,
Belwine added this infobox (copied from EN) to a bus model - Few points:

  1. Other than weight, length and door configuration everything else that needs to be in the article is already included
  2. Articles tend to be small and it could make the article unnecessarily big (and if both infoboxes are added at Enviro400 it would require 2 infoboxes which would make that article 10x bigger for nothing)
  3. I didn't know if infoboxes here were actually considered too technical

I've tried to lay this out in a way that makes sense but if it doesn't let me know and I'll try and clarify, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:04, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are ok. And infoboxes are intended to be a summary of the important points in the article. So everything in an infobox should always also be in the article. On an aside, for Enviro400 only a single infobox is required for the overall model. You don't require one for each generation. And no they wouldn't be too technical as technical is fine, its the language that needs to be simple not the information. -Djsasso (talk) 15:08, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay thanks Djsasso, You learn something new everyday! :), In regards to the Enviro400MMC that on EN is considered a new bus entirely so because of that I assumed that article would require 2 but I guess all could be merged. Anyway many thanks for replying and thank you for adding IBs to the articles, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cite errors

We've got a few cite templates that are throwing errors onto pages. I've been digging into them trying to see if I can find what's going on.

I've removed/hidden parts of the template to see if I can find what is causing the problem. They now all look like they are "fixed" except for EB19111 which I can't seem to quite figure out. It also feels like while I've maybe fixed their appearance on articles, I've probably just broken some sort of functionality. If somebody with some more template experience could also look into this and try to figure it out/see what I've broken that would be great.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 22:29, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gordonrox24 - Given coauthor and author aren't even on the EN template I would assume they should be removed here ?, Maybe an admin could import all 4 templates from EN which may fix all the issues present?. –Davey2010Talk 00:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah the EB1911 was very out of date. Will look at the others. -Djsasso (talk) 19:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Think I have them all fixed and updated and working on articles. -Djsasso (talk) 19:49, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:34, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Communes of Languedoc

Because an IP editor put it there. Can probably just be QD as nonsense. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 03:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I do like the template. Could I copy it into userspace? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 03:51, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, it's deleted now. But in general I don't see why you couldn't. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tsugaru, If you really want, I can still copy it to your userspace (the version that was deleted). If you want to, please leave me a message on my talk page. --Eptalon (talk) 00:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The template we had is complete graffiti, and hd nothing to do with the communes in languedoc. Note, that 1-2 years back there was a territorial reform in France, regrouping 2-3 of the old regions into a new one. The respective entity is now called Occitanie. Its capital is probably Toulouse. Note, that there are about 4.500 communes in Occitanie. That means that there could be up to 1.500 communes in Languedoc (if they merged form 3 regions). Which isn't something suitable for a template...--Eptalon (talk) 01:06, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

form, kind, sort, type, passive voice

Quick question: of the following four words: form, kind, sort, and type, which is the best to use here? I noticed that the first three are on Wikipedia:Basic English alphabetical wordlist but each of these also has another meaning. Naddruf (talk) 04:11, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would say it depends on the context. Can you give specific examples? --Auntof6 (talk) 06:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
An example for this would be in community (ecology): "Three forms of consumption are predation, herbivory, and parasitism." Another example is on lung cancer: "There are two main types of lung cancer, small cell lung cancer and non-small cell lung cancer." I think these are used in pretty much the same way. Naddruf (talk) 06:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To me, form is more complex. I would use type or kind. Kind might be the best choice because, although it also has multiple meanings, that other meaning (nice, or considerate) might be less likely to be confused because they're different parts of speech. That's just my thought, though; I don't think there's any official preference. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Naddruf (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • And another question. Is it always wrong to use the passive voice here or are there some cases where it is useful? Naddruf (talk) 04:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not always wrong. For example, saying "John Doe was born in New York" is a use of passive. Again, though, it depends on the context and I could further advise you if you can give specific examples. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
When "what is done" is more important than "who or what is doing it". For example, on IP address it says "An IP address is converted to physical or Media Access Control Address using the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP)." Would it be better if this kind of thing were in active voice, or is it good the way it is? Naddruf (talk) 06:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is it the ARP that does the converting, or does something else use the ARP to do it? Either way, I think one of the following might be better:
  • The Address Resolution Protocol converts an IP address to a Media Access Control Address.
  • The <fill-in-the-blank> uses the Address Resolution Protocol to convert an IP address to a Media Access Control Address.
According to my tutoring students, passive is one of the more difficult things for English learners to understand. So even though we understand when passive is a good choice (the which-is-more-important issue you mentioned), it's worth trying not to use it unless it makes a sentence too convoluted. Again, these are my thoughts, nothing official. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so I'll try to use active voice (as I have been), but it's okay to use passive voice if active voice would make the sentence too complex or introduce unimportant details. Naddruf (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, there is a long-standing preference in the "how to write" literature to prefer active voice where possible because it is the easier to decode. The sentence structure of the active voice is more straightforward. The Fowlers compare "ready to be availed of" with "available" (that's pretty far-fetched). Appreciating that "the cat sat on the mat" is simpler than "the mat was sat on by the cat" puts the writer at the starting-gate.
If more ideas are needed, I would suggest Rudolf Flesch's The art of readable writing. Harper & Row ISBN 0-06-011293, Walter Nash's English Usage: a guide to first principles. Routledge & Kegan Paul. ISBN 0-7102-1200-3 and E.D. Hirsch Jr's The philosophy of composition. Chicago U.P. ISBN 0-226-34243-3. The other kind of advice is "before you can become a writer, you first have to be a reader". Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:13, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rename Roxas, Capiz to Roxas City

Please don't use colloquial names. in the name should not be included province name Capiz. the official name is Roxas City. Having colloquial names causes confusion. Unfortunately this data is propagated on so many places and it is causing problem is address searches. Please rename it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Hanusiak (talkcontribs) 21:34, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter Hanusiak: actually, I believe this isn't the case, per w:WP:COMMONNAME and the page on enwiki. Also, please sign your posts with ~~~~ —Belwine (talk) 21:46, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Belwine: I don't understand what is not this case? Capiz is province and Roxas City is capital of that province. Roxas is just short name. Naming it Roxas, Capiz is odd, since when you look at other cities in the same category, they don't have province as suffix. Just check Iloilo city, if we were to follow Roxas, Capiz example, it should be named Iloilo, Iloilo and that is absurd. First you removed word City and secondly you add province name. Please rename it. I can provide you official documents from Roxas City if you don't believe that official name is Roxas City. —Peter Hanusiak (talk) 21:55, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the official name is Roxas City - it even says so on enwiki.
Regarding the name of the article though, North Korea is not Democratic People's Republic of Korea (link is a redirect), so official names aren't always the names that Wikipedia articles use. —Belwine (talk) 22:07, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can we then rename it to Roxas City, instead of Roxas,Capiz?. —Peter Hanusiak (talk) 22:11, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Out of interest, do you know about Roxas City in real life? In casual conversation is it called Roxas City, or Roxas? —Belwine (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well yes, we have business in Roxas City, and I am trying to correct all open data sources with correct names, since somewhere is name Capiz or Cadiz etc. So it is causing me a trouble since I can't generate address for our place. This is head ache in Philippines. But back to your question, in casual conversation it is Roxas or Roxas City. Definitely not Roxas Capiz, that makes no sense. I believe this was an error of someone who created this record for the first time. He made same mistake with Sigma, Capiz. Interestingly all other cities in Philippines don't have this problem. Well let's correct it now. —Peter Hanusiak (talk) 22:24, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's Roxas, Capiz because there are other cities called Roxas, I believe. This is how articles are disambiguated —Belwine (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well let's use consistent logic. Just look at the Iloilo City, which is on the same Panay island and it is properly called Iloilo city. Although in casual conversation people called it Iloilo. Yet no one created page Iloilo, Iloilo. They used correct name Iloilo City. Having Roxas City would just have consistent approach for all names. Why only Roxas City and Sigma has province name in the page name? Why not the other cities? This make no sense. It just confuses people. —Peter Hanusiak (talk) 22:32, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let's wait and see the consensus on enwiki before we move here —Belwine (talk) 16:43, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think you need to read MOS:PHIL When to use city as part of the city name which explains why Iloilo uses City. -Djsasso (talk) 13:53, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus on en.wiki is Oppose. I really don't see the need to move this page. If there are other towns named Roxas, then wouldn't it make sense to separate them based on province? Derpdart56 (talk) 13:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I kind of hesitated on this, but yes the points brought up in the other discussion are valid. This should not be moved. -Djsasso (talk) 13:49, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Twinkle

