Jump to content

Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 151

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

MinT Machine Translation added to Simple English Wikipedia

Hello Simple English Wikipedians!

Apologies as this message is not in your language, Please help translate to your language.

The WMF Language team has added another machine translation (MT) system for Content Translation in your Wikipedia called MinT; you can use MinT machine translation when translating Wikipedia articles using the Content and Section Translation tool.

The WMF Language team provides the MinT service. It is hosted in the Wikimedia Foundation Infrastructure with neural machine translation models that other organizations have released with an open-source license. MinT integrates translation based on the NLLB-200 model in your Wikipedia.  This MT is set as optional in your Wikipedia. Still, you can choose not to use it by selecting "Start with empty paragraph" from the "Initial Translation" dropdown menu.

Since MinT is hosted in the WMF Infrastructure and the models are open source, it adheres to Wikipedia's policies about attribution of rights, your privacy as a user and brand representation. You can find more information about the MinT Machine translation and the models on this page.

Please note that the use of the MinT MT is not compulsory. However, we would want your community to:

  • use it to improve the quality of the Machine Translation service
  • provide feedback about the service and its quality, and ask questions about this addition.

We trust that introducing this MT is a good support to the Content Translation tool.

Thank you!

UOzurumba (WMF) (talk) 17:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC) On behalf of the WMF Language team.[reply]

Again? (talk) 12:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I need help with writing articles


I need help rewriting the Lebanese Civil War article, it's currently just a stub and I want to expand it. So I am asking ya'll to help me out!

User:Yodashenchman/Lebanese Civil War Yodas henchman (talk) 17:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vijay Nagar

Can anyone explain what Vijay Nagar is about. Ive browsed is over a couple time and still have no clue what the subject is. I, talking about at the base pLevel. It is a place, an empire, a concept? I got nothing from the article but questions. Pure Evil (talk) 23:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's about w:en:Jabalpur and is very confusingly written. —Justin (koavf)TCM00:31, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do we let such poorly written articles be published? Isnt there any checking of new articles? Rathfelder (talk) 22:30, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Rathfelder: There's patrolling, but 1) not all articles end up getting patrolled before they roll off of the patrol list and 2) not everyone patrols the same. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:43, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can the patrol list not be extended? Or more people invited to patrol? Or some blockers put on - so, for example, articles arent published without categories or references?
I think in En wiki new articles have to be approved before they are published. Rathfelder (talk) 13:33, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given the size of the user base here, it is not surprising that things slip through. things can sit for years with no one noticing - both poorly written articles and vandalism. We are too few to catch everything. More often than not, much of what I catch days, months, years or even decades later is only caught because the article was flagged in an error category and I happen to notice the issue while cleaning up the other error. Pure Evil (talk) 23:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The only real solution to that is to grow the user base. Given that this wiki has a bad reputation with some EnWP editors, this isn't easy. I have no real numbers, but I think the number of users of this wiki has more or less stayed constant in the last 5-10 years. Eptalon (talk) 10:10, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Creating an article without QD via A1

How do do you create an article without it being quick deleted via A1. (talk) 10:58, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Wikipedia:How to write Simple English pages and Wikipedia:Manual of Style. MathXplore (talk) 11:00, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i will just read en's CSD. (talk) 11:26, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We have a page about CSD but it is called QD. – Angerxiety! 16:43, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
too lomg, did not read. (talk) 13:14, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You've been told which pages to read. If they are too long for you then I think you have to decide if editing here is not right for you. We aren't going to change our policies fr33kman 20:17, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Project page humour

if the community side is in user space, then what is project page humour? (talk) 10:42, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nonexistant... – Angerxiety! 11:16, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So why are those pages tagged as "humour". (talk) 11:21, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which pages exactly please. fr33kman 00:27, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those in Category:Wikipedia humor. (talk) 12:14, 10 August 2023 (UTC) PLEASE REPLY TO ME!!!!! (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"They are a philosopher" (at En-wiki), but I ask is there consensus to say that 'Last name' is a philosopher

Text from English-wiki, "[... 'First-name Last-name'] is an American philosopher. They were born in Ohio. They got their PhD in philosophy from Yale University in 1984. They live in Berkeley, California, with their partner Wendy [...]. In 1990 their book Gender Trouble was published by Routledge. It is considered an important work in modern feminism. In the book [... they] talks about their theory of gender performativity, which is that gender, along with sex and sexuality, is something you "perform" rather than an expression of human biology. "

Is there consensus that one can start article about this topic, and that one would need new consensus to change the article from last name to their.--I will not be starting article, just to have the last name changed (without consensus) to "their".--Rationale: it is okay to mention, one place in article, that "this person uses the pronoun 'their' about " themself/themselves. However, it is (arguably) not simple to understand how "their book", means that the book is actually written by only one person (if I have skim-read the En-wiki article correctly)! -- Regarding my "background": In the past I have read the article about Caitlyn Jenner, and i have no problem reading the article if it uses she/her.-- If this thread is helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:31D:7F35:B44E:A83A:1AD8:F669 (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)--The part about "performativity ...", would have to be simplified, in a wiki-article. 2001:2020:31D:7F35:B44E:A83A:1AD8:F669 (talk) 15:59, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If someone picks pronouns, we use those pronouns for them. Simple as that. The only exception is that we replace neopronouns with the singular they. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:02, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This website can get a consensus for how one article should look like, until there is a new consensus.--Is there consensus for not changing this (following) text, until there is a new consensus?

"Judith Butler is an American philosopher. Butler was born in Ohio. Butler got her PhD in philosophy from Yale University in 1984. Butler lives in Berkeley, California, with partner Wendy [...]. In 1990 the book Gender Trouble was published by Routledge. It is considered an important work in modern feminism."--Point 1: Am I right in that it is possible to have a consensus, that one particular article can have this text.--Point 2: Is there a consensus that this text can stay in an upcoming article - until there is a new consensus?--Attribution - the text is in part from En-wiki (and if point 2 gets consensus, then I will do the attribution thing, somewhat better).--A simple English wiki article should not be confusing - it should be simple.--Point 3: without consensus, I will not start this article (or plan to not do so, and I am not sure that enough established users care - one way or another).--Maybe some sort of middle ground can be found? After all, one can arrive at a consensus for now, and then a new consensus can be simply arrived at later, if the arguments (or maybe implementation of a relevant policies) say so. 2001:2020:347:BA8C:D596:BB4A:6C1C:4471 (talk) 19:54, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
TBH, do not expect to see a consensus. At best one side will just walk away in a huff and let the other win by default rather than fight forever. The only suggestion I can make is try your best to be respectful. If Butler is ok with "her" than "Her PhD" is fine. If she wants specific neopronouns, I would suggest no pronouns at all or the gender neutral they/their. You omitted most pronouns but "her PhD" could be changed to "a PhD" as there is no need to attach the pronoun. If they are the type to demand you call the dragon-kin (or another neopronoun), I would suggest you just ignore the mess of an article you were trying to clean up and go to work on something that is a bit less of a mine field. It is really not worth the stress. Pure Evil (talk) 04:48, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Her Phd", was a mistake on my part (in this thread). Good catch! (talk) 16:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advise/advice, user:Pure Evil!--English in Britain and English in America: Judith Butler = they.--Not sure that English written by government employees in Cyprus, India, Philippines or Nigeria, would ever write "they" about Judith Butler. (This last point, i don't really regard as a reply to user:Pure Evil - it is merely my suspicion of the status of things, outside UK and the U.S.) (talk) 16:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC) Typo:is a business language in many countries, and is used (I dare say). (talk) 16:38, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
English is used in many places in the world. I don't expect all the different countries to agree. As to the use of pronouns, this is also about how people feel. If a woman behaves like a man, and uses the pronoun "he", because she thinks she should have been a man, then this is something many people accept. Some parts of the world are less open towards same-sex relationships, mainly for cultural reasons. In short, write about the subjects that interest you, and if for one of those subjects, you find that an article is missing, you create it. And remember: errors are there to be made, and most articles here can be edited by anyone. If you think you contribute more, creating an account with a username of your choice would porbably be a good idea too. Eptalon (talk) 08:35, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am missing my philosophy story replied against the philosopher story . I didn't plan it before writing as always. Where is it so that I could remember what philosophy I should have delivered without having a doctorate enabling to do so. I believe every word exchanged anywhere as if it is a study material. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 06:57, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is my (current) suggestion for an article: "Judith Butler is an American philosopher. Butler was born in Ohio. Butler got a PhD in philosophy from Yale University in 1984. Butler lives in Berkeley, California, with partner Wendy [...]. In 1990 the book Gender Trouble was published by Routledge. It is considered an important work in modern feminism."
    Followed by something like:
    "Some English-language media, write "they", when those media write about Butler. Those media do not say if Butler is a woman or a man."

