Jump to content

Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 159

From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Enabling noindex in article space

Following on from Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 133#Use of QD A4, there was a rough consensus to implement NOINDEX in article space, however it wasn't really considered worth it for the actual impact it would have, especially as it would differ from all other WMF sites. There was a discussion on my talk page, at User talk:Ferien#Why, where the idea of noindexing pages at RfD was bought up again. This time, it was pointed out by Lee Vilenski that enwiki actually has a system whereby pages newer than 90 days are not indexed unless they are patrolled – see w:WP:NOINDEX for how they do things.

Now, we don't want any AfC/NPP-like processes here (as was rejected in Wikipedia:Simple talk/Archive 134#Proposal: Introducing Wikiproject Article for Creation), but we could adjust our patrol system so that only articles that were either patrolled and/or existed for, let's say 10 days, would be indexed. This would allow the time for the notability of articles to be discussed at RfD, while not worrying about the article effectively serving as a free promotion for the person, company etc being discussed at RfD. This would also, hopefully, reduce the misuse of A4 that is still occurring over 3 years on from that original discussion. Thoughts? --Ferien (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - As I mentioned before, I'm obviously fully in favour. I think it's worth noting that, I think the technical solution is pretty simple, and just a case of opening a phab ticket for the change to be made. I like the idea of ten days, as it is enough time for an article to go through AfD if suitable. I can see a massive upside to not indexing potentially dangerous articles, and the only downside being a small wait for indexing on good faith articles.
Enwiki also has w:WP:autopatrolled permission. Whilst not part of this discussion, would be easy enough to setup to give a flag to community members who make a lot of articles to bypass the delay (if they care). A potential discussion for a later date if this were to proceed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 20:48, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: we already have patroller which serves as both our patrol and autopatrol right. --Ferien (talk) 20:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no problem, didn't realise it was bundled. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 21:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: @Ferien Do we also have page curation tool here? DIVINE 20:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DIVINE, I'm not quite sure what you're referring to so probably not, we have our own version of Wikipedia:Article wizard, but I don't think that's the same thing? --Ferien (talk) 15:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ferien No, it is completely different. It is usually used by patrollers while reviewing pages on English Wikipedia. I thought we also have it here at SEWP, but we don’t have it. I think this tool will be helpful while patrolling the new pages, as patrollers' rights here on SEWP are a combination of both New Page Reviewer (patroller) and Autopatrol. And the tool iss more advanced and has additional features, which will surely help while patrolling. You should take a look once.[1] DIVINE 15:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    DIVINE, oh yeah, I've seen that before. I'm not sure we'd need it here, as our patrol process is a bit more basic than en's, and we might need to customise it more to fit what the community would like here, but that's another discussion. --Ferien (talk) 15:59, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ferien the only problem is that we can mark as patrolled but can't reverse it in case of a mistake. I don't see any confirmation options before patrolling. DIVINE 16:04, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it's that big of a problem. If it happens accidentally, the patroller is responsible for tagging, or taking care of what needs to be done. If unable to do so, they can bring it to this page and seek help.--BRP ever 16:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds good. DIVINE 16:33, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support 10 days.--BRP ever 07:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just going to add 'unless marked patrolled' just to be precise haha. BRP ever 15:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BRPever agreed, YGM on this one haha. DIVINE 15:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As a summary:' - There's widespread support for this in the community, I will therefore look into getting it enabled on this Wiki...--Eptalon (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon That’s good news. By the way, just to let you know, it can be shown immediately if it’s marked as patrolled, like on the English Wikipedia. This way, we will also have an actual use for the patroller tool for reviewing new pages, as it is worth it. Thanks. DIVINE (talk) 13:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I believe this would require the Simple English Wikipedia to use PageTriage, albeit a modified version of it. It's what the English Wikipedia uses to automatically NOINDEX unpatrolled pages for 90 days. I'm not sure if PageTriage supports such modification, or if a fork of it needs to be created first.— *Fehufangą✉ Talk page 04:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Olivia Rodrigo is now a good article..

Hello all, there seems to be ovrewhelming support, so I have promoted Olivia Rodrigo to Good Article. Thank you to all who helped... Eptalon (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idea:Deletion Policy For Clearly AI Generated Content

Perhaps we could have a QD for something undisputably AI generated (ex.something starting with Here is a draft of the Wikipedia article you requested:, something that's clearly an AI generated essay rather than an article, etc.) can be quickly deleted if it provides little to no value as an encyclopedic article. And maybe could we agree that in general AI generated content (unless it is in fact useful content, which is rather rare) should be deleted once determined to be such (again, provided it is in fact harmful, untrue, not encyclopedic or an article, not in simple english, etc.) Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 23:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All those things apply to any article. How is it different if it's AI-generated? -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:13, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because AI has a way of quickly making plausible sounding non-uncyclopedic nonsense.@Auntof6 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:41, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We already agreed that AI shouldn't be used here due to the complex language?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 05:09, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like we'd probably spend a bit too much time figuring out if it's AI, or just someone's essay. We can handle it in the same way we already remove unencyclopedic info. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 09:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Links to En wiki

No direct links to en wiki are allowed. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Random question but are there any ways of finding article that link to EN ?, I've searched "[[:en:" but no luck, WPCleaner does have a interwiki linking finder but it's all WikiDictionary or whatever it's called, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:48, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You could probably do it with a query, or maybe AWB.
Might be worth stressing that things like {{ill}} is fine. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:26, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Notability about an article

A new article, Toilet Tower Defense, was made, and I'm not sure whether to nominate this for deletion or not. I cannot find any sources that are reliable and although Fandom has info about it, I highly doubt it's a reliable source due to its wiki nature. Cyclonical (talk) 10:31, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you lose nothing by nominating for regular deletion. It allows the community to discuss.... Eptalon (talk) 10:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was a little unsure about it so just wanted to make sure, but I'll go ahead and add it to RfD for discussion. Cyclonical (talk) 10:46, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stroke page

Realistically, a reader would only need to know the mnemonic. I think the signs are the modt important thing someone should remember or take away from this article, so it needs to go at the top, and in a way that isnt drown out by all the other information. The user is also sitting there guarding the page reverting most edits Check out https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death At one point the article the editor had the cause of death ranking wrong (and uses future predictions insread of past information). This is cited Those are terrible bulletpoints which could be shortened down a lot. One of the bullet points I edited is the issue, which saw the whole article rolled back. The "jargon" is used in brackets () with links to other wikipedia pages. This article rollback put information back in the article about the circulation which is wrong.