When I was using Twinkle, I noticed something interesting. Twinkle has 3 options for QD G6, being Move (Making way for a noncontroversial move, like reversing a redirect), RfD (An admin has closed an RfD as delete), and Housekeeping (Other non-controversial "housekeeping" tasks). Can someone explain to me why it is like this? Thanks, and have a good day. ShadowBallX (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

G6 is for Housekeeping. Anything non-controversial. All three of those examples are non-controversial housekeeping. Twinkle just gives different wordings to be more specific. Likely not used very often by non-admin. The only real example that a non-admin would do this would be when certain maintenance categories become empty etc. But we have templates in those categories that automatically tag them now so you likely will never put a G6 on an page except perhaps as mentioned above for making a move. -Djsasso (talk) 14:55, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok thanks for clarifying. I was confused when I saw 3 QD G6 reasons, which is why I asked here. ShadowBallX (talk) 14:59, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Current event: Atlanta shootings

Just started an article on the 2021 Atlanta spa shootings. This is likely to see a lot of traffic. Studies show that the more different people who work on an article, the more accurate it is. Darkfrog24 (talk) 15:17, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just make sure the current event tag only stays up for a week or two. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:59, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, excellent. I infer you mean a week after it stops being current, but it's a good cutoff. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah like a week or two from today. It isn't a super useful tag and I generally think on this wiki there isn't much point to it. -Djsasso (talk) 19:26, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RFD IP votes

Can regular users strike those out? I saw a few on a recent RFD that noone's gotten around to nulling them yet. Derpdart56 (talk) 14:14, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IP votes on Rfds are allowed. They just can't do it multiple times. -Djsasso (talk) 14:20, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Derpdart56: And I prefer that people not strike out votes other than their own. If you feel you need to draw attention to a comment that's problematic in some way, you can do so by leaving a comment. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[upcoming deployment] Growth team features

Hello!

I'm Trizek (WMF). I work as a community relations specialist for the Wikimedia Foundation. I'm here to share a message from the Growth team.

As you may already know, the Growth team's goal is to create features that would help newcomers. Our goal is to help newcomers when they edit for the first time and also to increase the retention of new editors. Several wikis already have these features since a long time now. Working with these wikis, the Growth team found evidence of the efficiency of these new features.

These features will be available for all new accounts on your Wikipedia starting on April 7. This way your Wikipedia will offer more options for newcomers to make good first edits and become community members.

Which features?

The newcomer homepage (displayed using Czech language)

We have created several features to help them, and also to help community members who help them :

  • Newcomer homepage: a new special page, the best place for a newcomer to get started. It includes:
    • Newcomer tasks: a feed of task suggestions that help newcomers learn to edit. Newcomers have been making productive edits through this feed! Know more about this tool.
    • [optional] Mentorship module: each newcomers has a direct link to an experienced user (see below). This way, they can ask questions about editing Wikipedia, less the need to find where to ask for assistance.
    • Impact module: the user sees how many pages views articles they edit received. Have a look at Special:Impact for yours!
  • Help panel: a platform to provide resources to newcomers while they are editing. If they do some suggested tasks, they are guided step-by-step on the process of editing.
  • Welcome Survey: communities can know why newcomers create an account on Wikipedia.

The features available right now in your preferences (here and there) so that you can try them. They are not yet visible to newcomers.

How to help?

I need your help checking on the configuration the team setups as default. Please try the features and let us know if something questions you.

Newcomers tasks are based on templates to suggest edits to newcomers. You can check the templates used on MediaWiki:NewcomerTasks.json. You can also change the templates and the help links defined there. Several templates can be added for the same task.

It you are familiar with Phabricator, here is the ticket with all the information we used for the deployment. Please have a look at it. You can suggest changes by replying to this message.

If you wish to, you can create a list of mentors. This will activate the optional Mentorship module. Please format the list following the guidance. You need at least one mentor for each 500 new accounts created monthly on your wiki (3 mentors minimum). Are you hesitant to become a mentor? Please check the resources we have written based on other mentors' experiences. Please tell us if you are interested by creating a mentor list!

Let me know if you have any question about this deployment. Of course, please move or share this message if needed.

Thank you, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 16:10, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

En Wiki DYK

Pretty funny, I gotta say. Dingothegorg 14:38, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does WP block non-reliable sources?

Trying to provide guidance to the active new User:Haoreima, I advised studying WP:Reliable. Our exchange of Talk page messages produced this:

User:Haoreima: "But one thing I know is that Wikipedia has already automatically blocked blogspot, WordPress, YouTube, Facebook links from entry in the Wikipedia pages..."
User:Deborahjay: "In my experience, no source is 'automatically blocked' - it's up to the contributor to avoid using these because they aren't reliable sources, except as, perhaps, in the section Other websites (called External links in the main English WP)."

I'd appreciate help in sorting this out. Perhaps my explanation could be improved. Cheers! -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:46, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's the Wikimedia-wide spam blacklist. Maybe that's what Haoreima was thinking of. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't familiar with that (and it's rather massive!). A check of simple Blogspot, WordPress, YouTube, and Facebook doesn't show them excluded en bloc, only particular accounts within those platforms. Would that be a valid understanding? -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:40, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think so. I don't think YouTube, at least, is completely blacklisted; there are even templates for formatting links to it.
Aside from that, I don't know where the user got that information. They might just mean that they were told those sites aren't reliable resources. --Auntof6 (talk) 12:55, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
According to my experience, there are still some links present in the Wikipedia articles, like those of Facebook and YouTube. These are still there because they were added before the Wikipedia blacklisted them. But after the blacklisted timing (though I don't know exactly the date from which the system starts), none of them could be added in any Wikipedia article pages. Try yourself and see if Wikipedia still allows any blogspot links to be added.-- Haoreima (talk) 13:54, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That Spam Blacklist on Meta-Wiki, like all Wiki pages, has a viewable edit history. It started on 10 December 2004 and was updated today. -- Deborahjay (talk) 14:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We do have an edit filter that triggers, when a new user adds links to such sites. Look for the tag "added links to social media sites". I originally wrote the filter to detect articles that wee CV-like, and only had (a few) links to such sites. --Eptalon (talk) 06:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No clue

Where can I start??? I don't know what iam doing I created a user page that's all I know so far. Dontknownoclue (talk) 03:36, 2 April 2021 (UTC) Can I get a list of red links to work on? Dontknownoclue (talk) 03:47, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a place to start: veteran User:Eptalon has placed a Welcome message on your User talk page. It includes a lot of suggestions with links to information on what to do and how to do it. You're making a good start already! -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:02, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Known LTA database

I would like to propose the above. It would help us identify similar editing styles and LTA socks. Derpdart56 (talk) 15:38, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Derpdart56: Could you describe it in more detail? Which users would have access to it? Would it be onwiki or offwiki? Would it be situated on Wikipedia:Long-term abuse like enwiki? Any of the answers to those questions could change my vote. --Belwine (talk) 15:42, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to hear what the admins and Checkusers think, but my first thought is we don't want to validate them by giving them any more attention. On this wiki we seem to generally only deal with a handful of them on a regular basis, and I think the admins and checkusers have a good handle on keeping track of them as is. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 16:45, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, if it was onwiki that would definitely go against WP:DENY, so I'm wondering how the LTA database would be known without going against WP:DENY. --Belwine (talk) 16:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Really I think most editors need to forget about worrying about LTAs and labelling people as such. There are only a handful of editors that hit this wiki that are truly LTAs. Don't worry about labelling accounts as being LTAs, just report accounts doing undesirable things to VIP. Checkusers/admins will deal with them, and I will note CUs have ways of keeping track. Being an LTA doesn't change what we do with them. Going around calling various editors LTAs just gives them the validation they want. -Djsasso (talk) 19:34, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Universal Code of Conduct – 2021 consultations

Universal Code of Conduct Phase 2

Please help translate to your language

The Universal Code of Conduct (UCoC) provides a universal baseline of acceptable behavior for the entire Wikimedia movement and all its projects. The project is currently in Phase 2, outlining clear enforcement pathways. You can read more about the whole project on its project page.