    Note: most of the world thinks that Judith is a name for women.--The end of the (suggested) article, now clarifies some of the mystery: Judith is the name of at least one person, that some English-language media does not call woman, man, she or he. 2001:2020:32D:9981:615F:CD83:73FE:6C00 (talk) 19:06, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Judith Butler article.
    At least this thread has put some main ideas on the table for writing articles about other people that Simple-wiki will not call "she" or "he".--(I have no plans, as of now, for changing the Butler article.)--Thank you to all, for excellent advice on how to proceed with articles that my resemble the Butler article. 2001:2020:32D:9981:615F:CD83:73FE:6C00 (talk) 19:16, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I was trying to re read this thread as a saying goes beat the retreat by re read what is causing us feel difficulty before we get traped again in thread. We assume of being traped without realizing we are safe until the thread is unfold. And I don't think someone will make a effort to unfold it just to see us traped in open thread even there is possiblity to show inability by anyone upon asked to unfold the thread and make us traped in it. Here as I re read though at a casual glance I noticed a word contribute and another one attribute and realized this word seems difficult to understand to me. Them I made an effort to try it's meaning then again after seeing a huge article in research program or in psychology somewhere but in Wikipedia itself, I was about to declare myself anable thinking how can I Crack any logic writen bases on hardship of researches by doctorates. Then again I accelerate the speed of catching as per need and went my previously texted story or self declares philosophy way and found the logical discoveries of the gentleman who discovered and taught being ability and being effort are internals the real to realize and utilize and being difficulty an external the devil which was keeping me to search even in Wikipedia my pocket library. My external fear or illusionary belief of not succeeding has put a doubt on power or on the strenght of my efforts and then put a doubt on my ability. So before I would have given up I re read the thread and replaced it with re treat when combined became retreat so one simple lesson that I had learnt if I want to make replace something then I have to opt the "re read" way and when removed re it became "read" ( done or perfect in tense teaching ) so I discovered treat by removing "re" from it and let see how many words does Wikipedia says to explain the "reat" And I enjoy this kind of short searches. "RE" Searches need to be "Searched" first for reinventions or for redefinitions to get the joy of learning and giving back and experiencing it better than previously we had.
    Thank you. A really awesome experience of having knowledge providers company and learning new things for constant betterment with them. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 09:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • My feeling is that we should stick as close as we can to traditional English style. We should not make concessions, nor should we be for or against any life-styles. But when minority life-styles think we should change the way we use our language, that is a bit rich. Macdonald-ross (talk) 18:39, 18 August 2023 (UTC).[reply]
    I started speaking only after my finishing my school education at the age of 18. The fourth language of mine. Don't I represent this minority to deliver what is useful and worty ? In language their is no traditional way to deliver where speaking it is not in any tradition at all. Take asian countries name me a single country where English is native language and conduct a survey which continent of planet Earth needs to be put in survey as case for study. We are sticked in style of presenting and ignoring the most important issues. English is English for learners , they will learn it anyway while exploring Wikipedia. We want everything be perfect in style and they want to stduy to become perfect, is it simple to understand the intention of a wrong person for contribution in knowledge expansion to everyone who are buying wrong education in right prices. My available vs valuable vs achievable contents are good style for explanation even after editors find my writing style bad. See the massage dive into depth. You can't take space craft to reach in pacific ocean's bottom to measure the depth of Mariana tench. If you think your exellent style of flying will take your space craft in fastest span to tench then it is your taught information your experienced. Also before you think space craft has pillots then no. If you think of measuring it's depth without touching the botton then yes you can. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 07:02, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for each continent

Please come to an agreement on the list of countries for each continent (North America, South America, Europe, Asia, Africa, Oceania). An IP has been adding additional countries. Some of these are clearly wrong, like Texas and Catalonia, but it does need to be discussed because there are varying interpretations. For example Aruba is part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, but is essentially a separate country than the Netherlands. The Cook Islands are sort of part of New Zealand, but mostly their own independent country. Another question is if French Guiana should be listed as a country in South America, even though it's a region of France and definitely not a country. Or you could list "France" as a country in South America, which would be weird. (talk) 16:43, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that both the Cook Islands and French Guiana are categorized as "countries", but Aruba is not. These are just examples, there's a lot of other countries in the same situation. (talk) 17:03, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you've just found out why it's not so easy to agree on a set list of countries! Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't the UN have such a list? If not try something like the Foreign & Commonwealth Office or the US State Dept. fr33kman 18:21, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I guess we'll have to do what other 'official' sources do, wing it and hope we don't piss too many people off. We can't be 100% right 100% of the timer. No one is. fr33kman 21:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The main problem here is that there is no universally accepted list of countries. Each country is "defined" by others recognizing it. For the most part, countries can not agree with each other when it comes to most things. There is also things like "China". Both the PRC and ROC claim to be the one true China. As they are the only China, to accept one of them, a county has to refuse the other. One country actually refuses both.. There are a host of countries which are recognized by many other countries which are not recognised by the UN. Trying to decide which group's opinion on what is a country is an unwinnable debate. As such, I think any country that sees a general degree of recognition as an independent country qualifies for the group although if there is ample evidence of them being unrecognized (ROC) they also fall into the unrecognized countries category. (while generally seen as an independant country, they are often not recognized as one) Pure Evil (talk) 19:59, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Country", "state" and "nation" are contested terms. I think for categorising things by continent we should put location first, even if the place is legally part of a country in a different continent. If I was looking for stuff in the Caribbean I would like Aruba to be included, and not to be told it is in Europe. Rathfelder (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is about the lists on the continent articles. Each has a list of countries. 2607:F140:400:A000:F936:2942:453A:F6AD (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Locating a place on a continent should be fairly straight-forward. Check the map, see what continent it is on and list it there. For places like Russia and Turkey list them in Europe and Asia. Aruba would deffo be listed in North America (I think) Locate places by continent not political boundaries fr33kman 21:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the point, the point is if something like Aruba counts as a country. 2607:F140:400:A000:F936:2942:453A:F6AD (talk) 21:17, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you'll find that the discussion is about continents and not what constitutes a country. fr33kman 21:22, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What? I'm the one who made the original post and the question is what constitutes a country. (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I've misread it then. I thought it was about which continent a place (country or not) should be listed as being in. If you're trying to define "country" then there's no acceptable answer. If the UN and the international community can't agree thern we have no hope. fr33kman 21:50, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of our country categories are really about location, not about nationality. Rathfelder (talk) 07:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we should categorise limited recognition states and countries in one category, achieving NPOV seems impossible. (talk) 19:25, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We need to use judgement. Categories where nationality is important may need to be treated differently from those - geographical, for example - where location is more significant. And NB colonies have not always been part of the colonising nation. Rathfelder (talk) 19:31, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But there is no standard for what a country is, so we can not achieve NPOV, that is my point
Folks, I understand that there is disagreement on what constitutes a country, but we have to agree on something. I understand that the goal of Wikipedia is to have as accurate information as possible, and if the articles are just going to have random nonsense on them, we might as well remove the lists of countries altogether. The article for Oceania currently lists Hawaii as a country. Normally I would revert such edits, but as we haven't agreed on what the lists should include, I don't feel qualified to do so. It would be imposing my own opinions on this whole website. Maybe it's better to have one list of countries and one list of dependent territories? Or is that not simple? 2607:F140:400:A000:2506:4BFF:E6AD:C730 (talk) 16:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Hawaii and French Guiana, along with several others, are an interesting case. They are an integral part of their country, but within a different continent. These might need to be in a separate category or at least have a few words of explanation. 2607:F140:400:A000:2506:4BFF:E6AD:C730 (talk) 16:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe one list for both? (talk) 17:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I dont understand what you mean Rathfelder (talk) 10:37, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A list for both unrecognised states and fully recognized countries. (talk) 12:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Categories have to cope with uncertainty. Perfection is the enemy of improvement. Rathfelder (talk) 10:46, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On the topic of Aruba, it is quite similar to, say, Scotland. Aruba is a member country of the constituent country Kingdom of the Netherlands where Scotland is a member country of the constituent country the United Kingdom. Aruba is not a part of the Netherlands just as Scotland is not a part of England. Netherlands is not the same as the Kingdom of the Netherlands. IIRC, New Zealand is also a constituent country so the island nations that are a part of it would also be separate countries. this would not apply to French Giana as it is a territory of France similar to Guam and Puerto Rico being territories of the US and not independent countries. Pure Evil (talk) 21:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This logic works fine where issues of nationality are key, but not so well for categories relating to geography or history. The hills of Aruba are not in Europe, though happily the hills of Scotland are in the UK. But before 1707 Scottish people are not British people. Rathfelder (talk) 22:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As countries are political divisions, geography has little bearing. China is not a country, it is an area. PRoC is the country (and/or RoC). These are totally different things. China should never be put into a country cat. Historical countries would fall into one of two categories - still existing or former countries. These are distinctive with effectively no cross over. In cases such as Russia, which is current and former, the former is usually listed as a separate article. Overlap can happen, but it is rare and handled case by case. Aruba is sticky as it is a political entity and a geographic island entity. The article needs to cover both entities and as such is a country under Netherland control, a country in North America and a geographic part of North America. the categories need to track it each way as different people will look for the article in their own way. A subject will not always match all the steps of the cat tree. they should match either the steps which people will find it or the maintenance steps used to track it. For example, Jerome Bettis falls under Geography of North America. Why? Bettis is a former Pittsburgh Steeler. They are under the team category. The team is in the Pittsburgh category, Pittsburg can be tracked to both settlements and geography of Pennsylvania. The geography of PA is tied to Us and then NA geography. Is Bettis a geographic feature in North America? no. Is it likely a person looking for similar articles will start with Pittsburg and work down to the players? very likely. that is how I picked Bettis for his example actually. Started in Pittsburg, worked my way down and picked a player. I then worked my way back up just to see where it went.
As to the fact that Scots were not Brits in 1707... and your point is? If there were a simple wikipedita in 1706, Scots people would not have been in category:British people. I fail to see how this has any bearing on anything... Polish people are not Japanese people nor are they listed as such. Maybe 300 years from now that could change, but right now that is not the case. Pure Evil (talk) 23:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why sir Newton didn't realize the gravity while urinating or while sitting on commode or while walking on road ? Did he survive without all these with zero activity until the apple made him realize it when he was lying beneath the tree ? This question of mine is not available in Wikipedia. I hope I'll get it answered by you. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 03:23, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Our categories include historical articles. We cant just use current categories for countries.Rathfelder (talk) 10:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply] ┌─────────────────────────────────┘
FWIW - the list of countries as recognized by the United States of America is maintained by the United States Department of State. That list can be found here (Note that it changes frequently so list the date you are using). The United Nations list is available here. I have noticed that English Wikipedia is not a well maintained source for country information. My suggestion would be to pick either the USG or the UN as a source. The main points of contention are going to Kosovo, Taiwan, and Palestine.
There is a Geographic List of Countries on the last page of the report U.S. Overseas Loans and Grants: Obligations and Loan Authorizations. Also, there is a List of transcontinental countries over at English Wikipedia --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is not any globally accepted lsit of countries, we can't achieve NPOV, but we should get the closest we can to reaching NPOV. (talk) 19:37, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One strike issue