Continued from https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Davey2010?markasread=4436624&markasreadwiki=simplewiki You can see the edits and rollback here: https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Stroke&action=history And I think at least a partial rollback to my version should happen to retain information and links to articles. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 18:16, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This all relates to WCU's edit on the Stroke article - Imho the previous wording was better and the FAST part is duplicated twice and just overall the previous was better, I told the user to come here in case others had differing opinions or may of agreed that their edits were better than what they were replacing, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 19:01, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I rephrased a little, tis is not just about the U.S.... Eptalon (talk) 21:31, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its not about that W;ChangingUsername (talk) 21:59, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
bumping this W;ChangingUsername (talk) 22:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remember that Wikipedia is not a source of medical advice. The article should inform the reader about stroke and can include FAST asleep part of the article but the reader should be seeking advice from elsewhere. fr33kman 23:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The reader should be told by thr government or hospitals how to notice the signs of a stroke. They should be able to recognize the signs and call an ambulance ASAP as permanent damage will be done if they don't and they need to act fast as there is only about 7 minutes for action. Thats what that should know, above all other medical advice in the page (which they dont need to know, because, as you've said, this isn't for medical advice). If this isnt for medical advice, jt should be about spotting the signs, educating people avout that so they can get help from a medical professional and help save peoples lives as a citizen or loved one. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: In case of a stroke, it is important to recognize it, and to alert emergency services; people have about 7-10 minutes to react. Meaning, there's no time to read a Wikipedia article after the event happened. Also, given that anyone can edit Wikipedia articles, there's no guarantee that what is in the article is correct, or even accurate. For this reason, Wikipedia shouldn't be used for medical advice. People staffing emergency phones are trained to handle such situations, they also have a training to tell people what to do, till emergency services are there. And yes, like with any emergency, the most important thing is to recognize it, and to alert emergency services; being able to tell them what happened. Eptalon (talk) 06:27, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What i meant is, readers should know the signs, and I think you know that I meant that. And for an event such as stroke if there was an amount of people who'd read the page before they encountered one in their life I would be asking myself something like "what is the one lesson they should take away from this and keep with them" W;ChangingUsername (talk) 10:26, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, good luck with getting an ambulance within 10 minutes in London, let alone getting seen in the hospital by an appropriate staff member. Macdonald-ross (talk) 14:55, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that in London they usually manage jt. But you picked the most well funded city in Britan W;ChangingUsername (talk) 05:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Depression Ten (2005) demoted..

Hello, I have demoted Tropical Depression Ten (2005), it was a very good article, but there are various issues, amongst others a merge proposal. I have have therefore demoted it to reguilar article. Feel free to suggest again, when the issues are fixed. Eptalon (talk) 23:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

East-West or East—West?

I just realized that without checking, I accidentally created the article East–West Schism (em dash) without checking to see that the article East-West Schism (hyphen) existed. Which article, therefore, should be merged to be the new article? The en wiki uses the em dash. I am also not familiar with the process in which one merges articles, so how should this be done? Both articles have their own different positive aspects, so I would assume that it would be wise to manually go in an include both parts of both articles into one. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 08:00, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should only have one of the two. Note howevver, that on a non-technical level, the change is mostly visual. Technically, yes, they are different characters. I think the hyphen-version is likely easier to get, though. Eptalon (talk) 20:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per en and per English grammar, I made the hyphen version a redirect of the em version. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 00:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think it's really fair to just do it like that, what about revision history? What about attribution? This way of moving pages does not sit right with me (I believe it is wrong), if I am being honest… Dream Indigo 10:21, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Probably needs a histmerge. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski I agree Dream Indigo 15:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery, proposed article demotion

Slavery has been proposed for article demotion here MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 02:59, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I left saome comments; likely though, fixing/improving this will take several people working together, using several weekends. As a result the article may double or triple in size. The EnWP article is 8 times the size of our artcle. Big toppic, difficult one, once you dive in. Eptalon (talk) 10:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lua module error

Hi, So I copied the infobox from en:2024 Mmamatlakala bus crash to here however the map section now says

"Lua error in Module:Mapframe at line 384: attempt to perform arithmetic on local 'lat_d' (a nil value)."

I've copypasted en:Module:Mapframe but it's already uptodate so didn't know if anyone could come to the rescue and fix this issue as I don't understand modules, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 17:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See if it works now - I tried changing the case (Wikidatacoord --> WikidataCoord). I was fighting with a Lua error recently myself :) Antandrus (talk) 18:02, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Antandrus You are amazing thanks so much! - yep the error's gone and the map now shows, Thank you again I greatly appreciate your help :), Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 19:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simple suggestions

Hey all. I'm doing the frog genus Oophaga. What's a good Simple English phrase for "unfertilized egg"? I'm going with "egg that will not hatch" for now, but it's giving me mega we-can-do-better vibes. Frogs in the genus Oophaga return to the tiny pools where their tadpoles swim and lay an unfertilized egg for the tadpoles to eat. Darkfrog24 (talk) 18:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What about 'lay eggs for the tadpoles to eat'? And later explain that the eggs used for spawning are fertilized? Eptalon (talk) 18:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Purge things in a category?