Drafting Committee: Call for applications

The Wikimedia Foundation is recruiting volunteers to join a committee to draft how to make the code enforceable. Volunteers on the committee will commit between 2 and 6 hours per week from late April through July and again in October and November. It is important that the committee be diverse and inclusive, and have a range of experiences, including both experienced users and newcomers, and those who have received or responded to, as well as those who have been falsely accused of harassment.

To apply and learn more about the process, see Universal Code of Conduct/Drafting committee.

2021 community consultations: Notice and call for volunteers / translators

From 5 April – 5 May 2021 there will be conversations on many Wikimedia projects about how to enforce the UCoC. We are looking for volunteers to translate key material, as well as to help host consultations on their own languages or projects using suggested key questions. If you are interested in volunteering for either of these roles, please contact us in whatever language you are most comfortable.

To learn more about this work and other conversations taking place, see Universal Code of Conduct/2021 consultations.

-- Xeno (WMF) (talk) 22:06, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Global bot policy changes

Editor review - Belwine

Hello. As Wikipedia:Editor review now redirects here, I'm assuming that this is now the place for editor reviews. I've been active here for about 3 months now, and would like some feedback to become a better editor. Thanks for your time :) --Belwine (talk) 10:06, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Belwine: and thanks for posting here. I think you are a fine editor, and I've seen you grown so much in your time here, I remember the first time I saw you! Wow how time has flown. You've done a really good job here. One thing I'd suggest is to not comment on the Requests for Permissions forms, and as Auntof6 Mentioned, to not place an RFA on the RFP Page, of course you were not aware of this rule, so don't sweat it, now you know about it! One piece of advice I have for you is to never be scared to speak up if an user is abusing their rights (not picking on any user specifically) and never be scared to ask for help, and if you see an edit you don't know what to do, take it slowly, and ask another editor for help. Always remember that everyone here is a human, and no one is perfect, so it's natural to make mistakes sometimes, that is one of the best ways we actually learn (quoting my teacher here). Most importantly have fun in your time here, Wikipedia isn't mandatory, and don't let it affect your schoolwork (if you are in school), or your job! I first came to Wikipedia when I was very young, and the reason why I probably did poorly, and struggled to make friends (I still do struggle to find friends at school) was partly because I was spending too much time on the English Wikipedia. I've gotten better at managing my time now and learned to get off Wikipedia. I'm not saying that you may have this issue, I'm only pointing this out as a friendly pointer, so this won't happen to you! You may have different effects of the result of being on Wikipedia too much, and it may effect you differently in different areas of your life, not specifically in school. Wikipedia has no due date, so don't feel obligated to edit here every day if you are busy. I'm sure many editors could relate to me here and we've all been in school in one point of our lives, and probably had some similar experiences of being on Wikipedia too much. Thanks, Belwine for volunteering for Wikimedia's Projects, I really do appreciate the work you (and everyone) do. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the feedback Tsugaru :)
With my high activity, I have found myself with a lot more free time than before the lockdown, hence why I have spent so much time here! In the next couple of weeks, I am expecting that to decrease, but I will try and stay as active as I can. Best, --Belwine (talk) 08:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know....

...how I've been doing and where I can improve. --Derpdart56 (talk) 17:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Derpdart56: Hello, I think you are a good editor, especially in anti-vandalism.
An area I think you could improve on is article creation. Your categorisation and stub marking is good, but there is not much content in the articles you create and they sometimes look a little empty. What I would recommend doing is maybe adding infoboxes and tables from the English Wikipedia, whilst ensuring the language is simple. Also, don't be afraid to copy bits from the English Wikipedia and simplify using BE 1500, whilst giving attribution with the {{translated page}} template. Even just adding the infoboxes from the English Wikipedia makes articles look way more complete in my opinion. See this compared to this.
One more thing I'd like to let you know is that Wikipedia:Introduction is a sandbox which Hazard-Bot regularly clears out. I see other editors make this mistake too - this page should be treated the exact same as Wikipedia:Sandbox and no rollbacks or undos should happen here unless it's spam or vandalism. Test edits are expected.
Other than that, you do a good job here, keep it up :D --Belwine (talk) 16:44, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Japan Requested Articles

Where can I find a list for Requested Articles for Japan? Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 22:24, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe one exists. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:46, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You could keep such a list at WikiProject Japan. Other than that, we don't categorize wanted articles by specific subject area. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez promoted to good article...

Hello, after a lengthy discussion, I promoted Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to Good article. While there may still be issues remaining, keep in mind that we are talking about "good article", and not "very good article", and that the "perfect article" likely doesn't exist. So congrats to all those who helped and contributed to the article. --Eptalon (talk) 12:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the Wikidata item accordingly. If there is anything missed, let me know (or fix it yourself). --IWI (talk) 13:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

World Heritage Sites...

...should all have a flag at the top right of the page. You get this by adding {{WHSite}} at the bottom of the page. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:03, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Line numbering coming soon to all wikis

-- Johanna Strodt (WMDE) 15:09, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Uncategorized stubs

Is Category:Uncategorized stubs still used? From what I see, it's empty. Lights and freedom (talk) 04:51, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lights and freedom: Yes, it's still used. It has to be manually populated. Note that it has text on it that says it could be empty. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: I'd like to better understand its purpose. Is it for stub articles that just happen to have no categories, or for articles that use the basic {{stub}} template instead of one of the other templates? Lights and freedom (talk) 07:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lights and freedom: It's for stub articles that don't have any of the regular categories that articles should have. It can be hard to find them because Special:UncategorizedPages only shows pages that have absolutely no categories on them. Stubs will always have at least the stub categories, but they need more than that. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that makes sense. Lights and freedom (talk) 07:17, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Person categories

Should we categorize person categories within categories that include that person? For example, Category:John Adams is the only president category currently within Category:Presidents of the United States. Also, a few person categories are contained within Category:19th-century people. But most person categories are not categorized in this way. Lights and freedom (talk) 05:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lights and freedom: Any category that is a category named after a person should only have one category: Category:Categories named after people. I just removed the other two categories on Category:John Adams, and I'm taking the person categories out of the 19th-century people category. Thanks for pointing this out. Does that address your question? --Auntof6 (talk) 07:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thank you. I will fix that if I see that on any other person categories. Lights and freedom (talk) 07:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lights and freedom: Thanks. Just be sure you copy any needed categories to the main article. For example, some of the ones I just fixed didn't need to be copied to Category:19th-century people because they were already in a category for 19th-century politicians. However, some did need to be copied because they weren't in any explicit 19th century category. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:16, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Geisha demoted to good article...