Per this edit, the person editting from the IP address admits to being a banned En.wiki user. Our policy is to be open to second changes but to be cautious. As such we have a rule to grant them a chance to continue editing but with only one strike. Looking at the editing pattern and talk page of this person, I feel they have violated our trust by disruptive editing. Looking at their talk page and their RfD request on Simple talk for the page WP:Cabels that they created shows that they created the page with an eye on it being RfD'd and claim such an event as being an achievement. They are clearly editing in a disruptive manner and the community needs to decide what should be done. Pure Evil (talk) 23:46, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I wrote this policy iirc and the one strike is meant to "possibly" allow the editor to have a 'second chance' here. If the person is banned from another Wikipedia the admin can ban them here with no warning whatsoever. If their action of the banned site is obviously blatant vandalism then you don't need to give a one strike chance you can ban them directly. It's in cased when there may have been good faith edits and the user got banned on the other wiki and an admin here maybe considered it harsh. Let me know it you have questions.fr33kman 16:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But i am not meant to vandalise here, it is just that my pages end up problematic because i am a newbie. (talk) 15:51, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hate to flog a dead horse here, but if you name a username then someone could mentor you. I would be will to mentor you, but not whilst you IP chould change without warning. You keep saying you want to be part of the community, while all community edits have userids. Just sayin' is all. fr33kman 23:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe take to an admin here and get some help or advice. fr33kman 16:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the past, we had many non-vandal one-strike cases, so I don't think the user is an exception. Please understand that nobody can be a newbie forever, and such excuses cannot be accepted forever. MathXplore (talk) 07:03, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(Note) Related AN discussion can be found at special:diff/8993194. MathXplore (talk) 07:04, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Eukaryotes?

I feel like there needs to be significantly more articles about eukaryotes on here, I propose a wikiproject, but i dont have a user page to make a subpage for the wikiproject. (talk) 18:08, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think a single article on the topic of eukaryotes (as a group) in sufficient. Individual groups of eukarotyes can be made but it's going to be a job for you. If you've not noticed we all pick our topics and edit them. Create a user account. You seem to want to be a regular editor here so give us a name to call you by. It's more community oriented as well. :-) btw: very, very few wikiprojects become successful here, fyi fr33kman 02:04, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It depends what you mean by eukaryotes. The readership is mostly schoolkids. It's allowed to have pages way beyond their syllabi but maybe not helpful. Wikiprojects are basically dead letters here. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:20, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Eukaryotes overall. I am already expanding the field of articles on that topic, for an example, see Cryptista. (talk) 09:26, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It would be more helpful to the readership (which is not mostly schoolkids btw) if you focused on making Eukaryotes into a good or very good article. Making hundreds of pages on individual cells is less helpful. fr33kman 18:47, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note though, that maing an article into a Good or Very Good article is a lot of work. Since we are working on this as a community, the rules say that it cannot be done by one editor alone. And no, before you start complaining: We are not limiting ourselves to schoolchildren, we are limiting ourselves with the language we use. This does not affect the subjects covered. --Eptalon (talk) 20:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Me? Complain? When? :p I know it takes multiple people to edit a GA or VGA, but I'm trying to give advice on how to contribute on a comprehensive article rather than creating hundreds of stubs. fr33kman 20:29, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do we have the rule that more than one person needs to work on the page for GA or VGA? QuicoleJR (talk) 17:33, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've always wondered that also. If you write a GA from start to finish and it fits all requirements except that one why should it not be accepted. fr33kman 17:38, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because nobody is perfect. (talk) 10:40, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good one?

Hey, Bakhos's here, so im working with my draft page named "BitView" (a youtube alternative) in my user, should i move to BitView article? Bakhos2010 (talk) 09:52, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Bakhos2010: I don't see any evidence of notability. Please look at WP:Notability and WP:Reliable sources for information on how to show and support notability. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:10, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: Alright, i added a one reference Bakhos2010 (talk) 16:34, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But is it an RS? (talk) 16:54, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah? Bakhos2010 (talk) 05:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It needs to follow WP:RS. (talk) 21:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bakhos2010: The two references cite a blog and a YouTube video. Neither would be considered reliable. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
tbh, Auntof6 was being very kind. The subject of the article is a version of Youtube from 14 years ago. Other than possible nestalgia, it offers nothing in the current world. There is noting to set it apart from any other video platform. If anything, it is a weaker version of your basic video sharing platform. As to RS, neither of the added references is close to being reliable. One is a blog post from the developers and the other is a random Youtube review. Neither of these are close to meeting the standards for intendant coverage from a reliable source. You would need in-depth coverage from several major news agencies and/or tech magazines to begin to show RS coverage, they would need to be writing about the newsworthy ways this company is taking market share away from Youtube and how it is revolutionizing video clip streaming in the 21st century. Pure Evil (talk) 07:29, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see it ever meeting notability requirements. fr33kman 17:28, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can the stub tag go before the navboxes?

On some articles like Lake County, Illinois, the stub tag is after the navboxes and before the authority control box. This makes it look bad because there is a gap between the boxes, but it also makes it harder to see the stub tag (because it has to come after the infobox). Could the stub tags be moved earlier in the articles? Kk.urban (talk) 06:09, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The stub templates are supposed to go at the very end, even after the categories. IMO, the info in the navboxes is more important than the fact that the article is a stub (which you can see from the size of the article anyway). You can see en:Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Layout#Order_of_article_elements, item #4, for more info on order of "end matter". Auntof6 (talk) 06:34, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess that's okay, but on the short stubs with an infobox, moving the stub template earlier would not affect the placement of the navboxes, because the navboxes always appear below the infobox, but the stub template can appear on the side of the infobox. Right now it just leaves a lot of white space.
  • Is there some bot that can move the stub templates after authority control on every article? These were added/created en masse, so there are hundreds or thousands of articles with the stub between navboxes and authority control.
Kk.urban (talk) 06:40, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The level of inconsistency around here is stunning. People do whatever they want when it comes to formatting. they like to say to do things like En does, and then do what ever they feel like most of the time. And of course there is the policy to follow the way en does things unless we don't since we are not en. The article you picked is a nice example. It has been a violation of the rules since 2015 and nothing has been done about it. Also, while a number is attached to an article, there is no way a user will see that and know the article is a stub. That is completely wrong. regular users do not see the size of an article and even if they did, the number can vary wildly by the use of infoboxes and nav boxes. A 3K article could be all prose or a single line with a ton of bloat. Pure Evil (talk) 07:26, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Templates above the "Authority control (thingy)", is good/better/best.--Also, there is one advantage of putting stub-tag above other templates: it sends an important signal (without delay) - 'Please add (okay) text to the article, and make other improvements'. 2001:2020:301:5AEE:CCDC:9042:34F3:12AE (talk) 18:38, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this. I saw somebody add a second stub tag to an article because the stub tag was too far down for them to see it. Kk.urban (talk) 18:40, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Kk.urban, good point.--IRL, it can happen again and again, to users that add Templates or it can happen 'again and again' to users that try to do cleanup (at the very end of a wiki-article).--If this post was helpful, then fine (not sure that I will re-visit this thread). 2001:2020:301:5AEE:CCDC:9042:34F3:12AE (talk) 18:59, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should keep it the same as enwiki, so that changes don't have to be made when we bring articles over from there. But if you want something different, you can propose a change to the MOS. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:41, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • A stub here and a stub on the English wiki often tend to be two entirely different things. There, it is a short article likely because there is little to write about the subject while here it is small likely becaue no one got around to writing all the info available. We often just copy over a huge infobox and simplify part or all of the intro section and leave the rest for later. Over there, this tends to result in a short ompact article. Here, it is a huge white space caused by that infobox leading down for a full page or more until we get to a nav template going from side to side. This can happen on En, but it is very rare. Here that huge blank space is very common. Their putting the stub template at the end puts it at the bottom of the page, our doing it can put it a couple pages past the end of the article where is is not noticable. And for us, the stub is more likely to be useful as our stubs are more a lack of manpower than a lack of knowledge. People can actually expand the stub they find here. they probably won't but it could happen. Hope for the best. IMO. the stub tag should be at the end of the body of the article, before any large block of white space. This way it can be seen by both users and editors... so many times I toss on a stub tag only to notice someone else did it two pages of infobox white space later... Pure Evil (talk) 00:18, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I put the stub template after the categories, problem solved. (talk) 20:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have two categories: Category:Santiago de Chile and Category:People from Santiago which match neither the article nor each other. That doesnt help anyone to understand. Can we agree which we prefer and line them all up? Rathfelder (talk) 14:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why we are naming categories in Spanish is beyond me. the category name should be in English (which would match the English wiki name and not the Spanish wiki name). As there are at least 2 Santiagos, it could be useful to disambig the name, but this one does seem to the the most common use so just a tag on the cat itself to denote that it is for Santiago, Chile would be enough. Pure Evil (talk) 21:05, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Pure Evil: We use Spanish (or whatever language) for the official names of things, especially when there isn't a more common English name. In this case, "Santiago de Chile" is a common way of referring to the city. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What about Category:Santiago, Chile as on English Wikipedia? Kk.urban (talk) 21:02, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I dont think we have to anglicise the names of places. But I do think it is important that the names of articles and categories match. Rathfelder (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike, say Category:Brest, France or Category:Worms, Germany? Or the the En. category: Santiago, Chile which matches the name of the actual article it is meant to cover? Why is Santiago, Chile in Santiago de Chile and not Santiago, Chile? Why do we use Spanish naming conventions for categories on an English variant wiki when we do not use them for naming the actual articles? As you are the entirely of the reason for this, why did you chose to not follow the standard set by the English wiki on how to name this place and base it on a foreign language? Pure Evil (talk) 22:18, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why am I the entirely of the reason for this? Rathfelder (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
recheck the automatically added indents. That reply had nothing to do with you. It was a reply to the person who created the Spanish named category and who is the only name on that 2013 category. Your reply is two tiers below it. as an aside , I do not know how yours is a reply to KK urban as nothing you wrote has to do with his post.. Pure Evil (talk) 21:21, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template sandbox resetting