Do we have a bot or anything that will purge everything in a category? It would be useful when doing things like changing templates that are causing articles to appear in maintenance categories, and probably for other things. I know Commons has something that purges subcategories in a category, but do we have anything like that here? -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:34, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have written something, but if there's already another solution, then this should likely be used.. Eptalon (talk) 15:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, when you say "purge" do you mean remove the individual pages from that category, or otherwise? Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 23:22, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: Maybe that wasn't the best term. I was thinking of purging the cache of each item in a category. I sometimes do this manually by doing a null edit on everything in a category, but that is at best tedious and at worst impractical (if there are many entries in the category). That can have the result of removing things from a category that don't belong there. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oh, there's a gadget for doing it, rather than via null edits (see w:help:purge). Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 14:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: Yes, I have a purge link on my pages. However, that looks like it's done one page at a time, manually. I'm looking for something where you can give it a category name and it will purge each page in the category for you. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:51, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also not sure that that kind of purge would do what I'm looking for. Maybe I'm not explaining this well. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, you can put on the category in question a template, like template:Purge button that looks like the below, is that what you are thinking?
Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:58, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: If I understand correctly, that would purge the category itself. I'm looking for something to purge each item in the category. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: OK, I just found an example. Category:Articles with invalid date parameter in template had 15 articles in it. I did null edits on them which removed all but 2 from the category. Those two were in the category because they were in maintenance categories for June that hadn't been created yet. I created the categories, then did null edits on those two and now the category is empty.
When the fix for a maintenance issue involves doing something that doesn't touch the article, the fix doesn't always remove the article from the category. In this case, the fix was to create the maintenance categories, which didn't require touching the articles. In other cases I've seen, the fix was to take care of a problem in a template.
Am I explaining this any better? -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. I think this could be done with a userscript, but might be beyond my expertise. It would simply need to take the URLs for all items in a category and add the suffix "?action=purge" and run. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:09, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: That's OK. I'm perfectly prepared for the answer to be that we can't do this, but it doesn't hurt to ask. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Announcing the first Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language


The scrutineers have finished reviewing the vote results. We are following up with the results of the first Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) election.

We are pleased to announce the following individuals as regional members of the U4C, who will fulfill a two-year term:

  • North America (USA and Canada)
  • Northern and Western Europe
  • Latin America and Caribbean
  • Central and East Europe (CEE)
  • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • Middle East and North Africa
  • East, South East Asia and Pacific (ESEAP)
  • South Asia

The following individuals are elected to be community-at-large members of the U4C, fulfilling a one-year term:

Thank you again to everyone who participated in this process and much appreciation to the candidates for your leadership and dedication to the Wikimedia movement and community.

Over the next few weeks, the U4C will begin meeting and planning the 2024-25 year in supporting the implementation and review of the UCoC and Enforcement Guidelines. Follow their work on Meta-wiki.

On behalf of the UCoC project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 08:15, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed simplifying...

Hello, I recently broight over Who put Bella in the Wych Elm? from EnWp. It is aboutr an unresolved death in England of the 1940s. I started with some simplification work, but likely more is needed, so if any of you get a monent, and find the subject interesting, please help simplify. As a bonus: the BBC did a podcast, of 5 episodes each on the case, which seems to be well known.. Eptalon (talk) 17:25, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help with reading flow?

Hello, I recently found the article Samlesbury witches and though that it would probably be good for DYK hooks. I do however think that 'reading flow' is not really there, and in geneal the article is tiring to read. Would appreaciate help improving it, if anyone has time. The which Trial is somewhat unusual, because it happened in the 15th or 16th century,likely at the height of the "witch craze", but these women were acquitted (while on the same day, others were sentenced to be hanged or burnt alive. Anyway, if anyone is interested in helping, feel free... Eptalon (talk) 17:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now on Meta

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hi everyone,

The final text of the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now up on Meta in more than 20 languages for your reading.

What is the Wikimedia Movement Charter?

The Wikimedia Movement Charter is a proposed document to define roles and responsibilities for all the members and entities of the Wikimedia movement, including the creation of a new body – the Global Council – for movement governance.

Join the Wikimedia Movement Charter “Launch Party”

Join the “Launch Party” on June 20, 2024 at 14.00-15.00 UTC (your local time). During this call, we will celebrate the release of the final Charter and present the content of the Charter. Join and learn about the Charter before casting your vote.

Movement Charter ratification vote

Voting will commence on SecurePoll on June 25, 2024 at 00:01 UTC and will conclude on July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC. You can read more about the voting process, eligibility criteria, and other details on Meta.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment on the Meta talk page or email the MCDC at mcdc@wikimedia.org.

On behalf of the MCDC,

RamzyM (WMF) 08:45, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Nitazenes", yes. "a nitazine", no

When one has (say) two different Nitazenes - that does not mean that there is such a things as a Nitazene.--Suggestion: delete the (wrongful) Nitazene-redirect that i started today.