Hello all, the article Geisha was started in 2007. It is one of the oldest articles we have. When we started having Very Good Articles, it was also one of the first articles to get that status. Some time ago, concerns were raised about it rightfully being a very good article, and there are areas which need to be updated. For this reason, I have demoted it to the status of good article. When the issues have all been addressed, we can re-promote the article using the regular process. --Eptalon (talk) 12:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated all of the relevant things for a demoted article, including the Wikidata item. Let me know if I missed anything. --IWI (talk) 13:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Don't let us get too hasty about this. Demotion from or promotion to VGA is a big deal, not to be rushed. I can see things which need improvement as it is. The first para alone is badly written. And, checking with En wiki, I can see whole topics left out of our version. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As I wrote, it is one of the oldest articles we have, and its age is clearly visible. When it has been worked on, and the editors agree that it is ready, it will go through a regular process. Hanami is an article that has a similar age (also from 2007), it was demoted to good article in 2018. Since then, there were roughly 40 edits to the page. Looking at the actual changes, there were minor (fixing references, some rephrasing). So far, there has been no attempt to re-promote to VGA. Japanese tea ceremony, demoted to regular article in 2008; about 80 revisions since then; also very little change, no attempt at re-promoting the article. As of now, 27 articles have been demoted from VGA. I am not aware of any that have been re-promoted to VGA, after being demoted. So yes, if we take the process seriously, the article will need to go through a regular process, when the community feels it is ready. --Eptalon (talk) 18:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some joker just added false info about Nutri Ventures – The Quest for the 7 Kingdoms

The edits on the article for Nutri Ventures – The Quest for the 7 Kingdoms has to be a joke as it looks like it was written on a fanfic site. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 05:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd If you believe changes should be made add them on the talk page or just make the edits. SoyokoAnis - talk 17:51, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A few formatting questions

Hi all. I just had a couple of formatting questions that I was hoping somebody might be able to clear up. Firstly, when a navigational box (say {{Cities in France}}) is included on a page that also has an Authority Control template on it, should there be a gap between it and the navigational box or not - I've seen it done both ways and so am interested in what the general consensus is. Secondly, is there any consensus on where stub tags should be placed on pages that have nav boxes + authority control? I've seen it above both of them (ie just below References/Other Websites) but also below. I wasn't sure if there was any definitive guide to that - on the one hand putting it above makes it much easier to see, especially if there is a long infobox on the page, but on the other stub tags typically go right at the bottom of an article. If anyone has any ideas on either question it would be much appreciated. Best, Milo, Talk, Contribs 12:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs are supposed to go after the categories with two spaces between them and the categories, not with the navboxes. Authority control goes after navboxes, no space needed. -Djsasso (talk) 12:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant that's perfect thanks! Milo, Talk, Contribs 12:39, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SpaceGuy32: I know Djsasso answered your immediate question. But I thought I would share a link to en:MOS:ORDER as well. In case you have similar questions about the order of other elements in the future, it is a useful resource. Desertborn (talk) 18:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Desertborn: Oh wonderful that's exactly what I was looking for. Bookmarked for future use! Thanks, Milo, Talk, Contribs 18:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Nickelodeon is looking for new members!

Wikiproject Nickelodeon.png is looking for new members. Join us now!

Link SoyokoAnis - talk 20:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I don't mean to wreck your hard work, but just a question of does that banner contain the actual Nickelodeon logo? If so, Is it a copyright violation? I do appreciate the effort you put into the Wikiproject, but the logo needs to be in compliance with Wikipedia Policies. Thank you very much! --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi! No it technically does not, if you look at the Nickelodeon in the logo you'll see some of the letters are raised and the font I used allows you to sell, remix, etc it. Thank you, though! SoyokoAnis - talk 04:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kimono

Hello. How much more work would need to be put in the Kimono article, before considering for a Good Article status nomination. I would appreciate any feedback you may have on the article Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article should have a picture of a man in a kimono. Right now they're all women. Lights and freedom (talk) 00:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but we could only find one (see the talkpage), but my concern is, some people might think were 'advertising' Jimmy Wales, because he is the man in the kimono --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:53, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is this one okay? File:Gingetsu Morita in May 2012.jpg Lights and freedom (talk) 00:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I guess it could work. But the man looks like he's in a serious mood. However that is irrelevant to the article itself. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 01:04, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Lights and freedom I added the image to the article --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 01:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also see that there are not a lot of sources, especially in the history section, and men's and women's kimono section. I don't think it could be promoted unless more sources can be added. Lights and freedom (talk) 22:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Yes, that is still an Issue. But is the article easy to read? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 23:48, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is all easy to read. I don't know much about the subject so I don't know if anything is missing, but maybe you could add something about wedding kimono (shiro-muku?), because the English WP article talks about it. Lights and freedom (talk) 00:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I might need to do that, as some of the content is unsourced, and cannot find any sources for it, so I'll need to remove it, and I'll use the new content to compensate for the size lost from removing the existing information --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Hi. I would like attention to be brought to this page as it needs heavy workshopping. Thank you.--Derpdart56 (talk) 14:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Derpdart56 I just restructured and recreated the entire page. SoyokoAnis - talk 18:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle help.

Is there any way I can view the changes faster than what twinkle does without manually refreshing the page? Darubrub (Let me know) 18:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Darubrub: I'm a bit confused about what you're trying to say. Do you want to see diffs as quickly as possible? You should probably use Huggle, if that is what you are asking. --Ferien (talk) 18:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It automatically refreshes the page for you after a few seconds. SoyokoAnis - talk 18:13, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know, but I want a shorter time. Darubrub (Let me know) 18:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Darubrub Let me see if I can change the refresh time in the preferences. I'll get back to you with information in a few minutes. SoyokoAnis - talk 18:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Darubrub Okay, it currently is not possible to change the refresh time. I am not that good at MediaWiki programming so I can't change it at all. I'm sorry. SoyokoAnis - talk 18:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll just continue manually refreshing. Thank you! Darubrub (Let me know) 18:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! SoyokoAnis - talk 18:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to manually add RedWarn to this wiki?

Like it doesn't require interface admins or such?

Will the script work on this wiki? SoyokoAnis - talk 02:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No Redwarn only works for en.wiki. -Djsasso (talk) 11:19, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Although, JJPMaster did add the script here, with some changes. See User:JJPMaster/RedWarn.js. --Ferien (talk) 11:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ana Ivanović proposed for demotion..

Hello all, the article Ana Ivanović is a very good article, but it hasn't been updated in about 6-7 years. For this time, it has a template on top that an update is needed. Since we can't have such templates on very good articles, I have nominated it for demotion. In the last six years, there were about 60 edits to the article, it didn't change much. It looks like it has 50-100 views a month. Anyway, if you feel one way or another, please leave a comment at the proposed article demotion page. --Eptalon (talk) 16:44, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

monatomic

In physics and chemistry monatomic is a combination of words. "Mono" means single and monatomic means single atom It is usually applied to gases: a monatomic gas is one in which atoms are not bound to each other. Examples at standard conditions include the noble gases argon, krypton, and xenon, though all chemical elements will be monatomic in the gas phase at sufficiently high temperatures. Microbes are monatomic

Sorry, but this is just nonsense. First of all, please sign your edits. Secondly, your content does not need discussion here except to say that microbes are quite certainly not monatomic. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:49, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please sign your edits. And what does this have to do with Wikipedia? SoyokoAnis - talk 13:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Macdonald-ross Should I remove as a test edit? SoyokoAnis - talk 13:29, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Macdonald-ross: The other wiki has an article on en:monatomic gas. Why did you delete this article and say it has little or no meaning? 2601:640:4000:3170:B89F:F50C:6F08:6BFE (talk) 17:43, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Everything is true there and useful, except that microbes are not monatomic. But then you could just delete those three words instead of deleting the whole article. 2601:640:4000:3170:B89F:F50C:6F08:6BFE (talk) 17:44, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Daniela Hantuchová is up for discussion at WP:PAD