Can Hazard-Bot (talk · contribs) reset Template:Template sandbox just like it resets Wikipedia:Sandbox? Kk.urban (talk) 17:10, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend thaythat was a typo of that. (talk) 19:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC) you ask the creator of the bot to code it to do that. (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

English fluency and simplicity

It might be good for some users to watch the edits of User:Sandeep Manikpuri. I'm not requesting action against them, but rather users to review their edits and adjust them to make sure they help the articles. Kk.urban (talk) 00:13, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sandeep Manikpuri (talk · contribs) Link for ease on navigation. Pure Evil (talk) 00:21, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many users can be found in the world who learnt new languages with the help of Articles only. Some of them as thier third language some as fourth or as they should have felt in time. Many user's concern of worry is making contents available to those specially villagers who know only those languages in which knowledge in articles is either less available or not available. Improvements definitely will come on the way with other's users help but perfection will never in some users cases where they might have learnt what to express rather how to express. Readers are infinite number stars and users are limited starts in the stock. Thanks Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 00:47, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is the lesson anyone can get and transfer to others for lifetime. I learnt it while being on journey of learing. We as per my experiences never know what 5th page is containing and stuck thinking of 1st about being successful or not if we try. Miracles and new subjects of Interest join us later and we forget the every nigativity and pain that once hold us back before entering provided that we visualize the opportunity and blessings in much prior to experiencing them. Even if we have false faith but a true intenstion of learning then bringing the joy of learning and satisfaction of knowledge sharing wil come to us without pre writen and pre shaped form. If I say I learnt my fourth language in articles with heavy mind in beggening but had faith of succes and commitment to live the joerney and after achieving this one I learnt 4 more languages where I never even been to learn one to one as becoz I got my knowledge bank at my pocket. That is the reason I declared one simple to understand moral in life start with the " Available" by using your" Valuable" and make anything you want be your " Achievable" once you got the company of both other than one secret valuable the "Me". Fisrt Available is my knowledge provider second valuable is my time and I started with another avaliable me who realized it's worth later and then it is not a big issue to make any thing "achieving". But true achieving lies in giving nothing brings winning like happiness than that of "giving" what I earned in all these life experiences.
My gratefulness to my provider at my home anytime aything which made me share something worth living. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 07:41, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rail traction engine and road locomotive

Are these edits helpful?

  1. Special:Diff/9005322
  2. Special:Diff/9005326

Kk.urban (talk) 02:58, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would hazard to say no. In the first one , the listed items are types of locomotives. With the exception of Engine, the other two are not other names for a locomotive. The same can be seen in the article on tractors. those items are types of tractors but they are not other names for a tractor.
For a similar example, consider: "An automobile, also known as a sedan or a station wagon, is ..." Now while those two are types of cars - all sedans are cars but while a car can be a sedan, not all cars are sedans. The sedan is a type of car. It is an item that can be described as a car but it is not another name for "car". In this case, Locomotive = car and rail traction engine = sedan. Pure Evil (talk) 03:17, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is quite true that vehicles are called by different names in different places, and even at different times in the same place. In the UK people call the things cars which in the USA are called automobiles. It is probably helpful to acknowledge this, as it may be a source of confusion. Rathfelder (talk) 08:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not the case of an item being called different names in different places. It is about subtypes of an item being listed as the same thing. "An Automobile, also called a car" is a different thing than "An automobile, also known as a station wagon". Auto = car and Station wagon is a subset of Auto, but Auto is not the same as station wagon. And US usage tends to go to "car" for common use. Pure Evil (talk) 23:48, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"This page was last changed on 28 May 2021, at 19:28." It has no visible categories. Because it has hidden categories it does not appear on any lists of uncategorised articles. I have repeatedly raised this issue and nothing has been done about it. I would like to know how this problem can be fixed. Rathfelder (talk) 09:11, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd recommend that you do what you think best. Fix it how you like. fr33kman 17:32, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can't imagine how any individual user can fix this, unless they can change the way Special:Uncategorizedpages works. Kk.urban (talk) 17:40, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So how can we get that changed? Rathfelder (talk) 17:52, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It'd have to be a sysadmin issue via metawiki I think fr33kman 20:10, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Who are sysadmins? (talk) 20:49, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How do we do that? Rathfelder (talk) 21:30, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The system administrators are the employees whole work for and get paid by WMF to code the MediWiki software. It is only those fine people who can make fixes like this. You need to find then on [[m:System administrators]]. I'm not such how you raise a bug report (I've never done it before) but I'm sure one of those people can offer more advice. fr33kman 23:41, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But wikipedia is not perfect, nor complete, see en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a work in progress. (talk) 10:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can fix individual articles as I find them. I want to know how we can stop this happening, and find what may be a large number of articles without visible categories. Rathfelder (talk) 17:41, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The world is a challegenge, just deal with everything life throws at you(sorry if I did not use simple english). (talk) 20:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixing it would require either a total rewrite of large parts of the system by the developers (unlikely) or ,even more unlikely, for every article to be patrolled correctly with in-depth attention throughout. There is a sufficient workforce of people to ensure this happening without locking down all article creation which we do not have the manpower to do without the backlog killing us. Best we can do is keep our eyes open and correct things as we find them. Pure Evil (talk) 23:41, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It wouldnt be very demanding to set an automatic rule that articles cant be published without visible categories. Rathfelder (talk) 07:41, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not something that sysops can fix. This is an issue with MediaWiki's categorization system. — *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 10:48, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It doesnt happen with English Wikipedia. Rathfelder (talk) 15:35, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


A desease starts to show in a human body with an unnoticed or an uncured difficultly in time thus gradually resulting in the worst possible stage a human ever can get. Discussions are welcomed for as below,

Q. When does warning of the desease start to show? When it does, to whom does it start to show ? To A. Paitent 2. Hematology reader 3. Computed topography ( Obviously operater , no Radiologist sits full time in radiation) no dimensional limit to view 4. Electro cardiac reader 5. General practionar 6. Neighbour 7. The DM/DNB or any other super speciality will examine. 8. Something else in circle 9. Someone else in circle 10. Need disscussions 11. None of the above. # Useful Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 02:29, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12: Taking or giving medical advice online is asinine and potentially deadly. If you are experiencing medical issues see your GP or a local specialist and discuss the issue with them. Do not use the internet to diagnose your problems. This entire issue is moot and not within the scope of this site. Pure Evil (talk) 05:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This was not the topic in medical. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 06:12, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Taking or giving educating advice too is potential killer. Be it an issue of "Language protocol" or an "Intelligence protocol" will not be limited to San Fransisco but will be sent to Washington for sure. A learner and a teacher know well language is no bar to join each other for growth and human welfare. Needing perfection before allowing someone is a waste of time, money and technology and I know how valuable they are if wasted asset belongs to Wikipedia. It's available at every home that is enough .Jimmy Wales needs nothing else. He already had put his asset the knowledge much before. I had no mobile phone when I was student and Wikipedia didn't had android that time but now we both got what once lacked in year 2006.
|| Readers are infinite stars and users are limited stars in stock ||
A reason far bigger than any excuses.
. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 06:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello all
Wikipedia is not a doctor. No matter what the disease or condition is: there is no guarantee that the information in Wikipedia is correct, or complete, or that it applies to the specific case. In the end, there is a reason why studies of medicine last several years at university, and that doctors go through a number of stations at hospitals. Wikipedia can give hints and pointers, but it cannot replace the advice of a doctor who had seen the patient. Also: the questions asked are specific to the condition, and likely vary by patient. In short, do not use Wikipedia, when you need to consult a doctor. Eptalon (talk) 06:47, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How will I order medicine from thousands km away ? I was here to write and improve. My writing never lie. I think of others lives and well being. I had given many useful writings that may be used for better described information. I write what is needed and I need what is written. I'm a villager where not a tea stall is available but Wikipedia is. Thats the real asset. And I'm the only person who speaks 5 languages in village and still I'm learning new ones. Reason why I am sharing at last is your need nothing to expand but an inhanced and strategic aproach to reach every corner of earth. No physical movement is needed as already you are present in every mobile except those rural areas and I think coverage of most geographic area. "If Wikipedia understand my languages then believe you will talk to every dialect of English here. Simple is character and Skill is hard. I gave my hardship on learning it by being a simple character. Now it's called soft skill. And English is my 4th languag. Never mind it was good experience of being a sole writer among all editors. 🙏 Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 07:14, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also as you said these all are illusion then how can I get the real Encyclopedia back in my mobile? Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 07:16, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not for medical diagnoses, this should be put in WP:NOT. (talk) 10:52, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
People have asked me about medical issues lots over the years. I've always told them I don't do online diagnosis and to see your own local doctor. fr33kman 15:05, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I totally agree. (talk) 08:36, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer is linked from NOT. Its core message is that Wikipedia is not a doctor nor should it ever be considered / pretend to be a source of medical advice. Pure Evil (talk) 09:18, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The core situation: We are not qualified to decide treatments or diagnoses on WP. That applies to even the few who do have medical qualifications. The basic reason is that we do not see the patient. Secondly, most of us are not qualified in any event. Sandeep (above) needs to accept that we cannot go further than we do. There is already a huge amount of detail on big En wiki, and they may have enough qualified people to deal with it. I know that, in the early days of En, medical students in the U.S. were doing most of the work as preparation for their own degrees. So a lot of their stuff really is reliable. But it's a big mistake to confuse theory with actual patients! That's where the experience of seeing patients counts. Just a reminder of what we all know, namely that our species with its vast numbers, has extraordinary variability. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We are neither in an operation theatre nor in medical consulting room. A qualified or a responsible medical professional can not ask in web right before operating a human body nor the human body itself can do. Providing suggestions in such situation to the doctor by patient lying unconscious is quietly similar to asking infertility procedure and maternity tips to the father by his son before he starts his married rituals and procedures. The logical proof for their being right for asking and providing here is no need to explain or clearify as no one is better qualified for medical advice or surgery by the doctor, no one is better qualified to guide on married or family planning than the father, no one is better qualified to tell the experiences and symptoms of a deseases than a paitent in operation theater. Realizing this facts true have we seen anyone using their most qualified and reliable source of information for getting knowledge in above events ? If not then why not as per protocol set for providing? This hall is not a reader's examination hall Istead this is writer, editor hall of publication house for content creation ideas to help their nexy edition book readers to perform better in upcoming examinations. Now the book reader will not call the publication house in middle of examination hours to ask for any help in answering the questions. Is it ? Here publication house is qualified for providing all the tuition, have we seem any case of this too ? I am not qualified for anything but as a Wikipedian I have opportunity, knowledge and everything I could ever have except the qualification. I am utilizing this opportunity among those who are best in staring and creating. Discussion leads to development thus I can say if a person can not achieve the development alone then he can do discussion in community to achieve the development. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 15:00, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Medical pages