If someone (else), starts the article about a chemical compound called Nitazene, then that is a different story.--And just cuz I started the article List of benzimidazole opioids, back in the day - i am not going to ask anyone to Kiss the ring.--If this post was helpful, then fine.--(Not sure that i will recheck this post, since i will be busy fixing other articles.) Have a great day. 2001:2020:30D:D58A:5012:18BA:3E15:70CF (talk) 20:15, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We do try to mirror the English Wikipedia. The page should stay mirroring that project as a redirect. Operator873 connect 20:20, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We do not do, everything En-wiki does.--"Your" redirect, is implying that any Benzamidole opiod, is (a) Nitazene.--That is a falsehood.--The Simple solution is that there is No redirect from to Nitazene.--Not sure that i will be back to this thread to get presented with wiki-lawyering et cetera; i expect to be busy fixing articles.--Have a wiki-lucky day! 2001:2020:30D:D58A:4CC6:D7BC:132D:353F (talk) 20:29, 11 June 2024 (UTC)/ 2001:2020:30D:D58A:5012:18BA:3E15:70CF[reply]

Unsure how to revert

I'm seeing some gross vandalism on Toontown Online that I don't even want to repeat from "Lua error in package.lua at line 80" and am honestly not sure how to revert it. This isn't really my expertise. - MourningRainfall 🐺🇨🇦 (talk) 07:56, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

nvm - MourningRainfall 🐺🇨🇦 (talk) 08:05, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@MourningRainfall If that happens again, try purging the cache as it has worked in the past for many users.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 08:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, will do. Thanks. - MourningRainfall 🐺🇨🇦 (talk) 08:08, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've noticed this is present on some other pages as well, such as Banana republic, General semantics, and Inclusive disjunction - I found these by googling the unique part of the message. Trying another browser and purging my cache doesn't get rid of it in these instances. Walllable (talk) 05:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some moron weeks ago decided to edit a module that caused this. You can remove the error by making a dummy edit, by pressing “edit” on that page and then “publish changes”. It should clear the error.
Note that it may not work for users on mobile due to a different UI, but making any edit on that page should remove it. Cyclonical (talk) 06:03, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Edit this template"

Hi! This is not urgent, not even that important, but it may be a simple fix. Can anybody take a look at Module talk:Navbar, please? The module itself is protected, only admins can change it, but every editor is welcome (and encouraged) to share their opinion on the talk page. :-) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 11:54, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone!

Hi, I just wanted to know what can I do here and how is it different from the normal Wikipedia, where I cannot edit? (talk) 12:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! Simple English Wikipedia is a more simplified version of the normal English Wikipedia. The words in articles are simpler and are based off of BASIC English, which makes them easier to read. I've put a welcome message on your page so that you can visit some links to get started here. Cyclonical (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Articles should have simple grammar as well as simple vocabulary. Kdammers (talk) 17:37, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hoaxy (Russia-in-Hawaii and in Calif.)?

"Russian America ... included some fortifications, such as Fort Ross in California and four other forts (including Russian Fort Elizabeth) located in Hawaii".--I have some familiarity with "Old-Russia-in-Alaska thingy", but this other stuff, i am handing this over for your second opinion.--Next time, i will use the talk page of the article, as we are supposed to. 2001:2020:351:A0E6:38C6:6C1A:A581:4776 (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)/ 2001:2020:351:A0E6:38C6:6C1A:A581:4776 (talk) 18:50, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Russia did have forts in a few other places - Fort Ross in California and a fort on the south coast of Kauai. The one in the Hawaiian islands was there in the early 19th century, and is currently administered by the US National Park Service as Russian Fort Elizabeth State Historical Park (I'd be amazed if that link lights up blue). Antandrus (talk) 22:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the enwiki link - w:Russian Fort Elizabeth. (Russians in Hawaii; who knew, right?) Antandrus (talk) 22:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot - user:Antandrus. i have copied "your" text, and transferred that to the talk page of the first-linked article. 2001:2020:343:BCE3:1D3E:C859:3B2C:917C (talk) 03:37, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Project Gutenberg

Is project Gutenberg a reliable source? It contains e-books. Thanks CactusMunch Yum o.o 04:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cactus0rme: Probably not PG itself, but the books on it could be. I just poked around and found Template:Gutenberg, which is for citing books at PG. Of course, we'd want to be sure the book being cited is reliable, just as with any other source.
Thanks for being the reason I learned something today! -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:25, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, Thank you an no problem CactusMunch Yum o.o 07:06, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Automatically linking information from Wikidata

Hello everyone, I have been working on English and Arabic wikipedia for a long time, I found a thing in Arabic wikipedia that if an article starts with the name of the infographic template, it automatically fills the infographic with information from wikipedia without any other information. In this case, they use a template like {{#استدعاء:بطاقة|تركيب|وحدة=تحكم}}google translate: {{#call:card|composition|module=disipline}} in the infographic template. As it did in ar:قالب:بطاقة تعليق. If you only put the name of the template in the article in Arabic Wikipedia, even if you don't give any other information, it will shoe because it automatically collects information from Wikidata, such as ar:علم الحيوان at the beginning of the article [[:ar:Template:بطاقة التعليم]] The template is installed without any other information, but it automatically shows the information about the wikipedia article. If you provide additional information, it will be combined with the information from Wikidata. No other wikis have this feature. Not even on the English wiki. Can simple english Wikipedia do this? (talk) 03:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it would really be nice, but I don't know if our templates currently support it Eptalon (talk) 11:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's based on whether or not the individual template has been setup to take information from WikiData. So, yes, it could be done, but most templates don't do this. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding languages

In the corner of each article there's a tabber which has a directory to the same article on different Wikipedia language editions. I'd like to know how to add languages to that tabber in articles without them, I've read Wikipedia:Transwiki attribution but I've been told by an administrator that the article is incorrect. The article I'm trying to do this for is Christchurch Central City. Goose Green, 1982 (talk) 10:05, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Goose Green, 1982: You make the change in Wikidata. I have a (somewhat long-winded) explanation of a way to do that at User:Auntof6/How to#Interwiki language links for new pages. Feel free to ask if you have questions about it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I figured it out, thanks for your help. Goose Green, 1982 (talk) 11:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not "reaper", but ... ?