Hello. This is to inform of a discussion of the status of the current Very Good Article 'Daniela Hantuchová' at Proposed Article Demotion. Your thoughts are welcome. Thank you very much. Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 20:23, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only autoconfirmed should be allowed to create articles

I can't believe how many articles I have ran into that only have one word. While I know someone told me that stubs like this are allowed that makes me question this rule. This is an encyclopedia and the content should be encyclopedic. And most of these edits are coming from unconfirmed or IP users. This is my opinion and please feel free to place your opinion as well. SoyokoAnis - talk 14:38, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we do get a lot of graffitti, so to say. There are many admins, and blocking users who post nonsense all the time is done quite often. Personally, I do not see the need to restrict content creation to autoconfirmed users. Note, that we also have iP editors nominating articles for deletion, and taking part in other commnity processes. The admins have the tools to handle these situations, and there are many admins. Barring new users from creating content is not the solution. Besides: If they can no longer create new articles, they'll probably resort to replacing articles with nonsense/graffitti...--Eptalon (talk) 17:07, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SoyokoAnis: We actually had a discussion about something very similar to this on Simple Talk very recently, and it was decided that it is best just leaving things as they are. --Ferien (talk) 17:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon, @Ferien Oh, okay. Thank you. SoyokoAnis - talk 17:20, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Many VGAs have issues...

Hello all, Very good articles are supposed to be the very best articles we have, and can produce. I just went through the listing, and I found that many of them have issues:

  • Red-links, often in transcluded templates
  • "Needs update" (or similar)tag, that has been sitting there, sometimes for years without anything happening.

As an example, the article Anna Kournikova has several red-links to articles, where I am pretty sure we never had them, how was it possible to promote it, with red-links, given that VGAs must not have them? This message is not to discuss individual articles, but to point out that between a third and half of our VGAs have issues; giventheir current state they would not be promoted. Given this finding, I think we should re-think the process. Some ideas:

  • A bot flagging/reportting VGAs with red-links, or with certain templates
  • Time-limiting the "VGA tag" (for example: 2 years, after which it needs to be re-confirmed; the reconfirmation process could be simpler, and needs to be looked at).

I have reported a few VGAs for demotion. I have no idea what state the Good articles are in. On the one hand, people shouldn't be afraid to modify/update such articles, on the other, we need a mechanism of evaluating such updates. Sportspoeple: we get an article about the person at the height of her career; a few years later, he/she retires (fast-paced, too old, etc), but our article does not reflect it, because everyone is afraid of toouching it, for fear of losing the tag. Getting an article to GA or VGA is time-consuming, and we have seen very few articles promoted. So I post this as a wake-up call. Any thoughts?--Eptalon (talk) 18:14, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What do people think about the idea of excluding biographies of living people from the articles eligible to be promoted to VGA? This may be a bit of an extreme step, however given our difficulty in keeping articles up to date I think it may be worthwhile especially with how sensitive BLPs are. This would allow those who are working on promotion articles to higher standards to focus on writing articles that won't need to be updated every few years in order to maintain their status. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 18:33, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the system of having biography GAs and VGAs is something we may not need, and with which we struggle. A system of GAs would be easier to cope with. VGAs here are probably always going to be on the brink if they are biogs. Yes, we could limit biogs to GA without doing much harm. We all know they are prone to fall, can't be kept up to date and have often been unwisely (but understandably) promoted in the first place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macdonald-ross (talkcontribs)
I would say we probably shouldn't limit it because people who like to work on those kinds of articles shouldn't be prevented from "achieving" the recognition of making one. We should just be aware that they can fall behind and need to be removed and then do so. -Djsasso (talk) 13:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page Redesign/Tweaks

I know this may sound like a weird/Not possible Idea, but could we come up with a 'facelifted' version of the main page, and then gain a consensus to implement the new design? I know this sounds like a hard idea/thing to do, and I'm not sure if this is possible or not? But what are your ideas? Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:24, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that would depend on what exactly you'd want changed. I think we've done redesigns before. I personally like to leave well enough alone, but as long as other people do the work I usually don't grouse about it too much. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:34, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's not major changes per se, just the shape of the boxes, and the font type, and a very small change to the COVID header. Not any major changes, but like a facelift, but if others want to leave it as it is, I am 100% okay with that. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No reason it couldn't be done. I imagine you can view the source of the page, take the content to a sandbox and make the changes you want before presenting it to the community to discuss. Any changes to the main page should be discussed at Talk:Main Page, so the page's entire discussion history remains in one place.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 02:54, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so should I move this discussion there? Yea, I guess I could take the code and copy it into my userspace, make some changes, and present them. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally I think we have a nice clean page and don't think it needs any changes, but can't hurt for someone to mock some changes up and get input from the community. The covid header can probably actually be removed at this point, it was only meant to be temporary when the situation was very new. -Djsasso (talk) 15:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COI

What do I do about this COI? https://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:UspLK&diff=prev&oldid=7485288Yaakov Wa. (talk) 21:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Yaakov Wa.: What is the conflict? --Auntof6 (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Auntof6,
User claimed to be founder of organization. However, seems to be resolved because user is first going to en-wiki.
Blessings,
Yaakov W. Yaakov Wa. (talk) 22:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Values

Timur Vorkul (WMDE) 14:08, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Welcome

Template:Welcome links to Wikipedia:Most wanted articles, which has not been updated since 2012. Should this link be removed? Lights and freedom (talk) 23:26, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Would make sense to me to like it to Special:Wantedpages.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:28, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed link. -Djsasso (talk) 14:01, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Should we just turn Wikipedia:Most wanted articles into a redirect at this point? Since it is so old it is not useful in of itself. Desertborn (talk) 14:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to, but decided it should probably be left separate so as not to redirect across namespaces. If a bot gets set up to start updating it again then its there ready to go. Could probably ask Chenzw if he still has to the code to keep it updated. -Djsasso (talk) 14:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Captcha

Do non-autoconfirmed users (such as IPs) need to complete a captcha before creating a new page? Or does this not exist? Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 20:32, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to Special:Captcha, no, this does not exist. --Ferien (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think this would be useful if enabled, Ferien? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 20:42, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is definitely something we should consider, it will be useful, especially for some contributors who mass create bad pages. --Ferien (talk) 20:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, and it would reduce the amount of traffic, if there are bots creating pages. Creating those geo-stubs are fine, but since it is probably a bot, it is against policy. Also like you mention, it will stop those spam pages. So should I start a proposal here? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 20:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Is that something that other Wikipedias already do? If not, it would need to be proposed at Meta, not here. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't know, I never used an IP or created a page un autoconfirmed, good catch Auntof6! Would I be able to start the proposal here, and then go to meta once there's consensus? EN Wikipedia does not allow un-autoconfirmed users to create pages, so they'd would have no CAPTCHA --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:39, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't. I'd go straight to meta, where you could get input from people who work on many different Wikimedia projects. It might not even be Meta; there might be a separate site for discussing software changes. Having a consensus here wouldn't mean anything if it's only here. Remember that changes to the basic software are done at a higher level than any one Wikipedia. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be beneficial to go to the Test Wikipedia so we can test the changes there? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:13, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't know. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Incorporated" or "Inc." as titles

I see pages created with titles both formats. Could we not standardise on Inc. and Ltd. as is usual in the press? Maybe we have had this discussion before. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd favor the abbreviation, since that's what you usually see. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It falls to common name. In some cases the short form is probably what the organization is more often called by, whereas in others the long form is. We shouldn't standardize just to standardize, like anything else we need to follow WP:COMMONNAME. -Djsasso (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page messages