I'm going to try and improve pages that are medical in nature. I have a question; should I use American English or English English names (i.e.: anaesthesiologist or anaesthetist, paracetamol or acetaminophen)? fr33kman 05:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Fr33kman: Either is OK as long as 1) it's consistent within the article and 2) you keep the current version in existing articles unless there's a good reason for changing it. You could also make note of different terms, for example by saying something like "Physicians prescribe acetaminophen (also called paracetamol)." -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's interesting that you used acetaminophen first as that is the chemical name of the drug, whereby paracetamol, although more known globally, is the generic name. If you took a slip of paper into a chemist in Turkey with acetaminophen on it you'd get the right drug, with paracetamol on it who knows? fr33kman 15:54, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NB physician in UK means something different than what it means in the USA. Rathfelder (talk) 09:37, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:18, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, physician means the same in both. You may be thinking specific job titles such as in the UK I am a general practitioner whereby in NA I'd be a family physician, or in the US one could be an "internist" whereas in UK "internal physician". But anywhere English is spoken a physician is a physician is a physician; as long as you graduated from a WHO recognized medical school that is. (Don't get me started on Naturopathic "physicians" ie.: the ND, lol {joking}) The reason I'm asking is that most English speaking medical schools use the British model of training. North America graduates get an MD/DO(In USA only) and in the rest of the world it's either a country specific thing i.e.: MUDr, huisarts, a local NA specific MD program (for North Americans who didn't get into a NA school or else it's the British/Commonwealth/Middle-East MBBS/MBChB etc... Also I'm wondering about our audience. Do most of our readers come from Commonwealth countries or from non-English speaking places trying to learn English?? (I don't think we ever sorted this question out did we?) If we can determine who our audience is I'd be willing to go around and change all the articles to one standard of spelling (yes, lots of work, I know, or a smart bot) fr33kman 15:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it'd be better to have a site-wide standard rather than a page-wide standard. Doctors and nurses get confused as well. I had a patient show up to the nurse-prescriber's clinic asking for Tylenol-3s and she was lucky I was there and could tell her he means Co-codamol-30's. Most UK docs I know have no clue what acetaminophen is and most US docs have no clue that paracetamol is the same thing. BTW: paracetamol is the more globally known name for it. Check the WHO list of essential medicines. Which brings up the point of should we use the name used by the WHO list of essential medicines[1] and type local names in parentheses? fr33kman 15:26, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At the beginning of the page, I would suggest doing something like "thing A (also known as thing B). For this topic in particular, I would lean towards acetaminophen for the following reasons:
The vast majority of searches for N-acetyl-para-aminophenol call it "acetaminophen." Chamaemelum (talk) 16:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I spoke to my gf (a DPharm) and apparently acetaminophen is the pharmaceutical name. fr33kman 18:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest that, unless the local name is globally accepted as the correct name, we use the "scientific name" with an "also called <local names>" format. This is generally the standard for taxonomy based articles already as well as many medical articles (A Myocardial infarction, also commonly called a Heart attack, ...) Pure Evil (talk) 20:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the UK surgeons and physicians are two different things. Physician here is a much more specific thing. Both are called doctors. Rathfelder (talk) 20:28, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As a UK doctor (physician) I can tell you that in all countries surgeons and physicians are two differeent things. No surgeon would ever call themselves physician and no physician would ever call themselves surgeon. As to the title doctor, in the UK only physicians call themselves doctor. Surgeons are always called Mr or Miss (unless they have a PhD but the surgeons version of a PhD [an MD or DM in the UK] is a MSurg). In the UK an MD (Doctor of Medicine) is a higher doctorate (higher than a PhD) that doctors attend grad school and do research to obtain. The MSurg (Master of Surgery) is equal to the MD and is what surgeons go to grad school to get. A US MD degree is a professional doctorate and not a PhD. BTW: My medical degree is a MBChB and is a double bachelors degree in medicine and surgery. fr33kman 20:41, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I just tend to giggle to myself when I see a person with a PhD in Nursing... Doctor nurses just do not seem right.. And yet I see nothing wrong with an NP = Nurse practitioner / Nurse doctors. I have had a dozen of them and got along better with them than the MD they worked under every time. Pure Evil (talk) 23:45, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the medical world nonmedical doctors are not encouraged to call themselves doctor. In the UK it is forbidden for a nurse with a PhD to call themselves doctor. Not so much in the US. In the UK we have just recently started with prescribing nurses and physician assistants (we call them physician associates) fr33kman 01:01, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The English wikipedia uses Physician as the parent category for all medical doctors outside the UK and its affiliates. From a simplification point of view we should probably call them all Doctors, but of course that is ambiguous. Rathfelder (talk) 07:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As the term is ambiguous, it is the opposite of simple. Anyone with a PhD can use to title Doctor. In 7th grade, I had a teacher who was a doctor. She had her PhD in reading education. Jill Biden is a doctor of education.. I wouldnt trust the medical opinion of either. There is no requirement to know anything about medicine to use the title Doctor. Any PhD is enough to qualify. A physician is a physician. A surgeon is a type of physician. A doctor could be a physician or the could be a middle school reading instructor or an expert on archaeology. (The fictional Dr. Henry Walton "Indiana" Jones, Jr.) Pure Evil (talk) 09:09, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the UK a surgeon is not a type of physician. That is why English Wikipedia uses the term medical doctors for the UK. Rathfelder (talk) 19:10, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Doctor is a Greek word meaning teacher. It is why those with a doctorate may call themselves 'doctor'; because a PhD was initially a license to teach at a university. Why medical doctors in the UK may call themselves doctor is because it is what we do, we doctor (ie: we teach our patients what is wrong with them) for a living. My bank statement is addressed Mr. Fr33kman because I don't have a PhD so I am not socially a doctor. fr33kman 00:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I thought Doctor was the word for healer and wise man throughout the universe. Are you saying River lied to us? Pure Evil (talk) 02:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Middle English doctor (“an expert, authority on a subject”), doctour, from Anglo-Norman doctour, from Latin doctor (“teacher”), from doceō (“I teach”). This meaning is therefore primary rather than secondary. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:20, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is the real definition I can say matches my thought. A doctor needs no classification as it describes the healer in every way. A physician is one who observe human body machanism and functions by it's movements, replacements and disturbances in first examine. A surgeon is one who operate cells, group of cells or one or more body organs by cutting, removing and adding to normal shapes and arrangements. A consultant is advisor to cure or treat by counselling, medication and procedure advices . A general practioner is a health and welness educator first who teaches the needed practices to cure before suffer and works as family health friend. A nurse is nurture and care taker in process of healing. Psycriatrists are definitely on wrong path by treating mental "deseases" instead they should take place of Psycologists for counseling and therapies after "desease" is catched by radio rays on neurotransmission or brain functions by neurologists. A real Psycologist a rare to avail professionals in need should take the training responsibility of human mind and thoughts so that a normal "difficulty" a self controllable natural thought becomes a "desease" whithout any writable observations technically. A druggist is supposed to inform chemical formulation and dosage, application of medication to paitent but sadly they are just salesman with a pharmacy degree. A philosopher is a character given to those who see impossible to find or create a motorable way to guide others by engaging, entertaining but a sucees oriented way for encouraging them "tested and trusted" way though it is not necessary if he himself ever traveled or not the same path he is offering to others but he is trustworthy. This too has been limited to degree programs as necessity to obtain first. And I really don't know how many of doctorate holders kept their natural responsibility bearing which is research to know. Knowledge to analyize and action to take for other's path making by his simple teaching of complex subjects to deliver "take easy path the obstacles free for departing for far and invisible destination before your this path gets invisible obstacles to make a close and visible destination a difficult tast to reach" A really strength and belief developer teacher who makes us realize how value our time is and the most available or easy path lies in front of us saying silently to start first accelerate later but we keep ignoring both and a "illusionary teacher" and later after a half life we get the proof we were told to belive in miracle and magic much before of experiencing them today. Some poeple are definitely taught by such philosophers and crazy teachers or may be they are the same in themselves and deicided to bring this magic in an illusionary way to us. # Explanation in magic and definition in logic for those who feel as they are not good enough in language to start. # A basic language teaching for those as many want to learn but a philosopher to show them the way. Good thing is we are already in thier reach. Only a mater of approach in win win way as "people tend to rely on the best but bend to apply with the next." And I rewrote this fresh but known "Knowledge is the power when applied and book is a weakness when relied" # Real life story of many who had no book but got Wikipedia as knowledge to apply and grow. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Let me ask my chemist which one he would prefer to understand. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 02:06, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Finally you used simple english for the first time >:( (talk) 11:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Learn to protect what you build or learn to build first if you can not protect