MQ-9 Reaper.
"A reaper at the base".
"The reaper has cameras."--Please advise how the word reaper, should appear in those kind of articles.--Are there different choices (as long as there is consistency within one article)?--The Reaper has cameras.--The "Reaper" (quotation marks) has cameras.--Any other choices? Thanks. (talk) 12:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are talking about a military drone, so 'Reaper' likely is a proper name... so either reaper or Reaper, no need for quotation marks... Eptalon (talk) 14:10, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If a single article shows one or more of the following, then i will probably leave those name-thingies, alone: Reaper (no quotation marks)/ "reaper" (with nearly any kind of quotation marks).--However, reaper with non-capital letter, would maybe not be left alone. But, reaper with small letters and italics, i would probably leave alone.--Diff: simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MQ-9_Reaper&diff=9600343&oldid=9600210 .--Another way of looking at things: the first mention, should be written as an acceptable name; But all the following instances, one might consider looking the other way. Thanks for user:Eptalon's reply. The reply was inspiration, to change the article. 2001:2020:317:C5F6:B09F:D7D8:580B:75E3 (talk) 15:25, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, should just be capitalised as part of the title. It's a proper noun, so wouldn't be simplified. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 15:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some suggestions for beginners

Hello everybody! I have a plan to rewrite some articles from Standard English Wikipedia to Simple English Wikipedia. I’m a bit worried about the copyrights because I’m using the content, images, and sources from the English Wikipedia article, just simplifying the words. Do you have any suggestions for me? Thank you very much! Hanoifun (talk) 09:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hanoifun One thing I'll recommend is linking to the EN revision rewritten on the article's talk page to avoid any attribution. An easy way to do this is by using Template:Translated page.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can also use Special:ContentTranslation, with English as a source for Simple English. Everything will be covered, from attribution to reusing citations, etc. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 09:59, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome, @Hanoifun. You might like to look at this list I maintain of ways that Simple English Wikipedia is different from other Wikipedias. The list is not a policy or guideline, but it links to some relevant policies and guidelines. If you have any questions about the list or anything on it, leave a message on my talk page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe we give our fellow Wikieditors credit with the translation template: {{translated|en|[En's title]|version=######}} and by putting the "oldid=######" from the page history in the change description. At least that's how I do it. The policy is WP:TA. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know the policy, but when I use a translation for creating a Simple English Wikipedia article, I check the original sourced material. This prevents omitting or including references that are inappropriate (e.g., when editing a translation, the content for which a reference was given in the source Wikipedia article might not remain in one's Simple English article; or the original article might simply be in error with its citation). Going to the original source one is citing is standard practice in academic research and publishing. Kdammers (talk) 14:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting dates

In British English, it is usual to put dates in this order: dd/mm/yyyy. In American English, it is usual to put dates in this order: mm/dd/yyyy. Do we have a standard that prefers one or the other? Or is it like spelling, in which the topic "dictates" the style? I ask in particular reference to an article about an American poet (Elinor Wylie) in which the month-first (i.e., American) format was changed. That is, neither priority nor topic were given priority. Kdammers (talk) 17:42, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kdammers: Either of the all-numeric formats can be ambiguous if both numbers are 12 or less, so it's best to avoid the all-numeric formats where possible. MOS:DATE gives examples where the month is spelled out, and also gives guidance on formatting dates. I don't see where a date was changed in the article you link. In the case of specifying dates in template parameters, the templates often specify how to do it.
If that doesn't address your question, please give more specifics. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6 This is the edit where someone changed the date format: Special:Diff/4848769. (talk) 21:45, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why Rus793 did that. The subject is American, so I would think the mdy format should be used. Maybe Rus will reply here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:51, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone ahead and changed these as there really is no reason for an American subject article to have British date formats, That and Rus hasn't edited since 2017 so we'd have a long wait for an answer :-), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Auntof6 referred to MOS:DATE. I found the relevant passage there: 'Strong national ties to a topic: An article on a topic with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the more common date format for that nation. For example, it may be more suitable to use the '14 February 1990' format in an article about a person from the United Kingdom, and 'February 14, 1990' in one about an event that happened in the United States.' Kdammers (talk) 14:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hidden statistics

On the statistics link (I ran across it by looking at my 'home'page), there is a section with a map of the world coded for statistics by country. One of the countries for which the stats are hidden is Kazakhstan. Is there any way to find out why the stats are hidden for this country? It's a relatively free and open country. Kdammers (talk) 14:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are we doing...

... with "P versus NP problem"? Surely this is beyond our target audience? Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In what way is it 'beyond our target audience'? - It likely is one of the big problems of computer science.... Eptalon (talk) 09:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please provide a link as to what you are referring to, @Macdonald-ross? MrMeAndMrMeTalk 09:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy link: P versus NP problemJustin (koavf)TCM09:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks MrMeAndMrMeTalk 09:56, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dark mode for logged-out users coming soon!

Hi everyone, for the past year, the Web team at the Wikimedia Foundation has been working on dark mode. This work is part of the Accessibility for Reading initiative that introduces changes to the Vector 2022 and Minerva skins. It improves readability, and allows everyone, both logged-out and logged-in users, to customize reading-focused settings.

Since early this year, dark mode has been available as a beta feature on both the mobile and the desktop website. We have been collaborating with template editors and other technical contributors to prepare wikis for this feature. This work included fixing templates and ensuring that many pages can appear with dark mode without any accessibility issues. We would like to express immense gratitude to everyone involved in this. Because so much has been done, over the next three weeks, we will be releasing the feature to all Wikipedias!