Our talk page message is large and vulgar. I think it may deter users from sensible use of the talk page. I almost never see any use of the talk page after that notice is put up. We should replace it with a two-line wording which is friendlier to the eye. Indeed we should try and educate users to make constructive suggestions on the talk page, which is rarely done on this wiki. In general, IPs can't make direct changes to En wiki pages, and their talk pages are informative and helpful to the work on the topic page. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which talk page message are you talking about? --Auntof6 (talk) 09:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The many talk pages where a regular editor has deleted some silly or inappropriate comment. As it looks for this particular page:
... but in general it shows without the archive section. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:01, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is why these headers are put on the page, they give links on how to appropriately contribute. -Djsasso (talk) 13:56, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Would the fix here be to have some high level topic specific talk page headers? i.e. History, Sports, Geography, ect. That might make discussions on those topics more likely?--Gordonrox24 | Talk 00:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would just be wasted effort with little benefit. Talk pages aren't used much here because there aren't many editors. Lights and freedom (talk) 04:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would tend to agree with this. Really we started adding these to talk pages more often mostly so admins didn't have to keep deleting vandalized talk pages and if I recall correctly we thought it was more welcoming if someone else stumbled onto the talk page than the typical deleted page message. To be honest we likely don't ever need them on this wiki because there is rarely any talk on talk pages. -Djsasso (talk) 03:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mostly meant that there is no need for topic specific talk page headers. Lights and freedom (talk) 05:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, I was expanding on my thoughts. -Djsasso (talk) 10:52, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Articles

Can someone check the Alutor language and Alutor Numerals articles. I can't make much sense out of them. I think the Numerals article has the wrong title, but I have no idea what's with the Language article... Etoza (talk) 14:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's strange. It is about Algerian Arabic, but it is titled Alutor Numerals. Darubrub (Let me know) 17:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle's rollback does not work on user contribs page

It's a useful Twinkle feature to revert multiple edits of an LTA or a persistent vandal quickly from their user contributions page. However, the feature seems to be broken on Simple English Wikipedia. It would instead redirect me to https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/(article name)&twinklerevert=norm. Is there any fix to this? --*Fehufangą✉ Talk page ♮ 10:53, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template Error Help

As I am going through articles on checks; this page 2021 FIFA World Championship is throwing errors on the template and are visible in the article. I am not familiar with them, so I am asking for help on this. Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 15:49, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good articles, again...

Hello, I just wanted to point out that there are a few articles in the Proposed good articles section. Some of them may be closer to being promoted than others. This is simply a message, so that editors can have a look and add their thoughts on the different candidates...--Eptalon (talk) 20:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the WikiLove feature not exist on this wiki?

That would be a real helpful feature. Why doesn't it exist? SoyokoAnis - talk 15:11, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is any particular reason why, it just doesn't.
I've never used it before, I tried it out, I like how it works, it would be nice to have it here... --Ferien (talk) 15:57, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also wanted this feature here. --Hulgedtalk⟩ 16:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We discussed it and decided not to implement it. If I remember correctly, it was because it requires upkeep and we didn't want that extra burden on our small wiki. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:55, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, and I personally don't see a need for it either, I usually just go to the barnstars page and get the template(s) there anyways --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 23:41, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Enabling Twinkle

Hello I am autoconfirmed and I used twinkle today but I disabled it and I forgot how to re-enable it. Please help me. -Leo (let's talk) (my help) 19:13, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Leo12350: Go to your gadget preferences and you should be able to reenable it. :) --Ferien (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, thanks. BTW I was looking to ask you that on your talk page. Anyways, thanks. -Leo (let's talk) (my help) 19:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anything comparable to Resource Exchange: Resource Request here?

Does Simple English Wikipedia have anything comparable to Resource Exchange: Resource Request on the regular English Wikipedia? Futurist110 (talk) 23:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. We're much to small of a wiki to run something like that.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 23:41, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know if any Wiki other than the English Wikipedia has anything comparable to this? Futurist110 (talk) 03:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately I do not know. I'm not fortunate enough to know more than 1 language. We do have a few editors from other languages who frequent here, maybe they will know. My possibly uneducated guess is that it'll be a no across the board, as nobody can quite match the English Wikipedia's activity level. And certainly that undertaking is resource intensive.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 03:34, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How much further should this article be simplified?

I created and translated this article using Simple English, but do I also need to simplify this article's structure, or what? :

U.S. economic performance under Democratic and Republican presidents

If so, I could do that while keeping the tables in this article intact. Futurist110 (talk) 04:17, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, if necessary, I can outright remove and/or shorten some sections and the intro in this article. Futurist110 (talk) 07:13, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Issues with this page: I don't want to get too far into this, but the page should show population growth, which is very significant in various ways. Even more significant is the effect of WWII on global competitiveness. It's no surprise that Truman did so well, with the main competitors knocked out!! In any event the page is just a data page, but it suggests by implication that the main factor in the economic results is the political leadership. This might be true for some presidents but not most. Suppose a thirteen-year-old reads it. What are they supposed to think about its data? Isn't there an interpretation of how the data makes sense? I think there isn't, but if there is I'd like to read it. If not, why have the page at all? There are things which are so, so important, such as the exporting of manufacture from the U.S. (and the U.K., incidentally) to Asia, the re-entry of China (and Eastern Europe) into the world markets, and goodness knows what else! We should point out some of this. The world is not a level playing field... Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:26, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have now simplified this page further. To be honest, I made it clear that the reasons for this were unclear but this nevertheless appears to be a sufficiently notable topic because it's sometimes discussed in the media. For what it's worth, I personally think that a large part of the reason for the economic overperformance under Democratic US Presidents is that they tend to come to power when the economy is, on average, is in worse shape than for when Republican US Presidents come to power. But that's simply my own unsourced speculation and thus I can't actually include this in this article. Futurist110 (talk) 21:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, there's no question about notability. It's not so much that I want these questions answered, but rather what I think about is the implication that the choices of President were the main issues in determining the U.S. economy. As to unemployment rates, well Johnson did have an aggregate total of 2.7 million serving in Vietnam, (peak was over half a million)!! I don't think they were counted as unemployed!
There's a useful concept "graininess" which argues that the graininess of the world makes most generalisations vacuous. The classic attempt to make sense of amounts of huge information in a few simple ideas was Gibbon's The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Anyway, I think you should caution that much went on is not in the figures, and that how they are interpreted is often debateable. Incidentally, you should put the acknowledgement on the talk page. Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

VIP

Twinkle reports as null when I try to report IP ranges (see my recent diffs). How can I solve this? Darubrub (Let me know) 17:03, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's an issue with Twinkle that will likely be solved when we import from enwiki to solve a few issues in our current system. (I have no idea when that's going to happen but it is probably going to happen soon...) --Ferien (talk) 17:37, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Call for Election Volunteers

Hi everyone,

Would you like to get the right people elected to the Wikimedia Foundation’s Board of Trustees?

Voter turnout in prior elections was about 10% globally. We know we can get more voters to help assess and promote the best candidates, but to do that, we need your help.

We are looking for volunteers to serve as Election Volunteers. You can read more about this role here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/2021-04-29/Call_for_Board_Elections_Volunteers

Election Volunteers should have a good understanding of their communities. The facilitation team sees Election Volunteers as doing the following:

  • Promote the election in their communities’ channels
  • Organize discussions about the election in their communities
  • Translate messages for their communities

Do you want to be an Election Volunteer for Simple Wikipedia or any of the Wiki projects, and connect your community with this movement effort? Check out more details about Election Volunteers and add your name next to the community you will support in this table or get in contact with a facilitator. We aim to have at least one Election Volunteer for Wiki Projects in the top 30 for eligible voters. Even better if there are two or more sharing the work.

If you have any questions or comments regarding this role please reach out to me or any of the board governance facilitators.