I protect my building, my creation, my words and anything I develope or make. This is not a subject that I might have been taught in university but a lesson earned in life. This subject is important to understand the simple theory of protection in every manner. Wikipedia is protector first creator later. I do research my own way. Increasing or adding new contents is not the priority if existing content is not protected. I do not think the founder should have built the library without preparing it's cells for any kind of theft, replacement, fire protection, power back ups and any other. And obviously the good staffs, lights, cleanliness, elevation facilities, medical facilities and more a creator of creators will never miss a paper thin scope to apply everything to protect the creation here the Wikipedia. So protection policy and creation policy both needs to be studied. Let see who is Protector, creator , theif, destroyer, pickpockets, toilet cleaner, sweeper and currupt designated officers. Introduction with full explanation and full sources to protect the explanation is asked here.

Build what you can protect

Destroy what you can build

Explain what you can provide Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 03:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about and how is it relevant to this project? —Justin (koavf)TCM03:50, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Build what you can protect is what he is stating. (talk) 19:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If you can understand this person, I? nominate you to deal with him. fr33kman 23:34, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am fluent in english. (talk) 07:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How is what you are saying relevenant to this project? (talk) 11:49, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Probation period of IPs 'voting' at AfD

As will not come a a surprise to old-timers here I am a big propanoate of letting anonymous editors do what ever named editors can do; except where they technically can't by the software limits. I'd like to propose either a 1,2, or 3 month probation that would allow IPs taking part in AfD discussions. They can nominate a page for deletion (which is a vote de facto) and I think any negatives (vandalism and sockpupperty can be dealt with swiftly and harshly. We can undo problematic edits pretty quickly. Can I get some comments pls? Thanks! fr33kman 23:00, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes to closing an RfD, the closing admin needs to decide if there is more of a valid reason to decide one way than the other. It is up to them to decide if the points put forth are valid to the discussion. The fact that there is not a name attached to the fact should have little effect on if the point is valid. If an IP pops in and says "this is a copyvio and here is the source.", should we ignore that info just because the person didnt register an account? The point is still valid. Now this can to socking but theis is genterally a bunch of random people saying "me too" and providing no facts to the discussion. It is not a vote so if 400 people show up and scream "Keep, its notable" while 2 show up with "delete: and here is why...", it is likely the deletes will provide more of a reason to delete than an endless stream of "me too" We have enough of a me too issue as it is with registered long term users that I do not see this adding much to the problem.
On that: people need to not !vote: "Keep- meets GNG." they need to explain how it meets GNG. they need to give the closing admin reasons to chose keep by defending their opinion. They need to turn that opinion into reasons for one action or the other. Saying it is not meeting a guideline is often enough- its hard to prove a negative, Saying it meets the guidelines is not as good as showing how it meets them. Pure Evil (talk) 23:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I know how to do the admin side and what to take into consideration and what not considering I was and admin and a steward for years. I just don't like the formal exclusion of IPs. fr33kman 23:44, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I remember deciding a deletion that had like 15 'delete's and one IP 'keep' that was well thought out, valid arguments and addressed all the concerns of the nom. I closed it keep. fr33kman 23:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't inferring anything there. Just addressing the entire issue as a whole. I was not commenting of anyone in particular. Pure Evil (talk) 21:27, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why have a probation period? The implication of probation is that we would decide whether to continue with it at the end of the period. Deciding not to would just punish anonymous editors who make constructive edits. It's not like we can really control whether anonymous editors comment on the RFDs anyway. Why not just go ahead and remove the mention of IP addresses from Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion#Discussions (the talk page of which would have been a better place for this discussion)? -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:28, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then let's just rewrite the rules and let IPs comment. fr33kman 15:06, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would be in favor of allowing IPs to participate in RFD discussions. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Per Policy Ips are not allowed to vote. The IP welcome template actually lists this as a perk of registering. Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:31, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Bobherry: What policy is that, exactly? In any case, we are discussing changing the policy/rule/whatever. Part of the reason this discussion was started was that I pointed out the discrepancy between allowing IPs to start RFDs but not to !vote in them. Since the person starting an RFD is considered to be !voting to delete, that seemed inconsistent.
By the way, the IP welcome template mentions voting in discussions, but doesn't specifically mention RFDs. There's a difference. RFDs are decided on the basis of the arguments for and against. Other discussions, such as RFAs, are decided based on vote count, so it could make sense that IPs couldn't vote there (because we can't tell if the same person is voting twice). -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:48, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since there is quite clearly a consensus here, I removed the mention of IP addresses from the page. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! fr33kman 13:26, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Writing style of an informative article and an instructive article

I will share a story as I do it to explain better when instructions don't work. I am calling it instruction because I realized information has multi aspects and purpose to provide the readers. I came to conclusions out of which I am giving two by example. Number one a pilot will call Wikipedia sensing a crash of roter craft before landing in airport for safe landing. Number two a paitent will call Wikipedia right before undergoing his cancer surgery how to coperate the surggon for suceesful operation. Two things they igonred writen in Wikipedia or never read as these lines never got published due to some protocol issues of Wikipedia despite being writen by a wrong Writer.

  1. The pilot should have landed in elevated helipad provided by airport main landing area. # FAA has no protocol in emergency lending safety for last moment steps taken by fyer. Pilot is capable to handle such hazardous situation.
  2. Paitent should have taken painkillers to cure his body pain which was not prescribed his doctor as it was not cancer medicine. His finances that was allowing to regular treatment by frequent sittings of cancer destroyed after he left his small job due to stream pain in body thus he couldn't effort money needed to continue his previous treatment but in the critical moment he was hospitalized for immediate operation. # Super specialists often focus on thier stream deseases thus he was not informed by paitent about this problem and completely stoped visiting hospital. Paitent has read in an article where this precaution line was written but an expert friend of him has strongly recommended him not to trust in any information given in internet without providing a guinune source. Think about it and reply if I would have given "promotional and advertising contents" by writing this topic. I may wrong in everything but never in my intention.

Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 08:11, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Sandeep Manikpuri: First, let me say that it is hard to understand the things you write here. However, in case I am understanding part of this, I want to say that there should be no instruction in Wikipedia. It is not the job of Wikipedia to explain how to do things. In some cases, that could even cause problems with the law if Wikipedia is telling people how to do something that requires some kind of license or other credential. A good example of this is giving medical advice. It's okay to say that a certain drug is used to control pain if you have a reliable source that says that. It is not okay to say that people should take the drug, even if you have a source that says that. -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:35, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure if sandeep is here to build an encyclopedia. (talk) 08:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I never said Wikipedia gives instructions. I know well it provide information. You haven't read either. I operate my keyboard with my hands and type live whatever my mind says. I don't prepare in advance like technology nowadays a predesigned answers and conter discussions. If you see errors than it's human error. If you see anything wrong then you have to solve for mutual benifit. It is a human error who think,analyse, considers and rectifiers. How can I with I am yet to know your English protocol keeping me from writing. I used the same writing while typing gratitude mails to Wikipedia after donating small amount. Kindly have a study on my words they are useful study mateial if you want positive changes or suggestions and if you just do what is instructed to do then let me know clearly. Forward my request to the think tank of Wikipedia. I was giving my thought at wrong place. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 08:58, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All right I am coming on this very subject as I have lost many contents on medical and health. Is a prescription drug consuming details in paper given by drug peddler ? Or prescription is a written advice to consume medicine by a registered doctor ? Take any one. Okay no one is bold here except me so I am giving Alprazolam. Drug formula is same packaging and supply chain are different in two cases which are.
  1. A drug peddler or dealer or importer/exporter will ask or tell nearest police station for availing it successfully?
  2. A patient will ask or tell hospital for availing it successfully?
Do reply it and I do not need option as I am experienced and well wisher of sufferers. By default I am a writer too.
Note - No instruction is provided by me as I am working on how to provide information. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 11:03, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The truth is that writing simply takes experience. At the moment you are not writing simple, clear English. Once you accept this, the road is open for you to improve. The more you protest, the less likely you are to improve. It's up to you. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:19, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If this is a protest than it is better to protest for writing opportunity. If you have studied my contents then you will find what is explained by me. Sadly no one is talking or thinking what it is and how it is good for everyone. One more think I have experiences of everything in life except of dying. If editing is being proof read or copy edited each time I write then why all effort and tinie are spent on deletation or I say destroy beacuse they are my asset to share with the needy. Why can't editors utilize this very same amount of effort and time on ammendments or rectification or correction?? I am not that powerful to publish in public domain without your Aproval. I am in the phase that once lost forever lost is best 4 lines to describe. Thank you and kindly let me realize my promotional or advertisement content creation sins so that could apologize before God and Wikipedia both. What are they bring me readable to me. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 09:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You need to use simpler words. Please read this page. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Given gibberish statements like " I am in the phase that once lost forever lost is best 4 lines to describe." I doubt tweaking the vocabulary can help. We also need an article on basic grammar skills, sentence structure and coherent thought. Pure Evil (talk) 20:39, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It is simple to be easy but it is difficult to become simple. Quicole read this sentence and realise what we should adopt. All sentences given in examples can be writen in many ways. Like "John smith went supermarket", this is the easiest if we choose it for non native readers. Isn't it ? Also how will be my idea if I start writing articles with experiments of using new but correct easy words ? Doing this will bring more clearity in words choosing. Another could be John with his dog, John and his dog, Hard work is synonym of difficult to do as Evil used but look at the structure 1. Hard work ( Adjective + Noun ) 2. Dufficult to do ( Adjective + preposition + Worb ). Also first is not giving a negative message but second is. Many countries kids will understand that John walked that means he didn't took any mean of transport for going to supermarket but this is not the case. He might have used his car to drive upto supermarket. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 02:12, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SandeepManikpur: The language you are using is hard to understand what you are trying asking. It is bordering on disrupting the project. Please stop using such language or I may take this issue to the adminstrators. fr33kman 02:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you requesting ? May I has polite meaning that does not suits for wrong doers after a certain limit. Do what you said. If I were you then I would have done without asking any user if the user has broken the limit. Also report complains too there of unsourced quick deletion policy. I need it immediately. If cant build something then you should not demolish a building right after it's construction. It is like erecting a high rise in Manhattan is much easier for me than writing a small paragraph in Wikipedia. I will do what I can protect. If I can't then my moral says leave it. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 02:52, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? fr33kman 22:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am clearly not the only person who cannot make sense of what you are writing. Would you like to start again? Discussions on this page should be in simple English so that all our editors can understand them. Rathfelder (talk) 18:33, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Rathfelder They are already blocked. Kk.urban (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I should note that using more complex English is not discouraged on discussion pages. The problem here is that what they are writing is just not comprehensible, or simple in mainspace. --Ferien (talk) 22:15, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why are these pages not to be in simple English? Who decided that? Rathfelder (talk) 08:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Using simple english is challenging when you are fluent in english, and I find it a little bit challenging to write simple english pages, but that does not mean you can use complex english. (talk) 11:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Our content is in Simple English, but our discussions do not have to be. I think most people find when writing articles, they have to think about making the language as simple as possible, and so you'd have to spend the time to simplify what you're saying in discussions. So long as what you're saying is understood by other editors (unlike above...), there isn't a problem. --Ferien (talk) 14:00, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But blocking is a last resort. (talk) 19:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can translate most of his words into simple english. (talk) 11:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am a native speaker of English and a qualified teacher of it. I find many of the contributions to these discussions incomprehensible. If this wikipedia is for speakers of Simple English then its discussions should be accessible to them. Rathfelder (talk) 16:09, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am a native speaker as well, and yes, it is incomprehensible to everyone else, but not me. (talk) 19:18, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The content is aimed at speakers of Simple English people whose English skills are not advanced so they can read the articles. (Nobody really speaks "simple English".) The administrative side does not have to be in simple English. Neither do discussions between editors where the parties involved are understanding each other -- those don't have to be in English at all, simple or otherwise. If you, a native English speaker and qualified teacher, don't understand something in a discussion, then there is probably something wrong with the discussion other than it not being in simple language. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:30, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So the people who use it are not to be involved in writing and managing it? Rathfelder (talk) 07:47, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
They can, but they would need to understand that some of the administrative stuff is not conducted in simple language. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:59, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Setting boxes as closed

Could we have a consensus to set all large complex boxes as "closed"? On many of the medical and psychological topics there are longer than the actual article itself! And thanks to those who have already done some. Macdonald-ross (talk) 17:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by boxes? (talk) 19:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldnt contributions to these discussions be comprehensible? Rathfelder (talk) 20:49, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mac means navigational boxes. Those are templates that usually go at the end of an article and have links to related articles. An example is Template:Haut-Rhin communes, which is already set to autocollapse because it is so big. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:38, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That template is actually set to "collapsed" not autocollapse. The page says otherwise, but the coding on the template itself is set to collapsed Pure Evil (talk) 22:20, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would question setting the default for all navboxes from autocollapse to collapsed (though easy enough to do) but I do agree all large boxes should be set as such. What makes it a big one? Ill know it when I see it. Autocollapse works fine for most in that it starts collapsed if there are multiple boxes, but it has no effect based on size. Collapsed starts the box closed in all cases and should be on all large boxes but this , IMO, should be done individually and not by default as many boxes are relatively small and if they are the only one on the page, there is no reason to have them shut.
Looking further, there are cases where the box template is calling another template yet not passing all the needed info. the Key in this case being no collapse state. They may alternatively vary the terms without notice. This prevents the setting of a state at the end template. I shifted the US county main template to collapsed as the individual templates can not be set on a per case bases. This could be changed, but could end up being quite labor intensive to change them all. As they all tend to be on the larger side, changing the base to collapse seemed a lot less labor intensive. Pure Evil (talk) 00:02, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why? (talk) 09:05, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because it required less work. Pure Evil (talk) 21:20, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Test edits outside of the sandbox

If test edits are meant to be made on the sandbox, why do people make tests outside of sandboxes. (talk) 12:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why do people vandalise??? I've never understood it personally. I see you are using my sandbox. That's great!! :-) fr33kman 16:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
when I used to vandalise en.wp, I saw it as a place to share my imagination to the wide world, but other vandals like the reaction editors have to vandalism, and they would not have fun attacking smaller wikis. (talk) 19:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are no valid reasons to vandalise wikipedia fr33kman 19:28, 22 August 2023 (UTCl)
So why do people vandalise??? (talk) 19:32, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Because they are anti-social, bored, can't help themselves or are just plain nasty people. Whatever, they are not valid reasons. fr33kman 19:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But I am specifically talking about non-sandbox tests. (talk) 19:37, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikipFan33 attacking editors

WikipFan33 (talk · contribs) is attacking ferien, XxblackburnXx, fr33kman, and other editors, in edit summaries, as seen on the edit history of this page (I gave him a 4im warning for attacks). — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 19:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Other than reverting edits I wouldn't get involved. Leave it to the admins and checkusers. fr33kman 19:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion should be moved to WP:AN. (talk) 19:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's already resolved, and with all the messages that editor leaves on my talk page, I am often aware of these issues very quickly :) --Ferien (talk) 19:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
He posted a talkback message when he did not actually reply! And I do not want any one who may attack me to post messages on my talk page! (talk) 09:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I mostly copied the infobox from English Wikipedia. Is that too much content for an infobox? I mean all the airports and highways. Kk.urban (talk) 20:49, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's fine fr33kman 20:50, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Its better than some. I dont like infoboxes which are just full of red links. Rathfelder (talk) 21:56, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Too many redlinks in infoboxes are rarely an issue. I do not need a list of US cities by population to understand what it means that Miami is 7th. If I needed to know who the mayor of some city was, is his complete bio always needed or just who he is? Unlike navboxes, where redlinks are useless, in infoboxes, the link often leads to info that, while nice to have, if often not needed to explain the subject. Pure Evil (talk) 03:04, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, it may be a tad excessive while not providing much useful info. I would have trimmed all but the primary airport or atleast put the secondaries and roads in collapsed lists or a list article on Roads of Miami, Dade County. I also would have fixed that ref error as there is no archived url so url-status is not used. Don't worry, no one seems to notice that one.. even b'crats make that error. Pure Evil (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed all this content. However, if anybody disagrees they can revert, per en:WP:BRD. Kk.urban (talk) 01:30, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is this known?

I was looking into references on a page and got to this article from a cached version of the MDO Kids page. The page is basically a word for word of the deleted article here but that isnt the issue. If you click on a link there, it leads to the mobile version of Simple. The bad part is, if it is a red link, it leads to the page creator for that link. So there are off site sources linked to creating pages here.. This is bound to have an effect on vandalism.. Is this practice known and or common? Can steps be taken (dev level) to block referrals from outside sources to page creation? Pure Evil (talk) 01:40, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did not understand you. (talk) 14:30, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do not care Pure Evil (talk) 20:45, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I do see what you are talking about. Perhaps this would be a good place to ask your question. Pecopteris (talk) 21:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestion. I tossed the question into their arena. Pure Evil (talk) 21:27, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Anybody can download MediaWiki software and download a recent copy of the Simple English Wikipedia. They can then do whatever they want including leaving links to the live site. It's not ideal buy it's open source, open content. fr33kman 00:05, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do not have an issue with them having open access. The issue is with them using it to have people edit here. In reality, it is not even a redlink here that they are creating. Any link on their version can be a link to us. If they create a red link on their site, they provide a link to create that page here. Their portal provides info there but creates it here. They can use our source. THey can use our data. I just find it fishy how they are tricky about having their users make changes here. I just think we should be more selective on where our edits come from. Wiki edits should come from Wiki.. not say.. Pornhub or some random site that is posting references for hoax articles. Pure Evil (talk) 00:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what to do in such a situation, maybe m:Tech might be able to suggest something? fr33kman 01:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's where I tossed it. Dealing with something like this is beyond our level. If anything can be done or should be done about it, it is in their scope so I tossed it to them.
I was just curious if people here knew this was happening and that some of our vandalism could be coming for bore people at completely separate sites Pure Evil (talk) 03:12, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