Deployment configuration and timeline

  • Tier 1 and 2 Wikipedias: wikis where the number of issues in dark mode when compared to light mode is not significant. These wikis will receive dark mode for both logged-in and logged-out users. Some small issues might still exist within templates, though. We will be adding ways to report these issues so that we can continue fixing templates together with editors.
  • Tier 3 Wikipedias: wikis where the number of issues in dark mode when compared to light mode is significant. These wikis will only receive dark mode for logged-in users. We would like to make dark mode available to all users. However, some wikis still require work from communities to adapt templates. Similar to the group above, these wikis will also receive a link for reporting issues that will help identify remaining issues.
  • Week of July 1: mobile website (Minerva skin) on the Tier 1 Wikipedias (including simple English Wikipedia)
  • Week of July 15: desktop website (Vector 2022 skin) on all Wikipedias; mobile website: logged-in and logged-out on the Tier 2 Wikipedias, logged-in only on the Tier 3 Wikipedias

How to turn on dark mode

The feature will appear in the Appearance menu alongside the options for text and width. Depending on compatibility and technical architecture, some pages might not be available in dark mode. For these pages, a notice will appear in the menu providing more information.

How to make dark mode even better!

If you would like to help to make more pages dark-mode friendly, go to our previous message and see the section "What we would like you to do (template editors, interface admins, technical editors)".

Thank you everyone. We're looking forward to your questions, opinions, and comments! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 17:12, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How Do You Know (movie)

Is How Do You Know (movie) complex? If so, how do we simplify it? (talk) 21:30, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely needs some simplifying. I've left some comments about that on the article's talk page. If you have any questions or response, leave it there and I'll see it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:59, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Main Page issue

The Main Page looks weird on mobile after a recent update. Each word should be on a single line. TitanicGlitter (talk) 23:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes,I can confirm that Eptalon (talk) 23:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can confirm as well. Cyclonical (talk) 00:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to look normal now. @Cyclonical@Eptalon Can you check again? TitanicGlitter (talk) 05:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, back to normal now. The text however looks so large compared to the contents of the main page that quite frankly I think it's ugly. Cyclonical (talk) 05:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mobile screenshot of the Simple English Wikipedia on 18 June 2024
This is the main page now. Cyclonical (talk) 06:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason all the words are bigger on my phone than yours, so "to" appears on a separate line. I do agree that "Welcome to Wikipedia" is too big. TitanicGlitter (talk) 06:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
first line: welcome
Second line: to
Third line: Wikipedia,
No comment on font size Eptalon (talk) 07:10, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On Opera GX Desktop Simple English Wikipedia, the main page is still messed up... --Tsugaru let's talk! :) 02:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If I could I would upload a screenshot, but I do not know how to licence it on Wikimedia Commons. Tsugaru let's talk! :) 02:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@つがる I have the screenshot licenced as my own work. Cyclonical (talk) 07:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should we tag this page with {{historical}} Since it hasn't been edited since 2009 and doesn't seem to serve a purpose anymore?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 15:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

yes, that's likely a good idea Eptalon (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Judging by the history it appears to have been a vanity venue that never took off but nonetheless it was still part of history even if it was very short-lived, We're not gonna get 2009 back so should make the most of the precious history we have of that era. –Davey2010Talk 17:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've tagged the page for now.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The policy as to who can become an oversighter is now at meta, and or candidates are listed on the page, where the candidates for the other privileges are listed; given that you need 25 support votes, getting the flag isn't easy. Eptalon (talk) 09:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May I ask what that has to do with this discussion?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:38, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 01:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By Fusionsub Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 01:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply button

The reply suddenly disappeared and I need to manually source edit to reply. Could you please help me?--Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 12:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cactusisme: If I understand correctly what you're talking about, I've seen that happen when I reply to something on a page -- all the "reply" links disappear. I was able to fix it by clearing the cache of the page. en:Help:Purge explains different ways of doing that. Let me know if you need more help. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:18, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I cleared, still don't work--Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 12:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cactusisme: OK. Just to be clear, are you talking about the "reply" link that appears on talk pages right after each individual post?
What page are you seeing this on? -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:20, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Every single page :(--Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 12:21, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Give me an example of one page. Also, how did you clear the cache, and on what page? -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:Simple talk and I used Ctrl F5 as I use micro edge (I am manually (in the source editing) adding these replies)--Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 12:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's one thing to check: go to Special:GlobalPreferences and see if you have the "Enable quick replying" option selected. You can select it for local only, or global and local. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:30, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yessss it worked. Thank you sooo much Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 12:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
-- Auntof6 (talk) 12:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cactusisme, to be sure: have you unchecked that box at some point? Trizek (WMF) (talk) 12:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I dont mess with that Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 00:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. We will investigate what seems to be a bug. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 07:50, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 10:23, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Madonna should be a disambig page, in my opinion.--En-wiki has their views, and i appreciate that. "Madonna" is a better title, than "Madonna (disambiguatio)", in my opinion. 2001:2020:345:A57A:9D3E:99F2:C174:DAD4 (talk) 21:41, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Madonna is quite clearly the primary topic in this case. We follow enwiki's policies/guidelines as guidelines, and therefore, there's a good reason to move the page here. Your opinion may differ but you don't seem to offer a reason other than I don't like it and want to differ with en. --Ferien (talk) 21:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Madonna (song) is one indication, that "Madonna (singer)" is not the primary topic.--The move, actually comes across as some sort of Ethnocentrism, without ethnocentrism being the purpose. 2001:2020:345:A57A:CCB8:F39D:CE66:9C82 (talk) 22:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:345:A57A:9D3E:99F2:C174:DAD4[reply]