Best,Zuz (WMF) (talk) 11:33, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Zuz (WMF)! I'm interested in this role - I am currently looking the guidelines and the requirements for it. I am however, not as active on weekdays, I am more active on weekends, would this affect the role much? Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello つがる, thank you for expressing interest in the Election volunteer role. And no, your availability on only weekends will not affect the role. More than one person can sign up for this role. So everyone can work within the time that works best for them. Regards,Zuz (WMF) (talk) 09:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Afghan categories

I need some help with something. I want to merge Category:Afghan leaders with Category:Afghan politicians (which I just made), but I don't know the best way to do it. Is it okay to put monarchs in the politicians category? If anybody has more experience than me, they can fix it. 2601:640:4000:3170:A92B:B732:D71B:29DF (talk) 20:23, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@2601:640:4000:3170:A92B:B732:D71B:29DF: I don't think it is appropriate to merge, but I've added Afghan leaders as a subcat of Afghan politicians. Regards, --Ferien (talk) 20:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien: Shouldn't it be the other way around? You don't have to be a politician to be a leader. Or does "leader" mean something here other than "a person who leads"? --Auntof6 (talk) 00:24, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The equivalent on enwiki is w:Category:Heads of state of Afghanistan, which is a subcat of w:Category:Afghan politicians. The categories in the heads of state category are similar to the ones we have in Category:Afghan leaders. Category:Afghan monarchs is in Category:Afghan leaders because the monarchs led the country at that stage and so - I think - they are politicians, they are involved in the politics of the country. --Ferien (talk) 10:19, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Medal Table Help

Please see my help request at David de Gea. Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 15:43, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Djsasso: - Thanks for fixing it. I used the template that I thought would work. I am still getting used to them. Thanks for fixing it. Next time, can you please comment and ping so I know. I almost forgot about this request! Thanks! PotsdamLamb (talk) 07:18, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Action: Change the languages on the Log in page

In December and January we had a discussion about Proposal: Change the languages on the Log in page. There was a pretty clear consensus to change, with some details of exactly which languages to include. Then, it dropped of the Simple Talk page. Probably just an automated time limit thing? Anyway, the hold up seemed to be that very few people have the permissions to make the change. I would help out of I could, but I can't. Can this be put in place? Thanks, --Gotanda (talk) 05:41, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The change is easy and can be done in a second. The deciding on the languages is the hard part as Chenzw mentions near the end of that discussion there is no consensus on which languages to include. -Djsasso (talk) 11:03, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gotanda's suggestions seemed fair to me, in my opinion. I agree the current languages are not ideal for a world audience. --IWI (talk) 11:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Gotanda's list at the end. I think the most important languages are English, French, Spanish, Chinese, Arabic, Russian, and Hindi. Naddruf (talk) 02:07, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Chinese Traditional or Simplified? I'm assuming by Chinese it means Mandarin? --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:10, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about Traditional or Simplified, but aren't the different varieties of Chinese written the same? Naddruf (talk) 03:14, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not too sure, I would imagine they would be very similar. I can only speak Cantonese, but listening to Mandrain is way different than Cantonese. Just to give some contex, for Japanese Chinese characters (Kanji), they are read differently than regular Chinese, but have the same characters. Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 01:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion stopped last time as the topic was moved / fell off Simple Talk into the archives. Over the past and current discussion, it seems we have a general consensus on this from many people, but つがる makes a good point about Chinese and we should probably include both to avoid prioritizing one over the other, so that gets us to something like this:
عربى | 中文 (正體字) (简化字) | English | español | français | हिन्दी | Indonesian | русский | Swahili.
Is that OK to go ahead with? Or, anything else to be changed? Thanks all. It's just a login page. People may login on another wiki. But for first time visitors, I think something like this shows a more welcoming face than Esperanto etc.--Gotanda (talk) 02:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gotanda: I support the above suggestion. --IWI (talk) 16:32, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The above is good. --Belwine (talk) 16:35, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have to ask why Indonesian? That does not seem like its on the same level as the others and seems to put an over emphasis on that region by having four asian-based languages (five if you count russia)? Seems like it puts us in the opposite problem of being too asia centric instead of too euro centric. English, Spanish and French while starting in Europe are the main languages for countries around the world not just Europe whereas I can't say the same for Indonesian. I would probably drop both Indonesian and Russian. -Djsasso (talk) 11:31, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I happen to agree with Djsasso --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With just under 200 million speakers and then with roughly mutual intelligibility for most Malaysians for this purpose that makes about 230 million. Four European languages (English, Spanish, French, and Russian) and three/four Asian (Chinese (two scripts) Hindi, Indonesian) seemed not out of line. Africa is relatively lightly represented with Swahili and to some extent Arabic but is also covered by the colonial languages. That was the thinking there. If it has to go, it has to go. If it stays, I guess it should also be localized to Bahasa Indonesia. Too bad this conversation stopped when it was pulled off Simple Talk in the first place. My priority for this proposal was to make the login more inclusive and get rid of the current design which seems more than a little odd and doesn't represent us well. --Gotanda (talk) 05:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I would never be without German, which is one of the two most important languages of science & technology, and is almost the lingua franca of east and central Europe. Don't forget that Arabic covers north Africa pretty well, while none of the native African languages do the job at all well. English (and sometimes Arabic) is the lingua franca of countries below the the northern coast. The argument against such languages as Malaysian is that they have no reach, and virtually no international use. You can't judge these things by population of the country of origin alone. Hindi is probably a better international language than Mandarin. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me for coming in a second time. I think we should do more than I suggested above. We should consider listing each language in English, not in its own script and language. Many will not know that Cymraeg is Welsh, that Gaeilge is Irish, Scots is just a dialect of English, that Ido is goodness what, but not a regular language, that the oriental script is not just Chinese, but Mandarin... and so on. Not only should we cut out some of the nonsense, but list properly in English the links to the world's greatest languages. If that language uses a different script then that can be added in brackets. There really is no upside to listing in scripts which most of out readers cannot decode. Improving the usability of this side-list is important. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean the interwiki links, they are written in their own language so that people who actually can read those languages can find the link to the language they understand. It is important they are in their own language to help users that actually need those languages and can't read English and for some reason ended up on our pages. People who can't understand those languages probably don't need to know what they are links too because they won't go there anyway. -Djsasso (talk) 11:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Macdonald-ross makes a good point as well. How many speakers in a given country is somewhat irrelevant if the languages have little to no reach beyond their own borders which is why I suggested on going with the lingua franca from the countries our stats say our visitors are coming from because those choices would actually be helpful to our readers as opposed to just looking like we are trying to be broad based. As for why the login page is the way it is, what we have is just the default languages from the WMF, they were not chosen specifically for simple. Not sure why they are what the WMF chose for the default but they are. Esperanto I assume is included because it is intended to be the cross-language language but other than that no idea. -Djsasso (talk) 11:04, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I get that transborder reach is more important; having a very large number of speakers in just one or two countries is important enough. I would like to ask you to reconsider this, dj, "just looking like we are trying to be broad based." I have not proposed this for appearances sake. We should be broad based. I think that the languages presented at the login matter. And, that a better selection makes the site more welcoming, more accessible, and more inline with larger Wikipedia goals. As far as number of visitors from country by IP goes, I think that is less useful for reasons I have already outlined in the previous discussion: one, country/ip address does not equate to language of the user; two, just counting the current users is a feedback loop--it's a bit like looking for your dropped keys under lamp post. Making the login more immediately appealing to a greater variety of people may help us get beyond our current reach rather than just concentrating on it. There can be some changes around the edges of the list, but any of the proposed versions of that list would be better than what we have now. It can always be improved later. --Gotanda (talk) 09:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we will have to agree to disagree, I think it is substantially more important to be useful to the people actually using the site rather than just trying to look welcoming to people who may possibly come here. I think that is a detriment to the people who are actually coming here which could lead to the shrinking of our userbase due to not being as welcoming to them. This is where the appearances sake comes in, we are just trying to look welcoming for people who may or may not come here while actively being less welcoming to people who do actually come here. But yes, I think the language being transborder is important because it means more countries reached by that language, thus more of the world being covered by that language, rather than a small single country. -Djsasso (talk) 11:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Looking at the list of countries with visitors, I think we should definitely add Hindi, because India is the country with the second most visits. I think it's reasonable to keep German, but remove Esperanto, as almost nobody uses it. Also add Russian, because Russia is the non-English speaking country with the most visits (after India). I think we can probably remove Italian, but doing that is not necessary. Even if we don't make all the changes as originally proposed, it would be good if we do this. Assuming, of course, that we keep multiple languages on the Login page. Lights and freedom (talk) 17:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll support this. We seem agreed that at least this should be done. Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I can get on board with that. -Djsasso (talk) 20:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
DJ and Mac, several users supported my suggestions. You seem to have changed up the list. Can one of you provide what you now think that list should be so that everyone who weighed in before can have a look and see if they still support or oppose? Thanks, -- Gotanda (talk) 04:30, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can this still be done? Add Hindi and Russian, remove Esperanto, Italian, and maybe Dutch? Lights and freedom (talk) 17:01, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the previous discussion there was a list of languages with pretty strong support. There was support this time as well, but the discussions were spli. Mac ross and dj seem to want something different, but it is unclear what exactly. Can one of you please specify your alternate proposal? It would be good to not let this drop off Simple Talk again and to improve our login page. Thanks, --Gotanda (talk) 01:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Black hole promoted to Good article...