IP editors and RFDs

One of the items under Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion#Discussions says "Suggestions by users using 'sock puppets' (more than one account belonging to the same person) and IP addresses will not be counted." (I have bolded the part I want to discuss.) An RFD nomination is considered to be a "delete" suggestion, so should we stop allowing IPs to create RFDs? We currently have a few open RFDs that were started by users using IP addresses. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:11, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Give the 3 IP listed RfDs are 2 hoaxes and a "list of Mayors of..." with no list, I fully support the deletions. If anything, the IP should have upgraded to QDs on some of this.. Over all, the discussion says an opinion of an IP will not be accepted as part of the discussion. As such, the closing admin should ignore their opinion as invalid when determining how to close. This is not saying they can not say something, only that we will ignore what they say because they did not use a registered account (IP opinions, no matter how correct, do not matter) If an IP says "This is a hoax, here is the proof." , we are forced to ignore it unless a registered user copy/pastes the proof as an acceptable source of wrong doing. As such, I have to wonder why we are ignoring people with no proof od bad faith. Just because they are IPs does not mean they are vandals that should be ignored. Yes, there will be people using IPs in bad faith but that does not mean we should shun the activity of all IP users in any area of the wiki. That discussion point should be reworded to only apply to those IP determined to be used in bad faith. What to accept or refuse should be based on the content more than the source. If the info is correct and valid, the admin should be allowed to use that info in their discission. Not forced to, but not unallowed to. Pure Evil (talk) 22:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But some admins (myself included when I was an admin) take what the IPs have to say, especially if it makes total sense: sometimes if it make more sense than the named editor. This happens because AfD is not a vote, it is based on argument and common sense. fr33kman 23:21, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with everything Pure Evil just said. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point wasn't really the specific RFDs that are there right now, it was the inconsistency between allowing IPs to create RFDs but not to have their suggestions counted. If you're saying that we should make it consistent by allowing IPs to do both, that's fine with me. I was just trying to address the conflicting practices.
As for whether an RFD or a suggestion is in good faith, that applies equally to registered and unregistered editors; admins already watch out for that. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:35, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As it says, an RfD is a discussion, and discusiions are based on arguments, and not on the person who makes the arguments. We have had a few IPs making good suggestions for deletions, and also making valid points about (not) deleting an article. Evaluating the aruments is part of the closing admin's job. So the question is (if and how) to adapt the text in the blurb of the RfD page? Eptalon (talk) 01:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest just removing the "and IP addresses" section from the blurb. There is no reason to point out that they are an IP. If they are acting in good faith, their voice should be heard and if they are acting in bad faith (in the closers opinion) then they would be ignored. If an IP is being used as a sock, the fact that it is an IP really has little bearing on it still being a sock to be ignored.
If their comment is black or white, the closing admin can easi;y chose to accept or ignore, but that is often the case with any !vote. If they are in the grey, no offence but most will side against an IP vs a registered user (established) as the user likely has a longer standing track record. If an IP said "a" and Auntof6 said "b", all things equal, I would lean toward B. This isnt a bias against IPs, but leaning toward what has proven in the past to work out.Ao6 is more likely to have experience in things around here that an IP may be lacking. They may have a great argument, and it should be considered, but she is likely to have a deeper perspective on the subject from years of experience here. Pure Evil (talk) 03:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of removing "and IP addresses", maybe say that only one suggestion per IP is allowed, with the nomination counting as a suggestion. But then what could/should we do to try to prevent someone from making a suggestion using an IP and another suggestion using a registered account? We've seen socks and such in RFDs before, so there's no reason to think we wouldn't see this. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Like with any RfD, if the result is clear, and unlikely to change, an admin can close the RfD early. Also, in some cases, linking the IP to an username is the task of a CheckUser. So far, I haben't see that many cases of an IP user spamming the RfD board. If that really is the case, we can tell the user.... Eptalon (talk) 08:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As of now, only one suggestion per person is allowed (including the nom). A person can not make a suggestion as one account then another suggestion as another account. the only difference here is you are pointing out that an IP can not do what an account can not do. Why make it specifically for IP user when it already applies to all users? Ye, Socks have used IPs for extra votes. they also use other accounts. Either way either the closing admin or a CU will need to make the call, registered user or IP, it really matters not. End result, the fact that it is an IP doesnt matter so why are we trying to make it matter? Do we need a set of rules for IPs that are identical to the rules for other users. This is more the issue where these wordings can be used to deny things to IPs based solely on them being IPs. Pure Evil (talk) 21:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've always found the IP address rule pointless, per what Pure Evil has already said. They are allowed to nominate pages for QD and report at VIP, so why can't they get involved in RfD? Sockpuppetry/block evasion issues can be handled if they come up, rather than preventing IP users from contributing to RfD entirely. --Ferien (talk) 12:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is unfair that IP's opinions are not counted, what about me, I am a helpful editor. i agree with you, what about IP editors that are Not vandals. (talk) 10:49, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Don't misunderstand please: An RfD is a discussion. We are talking about arguments, in favor or against deleting an article. The closing admin will look at all arguments, and based on those, take a decision. In that way, the admin will likely take the arguments of IP editors into account. After all, it is the argument that counts, and nor who makes it. Eptalon (talk) 20:07, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My point is that not all IP editors are vandals. (talk) 11:30, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I actually like AGF IPs because the do a lot of wik-ielf work putting thins straight, fixing categories etc...fr33kman 23:23, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see no reason an IP editor can't vote. It is a single action and it'd be pretty easy to figure out if any sock puppetry is going on. fr33kman 18:41, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This may be a minority view, but I don’t think we should allow IPs to start or vote in RFDs. It’s quite easy to move a few miles or go to a friend’s wifi to get a new IP address. Or users could !vote anonymously and then create an account and !vote. There are a whole host of issues with this. I’m fine with letting IPs comment on points that others may have not addressed, but I don’t think their opinion should be weighed when judging consensus. Illusion Flame (talk) 11:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And on another note, while not entirely a concern: I have seen some poor RFD conduct and clear canvassing from IPs, so this is another reason for feeling the way I do. Illusion Flame (talk) 11:13, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of these issues could apply to accounts. It is even easier to just create two accounts, than it is to get a new IP address. --Ferien (talk) 11:43, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But with IPs it’s impossible, afaik, to check if the 2 IPs are related. With accounts, we can perform a check to see if the Ips are the same. Illusion Flame (talk) 11:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But maybe we can just let it be revealed on the sockpuppet investigations, that seems like the only choice. (talk) 15:51, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
RFDs last 1 week. Sometimes sock investigations last multiple weeks. I’m in favor of just eliminating the problem all together. If you want to !vote, just create an account. Pretty simple. Lol. Illusion Flame (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've always been in favour of letting IPs do whatever named editors can do (obviously not admin etc...) I don't think people should have to name themselves just to be able to say whether or not an article should be deleted, esp when they can start the process (which is a vote in and of itself is it not?) fr33kman 19:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is kind of elitist if you think about it, IPs should do whatever registered editors do, however, this would give advantage to vandals, which we do not want. (talk) 09:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What does IP stand for? (Once again, I ask that people explain abbreviations at the start of a discusin, OwSPWNKnWhYAS.)Kdammers (talk) 02:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Internet protocol. When people talk about IP editors, they mean people who edit without logging in, using an IP address. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish Empire

This edit: Special:Diff/9003146 does not look simple to me, but I prefer to get input from experienced editors on this. Maybe somebody will know what to do about this. Kk.urban (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is not even close to Simple... add in the linking to En. to the structure and vocabulary and it would likely just be best to revert the edit and start over. AGF but accept this is not helping anyone. Pure Evil (talk) 04:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What does AGF mean? Kdammers (talk) 03:00, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It means assume good faith, the guideline that says to assume that people don't mean any harm, that bad edits might be mistakes or made out of ignorance. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:39, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Project page humour

If the communtiy side is in user space, why is there project page humour. (talk) 14:22, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where? fr33kman 19:36, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest starting at the essay at Wikipedia:Humor, following up with the 18 language variants at wikidata and then off to the host of related pages at En. to see what else is out there. The {{humor}} tag could also useful as it is linked to 32 pages not in the user space Pure Evil (talk) 06:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My actual question is, why is there humour within the Wikipedia: namespace. (talk) 09:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What sort of answer are you looking for? Rathfelder (talk) 13:50, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's historical. People did it but it's not how we work now. Either way I do not support humour in any namespace. We're no enwiki fr33kman 23:32, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the page was historical, it would be tagged as historical. (talk) 14:26, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm saying it was done a while ago. People don't do things like that now. The current consensus is no humour. fr33kman 15:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
But consensus can change, so we might allow humour one day. (talk) 15:20, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus could change on if we are tired of your crap. Does this possible future event mean we should just get rid of you now?
How does the fact that one day we may change our minds about humor have any effect on the fact that it is not acceptable now? Why are you so obsessed with disrupting this project with this and your other trollings? Pure Evil (talk) 20:44, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, it's enough now. No humour .249 !! If you keep pushing it you will be getting blocked. Work on the articles please. fr33kman 21:05, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As the creator of WP:HUMOR the page is meant to be for former humor pages and humor essays. Bobherry Talk My Changes 21:31, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You started all of this!! BURN THE WITCH!! Pure Evil (talk) 03:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are a rather funny fella. (talk) 17:22, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:GNOME is not complete humor, "WikiGnome" explains a type of editor. (talk) 09:18, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]