Lady Madonna isn't going to be a primary topic, or close, in this case. It is not ever referred to as Madonna. I find it quite difficult to call this ethnocentrism because what else on this is realistically going to be the primary topic in any other country and Madonna just being called Madonna is a thing for many language Wikipedias, not just enwiki by any means, even if Madonna is American. --Ferien (talk) 23:32, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Madonna the singer is the obvious primary topic here. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 06:54, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the disambiguation page
  • Depiction of Mary, usually with child (Jesus), most often as a statue, sometimes as a small painting (icon)
  • A specific painting by Edvard Munch
  • At least two artists, two football players, an officer, an actress
  • At least two music albums
  • At least four place names
  • An Austrian weekly magazine for women
Primary topic should either be the well-known singer, or the depiction of Mary. Eptalon (talk) 07:13, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have added some meanungs to the disambigaion page. As we have it currently, it is ok. At the top of the pages we list the two most common meanings, and the disambiguation page Eptalon (talk) 07:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Madonna (name) is arguably the main topic (though we seem to not have that article).--See the following link for all the famous (or well-known) people with the name. Link,

    .--As of the 2010s she still was having number one hit songs - see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna_singles_discography#2010s .--Anyway, she is just another famous person among other famous people with the name "Madonna". 2001:2020:345:A57A:9C73:2FCC:27A6:77ED (talk) 08:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Well no. Only one Madonna is worldwide known among all of Madonna currently existing. Madonna (name) cannot be placed under the title Madonna. A09 (talk) 14:17, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just because a lot of people have a name doesn't make it the PRIMARYTOPIC. This is a very clear instance of the most relevant article for that search being the singer. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 14:39, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As the page move-suggester, I never expected or imagined there would be drama over it - A few points to note:
    A) As noted by all of my fellow colleagues above it's blindingly obvious Madonna is the primary topic here - She's Primarytopic on EN too which sparked this move,
    B) We follow ENs policies and guidelines and as I said given she's primarytopic there (en:Madonna) it's pretty obvious she should be here too,
    C) How is this Ethnocentrism ?, I'm British and personally speaking I don't like her music so herself and her culture are absolutely irrelevant to me and I can easily vouch and say her culture etc is irrelevant to everyone here too,
    Also whilst on the topic of Madonna I personally am not happy with Madonna (disambiguation) because it looks nothing like the EN variant.
    Anyway I'm honestly baffled as why we needed to make a mountain out of ... well literally nothing.... –Davey2010Talk 14:56, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strange Lua errors on "Simple English" pages

I was just reading through the article on the Kilogram using the Android app. Underneath the heading "Mass and weight", the following message is shown:

Lua error in package.lua at line 80: module 'Leonidlednev Rapes Babies on Wheels' not found.

I cannot help but feel like this is somehow an attempt at vandalism. I tried to change the page to remove the vandalism, but I was unable to find any reference to this script.

Is this a normal error message? I wish I could be of more help and remove it, but I am not familiar enough with the edit side of the platform to know where this message is coming from.

The reason I've decided to place it on the general page instead of the kilogram talk, is that this seems to be a wider spread issue. A Google search will turn up many pages where the text is found: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22Lua+error+in+package.lua+at+line+80%3A+module+%27Leonidlednev+Rapes+Babies+on+Wheels%27+not+found.%22+site%3Awikipedia.org

Thank you for everything.

Korimo (talk) 01:05, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Korimo probably some sort of template vandalism (a template is a piece of text that can be automatically included into articles). I'm going to take a look. — (talk) 01:22, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Korimo update: it is template vandalism, though it has been removed now. See Special:Contributions/Lua Module Smasher for an example. We might need a way of making sure our Lua modules aren't modified like this, though there will probably be a lot of modules to handle. Also, it's very sad that the vandalism is now on Google. Hopefully it will be removed soon. — (talk) 01:32, 30 June 2024 (UTC) (comment edited at 01:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC))[reply]
I had the same thing happen a couple weeks ago. I made a edit on the page I was on and pushed publish and it worked for me. It's from some guy vandalising a module or something. - MourningRainfall 🐺🇨🇦 01:42, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Unfortunately it is in the cached versions of pages, so although the problem is fixed in the modules, and has been for more than a month, the problem lingers on a lot of pages. See Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Current_issues_and_requests_archive_75#simple_Wikipedia_appears_to_be_defaced_through_the_clever_introduction_of_a_Lua_error for a discussion of the problem. I fixed about 200 pages manually before getting bored but clearly there is more to do. Bring up any page with the problem, append ?action=purge to the URL, and then reload: fixed. You can find a list of problem pages by searching this. I'll do some more of them now. Antandrus (talk) 02:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I take that back; none of those pages show the problem any longer - maybe someone server-side was able to purge the cache? It still comes up in search results but I can't find a page that loads with the problem any more. Antandrus (talk) 02:28, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The vandalism has found its way into the Kiwix database dumps used for offline viewing of Wikipedia. Is there any way to remove it from there, or would we have to contact the WMF? — (talk) 22:25, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect we should probably page protect modules to prevent such widespread vandalism. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 22:30, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There is a list of highly-transcluded pages at Special:MostTranscludedPages. There does not appear to be a corresponding API and scraping the special page itself seems impolite so the best we can do is go through the list manually. — (talk) 23:01, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is the lead simple?