Hello all, I took the liberty and promoted Black hole to Good article. The last few changes were small simplifications, and the otiginal nomination was from last year. Congratulations on all those who contributed. --Eptalon (talk) 07:56, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Great job! SoyokoAnis - talk 02:42, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of scientists

I think List of scientists is too broad, so it should probably be replaced with a set of links to all the lists of scientists in individual subjects: List of biologists, List of mathematicians, List of physicists, etc. Is it okay if I do that? Lights and freedom (talk) 21:39, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lights and freedom: I wouldn't do that, because List of scientists has them grouped by country. That's different from grouping them by field or specialty. You could certainly add links to the other pages to the "Related pages" section of List of scientists. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:41, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I've added the links. If anybody thinks it would be better, I can sort the countries by continent. Lights and freedom (talk) 02:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a few comments on the talk page of the list. Let's agree on who to include first? --Eptalon (talk) 10:09, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Enabling global sysops on this wiki

Hi, I propose allowing Global Sysops to work on this wiki. It is currently not enabled because the community has more than 10 admins/3 active sysops, but I strongly recommend that the community opt-in because they often help in combating spam and vandalism (eg GRP/LTA). As an en.wikibooks admin, I can attest to the work they do and have no issues with them at all. This will also allow stewards to block routine spam/vandalism (which they cannot do now as per the global rights policy). Thanks in advance, and please ping me if you need further input, since I don't watch this page.

P.S: Global sysops won't interfere with normal Wikipedia matters (for instance they do not have access to Special:UserRights) - their role is codified in the policy page and is more or less handling spam or vandalism. This wiki can also use its global rights policy (Wikibooks' version) to make any restrictions if needed (such as not allowing use of editinterface). They're there to help you. Leaderboard (talk) 14:26, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not. If someone is seriously vandalising and no-one can stop it, global sysops can help, and when I am requesting deletions on smaller wikis, I always notice that global sysops are very quick to respond. Thanks for suggesting this Leaderboard, I was thinking about it after I saw your discussion on wikivoyage a few weeks ago! --Ferien (talk) 17:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • If a bunch of admins come here and say "yeah we are swamped and could really use the help" then I think I would be easily persuaded otherwise, however my initial thought is thanks, but no thanks. In our current sysops team I count 3 global sysops, 2 stewards, and a whopping 7 checkusers in addition to another 8 sysops. In my humble opinion, that is plenty of hands to deal with what feels like a relatively manageable level of vandalism on this Wikipedia, and we have many people who are well versed in cross wiki spam and dealing with LTA users. In short, I don't think opting in would hurt the wiki, but I'm not convinced we really need to.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 19:51, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gordonrox24 Very true, and sysops are in different time zones so there is usually a sysop active and ready to stop. SoyokoAnis - talk 02:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Even if that's the case (and I'm not the best person to judge on it, though I did have to flag stewards in the past when trying to handle cross-wiki attacks since no local admin was around), as you noted, GS can still help and I don't see their inclusion as detrimental. If indeed that assertion is true, all that means is that GS will use their powers less. Leaderboard (talk) 07:16, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(Non-administrator observation) On some wikis, the 'Abuse Filter' is used to block people automatically for a few hours at a time until a sysop shows up I think. However as mentioned before, it may be a false positive, so GS is better provided that they can block on time --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 20:32, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@つがる: We do this in en.wikibooks, but that is not related much to the discussion - while global sysops do have abuse filter access, they are not likely to modify filters unless absolutely needed, just like the rest of their rights. Leaderboard (talk) 08:28, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello all; there are more than enough admins on this wiki. These admins are spread across the globe, some in the Americas, some in Europe, a few in Asia, and Australia. Which means: no matter at what time of day you come here, you'll almost always have a chance to get to talk to a sysop. On this wiki, the edit filter will flag suspicious actions, or it may prevent the action from being performed; blocking a user, even temporarily is not something we leave up to automated software. In short, I don't think we need to opt into global sysops...--Eptalon (talk) 20:57, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There are 49 admins on wikivoyage, but they decided to opt into global sysops.
    They would only be here to help with vandalism and spam. And I believe we had well over 20 QD requests the other day and it was quite a long time (several hours) before an admin came online. I'm not expecting to be able to speak to a sysop 24/7 but if there's a vandal who is vandalising lots of pages and causing a lot of issues or a large QD backlog that hasn't been dealt with within a few hours, can't a global sysop help? Although I don't think global sysops would be able to help deal with some QD criteria that isn't vandalism (like enwiki copies) they would be able to help delete pages that are vandalism. --Ferien (talk) 05:59, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Vandalism and spam is never time-critical. As to the QD listing filling up: When I come on in the morning, I regularly clear that log. In the last few weeks, we sometimes had 20-odd entries there. Clearing that log is something comonly done by admins. When was the last time we had a problem with a user going on a vandalism-spree, and the user not being stopped in time? - There's the option to delete all contribs of the user in 1-2 clicks, so the tools are there. Sorry, I really don't see the need...--Eptalon (talk) 08:15, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Eptalon: It depends on what you mean by "stopped in time", but last time I had to flag a steward (who happened to be a simple.wiki admin) to halt an LTA that was continuously reverting pages (and by extension, abusing). Also, keeping this wiki opted-out of GS is detrimental to the work of GS who often it hard to suppress large cross-wiki attacks (some of which involve doxxing), and even stewards for that matter. Leaderboard (talk) 08:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Sometimes the sooner it is dealt with the better. I get what a lot of people mean that it isn't absolutely required but it could help sometimes. As I said I'm not expecting a sysop to be online all the time. It could just be helpful if there were no admins online and action was needed. I thought that others might come round to it like on Wikivoyage but I suppose not. --Ferien (talk) 14:54, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think a wiki with several checkusers and active admins need to opt-in GS. QD listing for some time might not be as fast as other large wikis (like enwiki) could handle but it's still an acceptable speed to fight vandal. Sun8908 (talk) 08:55, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    As a result of this discussion, I'm unfortunately marking this discussion as X mark.svg Not done and would request a suitably trusted user to close this if needed, because I'm not seeing the support needed. Leaderboard (talk) 10:10, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]