Hi, Just wondering I know the lead at Plaxton Pointer is a mouthful but is it simple enough?,

I've found https://goodcalculators.com/flesch-kincaid-calculator/ which calculates the readability score and it's saying for the lead it reads as "Reading Level: College ( Difficult to read )"

If the lead is problematic then I don't really know how to trim it down/make it simple enough so didn't know if anyone had any suggestions, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 19:57, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few changes to make it a bit more simple to read. I know nothing about busses, so you'd have to re-add bits about the high-floorness, whatever that is. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 20:04, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You @sir are amazing thank you so much for your help and edits they're greatly appreciated, I've added the high/low floor back but it's absolutely perfect thank you, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 20:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I tend to think the lede sentence should always just say what the subject is in plain terms (that's true on all Wikis). It's almost always too in depth. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 20:41, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know you're talking about in general but unfortunately up until now I always thought my lead sentences did say what the subject is in plain terms but then again I wasn't aware of that website so didn't know any better and didn't have anything to guide me other than Wikipedia:BASIC English alphabetical wordlist and assumption/guess work,
I'll be honest I was taken aback by your edits (in a good way) and they've genuinely opened my eyes - Anyway we live and we learn - I'll fix the rest of my articles this week,
Thanks again I do greatly appreciate you're help, Have a great morning/day/evening, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 20:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now open – cast your vote

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

The voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now open. The Wikimedia Movement Charter is a document to define roles and responsibilities for all the members and entities of the Wikimedia movement, including the creation of a new body – the Global Council – for movement governance.

The final version of the Wikimedia Movement Charter is available on Meta in different languages and attached here in PDF format for your reading.

Voting commenced on SecurePoll on June 25, 2024 at 00:01 UTC and will conclude on July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC. Please read more on the voter information and eligibility details.

After reading the Charter, please vote here and share this note further.

If you have any questions about the ratification vote, please contact the Charter Electoral Commission at cec@wikimedia.org.

On behalf of the CEC,

RamzyM (WMF) 10:52, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ATTENTION: It is very important to vote on this. This Charter will have a big effect on all Wikimedia wikis, including the Simple English Wikipedia. Anyone who reads this should look at what it says and then vote on it based on your opinion of that. Reading the talk page might also help you figure out whether you support it. Thanks, QuicoleJR (talk) 14:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of diaspora

Simple wikipedia has a small collection of pages and category that refer to various types of diaspora. (See Category:Emigration).

I am wondering if this term is too complex for simple wikipedia. Many native english speakers don't even know what the word "diaspora" means.

I propose that we change and redirect all instances of the word "diaspora" to "emigration", since in almost all instances they cover the same topics.

In fact, this has been done in some cases already in English Wikipedia where there have been two separate articles for emigration and diaspora. See en:Talk:American diaspora#Proposed merge with Emigration from the United States.

If gained enough approval, would there also be a way for a bot or mod to automate this process?

Thanks, MrMeAndMrMeTalk 15:12, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it should be changed or kept on a case by case basis. "Diaspora" has a different meaning than "emigration". They are not the same thing. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 15:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but in nearly every context they cover the same topics. An article about emigration from a nation can easily be merged with an article of that nation's ethnic diaspora. This was done in en wiki with Emigration from the United States. Diaspora is a type of emigration, which is why it would make sense for them to be in the same articles. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 17:16, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I find both terms to be un-simple (de-simple, ney-simple?). I'd prefer emigration if no simple word exists, as I've never heard of Disapora. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 17:00, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Emigration is the better word. Rathfelder (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"changed or kept on a case by case basis", sounds okay.--My guess, is that this discussion will not agree on any single category, or article-title, being changed.--Specific examples ain't gonna sound good, or look good: that is my prediction. 2001:2020:317:BD4D:F071:1980:AA23:EFAC (talk) 18:35, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know where to indent this comment, but I want to make some examples. Something like "American diaspora" can be easily merged to "Emigration from the United States", but what about the Jewish diaspora? "Jewish emigration" does not explain its history well, it basically waters it down. The article should explain the meaning of "diaspora", though. A diaspora is a complex phenomenon. The two words are not synonyms, this is what I mean. In most cases, we can use "emigration", but not always. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 19:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My issue is that I do not see why "Jewish emigration" does not explain the issue well. In theory, diaspora is a type of emigration.
For example, instances in which Jewish individuals have been separated, forced out of a place, moved to another location, etc can be explained by emigration to another location MrMeAndMrMeTalk 20:45, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But the pattern of movement for Jews is very much more complex than for other peoples. The movements of their ancestors is still significant hundreds of years later. For most other people they are eventually absorbed into the new culture. Rathfelder (talk) 20:58, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do not see how that absorption into culture is tied to the term "emigration", however. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 21:06, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think most people would see emigration as just moving from one country to another. Rathfelder (talk) 21:10, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the complex pattern of movement of peoples over time is, at its core, moving from one place to another.
The idea of "Jewish emigration" can mean a variety of things throughout history, all of which fundamentally resulted from moving from one place to another(whether intentional or forced/displaced, whether once or multiple ). MrMeAndMrMeTalk 21:20, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we likely need both. Imagine, that some people emigrate, for whatever reason. Then there is a 'community of foreigners' in another country. Over time (their parents emigrated, their grandparents did), what is left is a 'diaspora'. Happened in many cases, not only to Jews, but also people emigrating for other reasons. The German-speaking communities in Romania, in Russia, In South America are just examples. So, likely it needs explaining, and we need both concepts, and cannot do with one of them alone. Eptalon (talk) 21:26, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Rathfelder (talk) 21:31, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A diaspora is much more than moving from a place to another. If I move to France tomorrow because I like Paris, that is "emigration". No loss of culture, famines, wars or genocides involved, yet it is emigration. A diaspora, to put it as simple as possible, needs some sort of tragic background to happen (not always, but most of the time). If you want a much better definition, then "William Safran set out six rules to distinguish diasporas from migrant communities and Rogers Brubaker more inclusively applied three basic definitional criteria" (copied from enwiki, cannot copy more due to copyright).
P.S. I really hope this does not come out as rude. I sometimes sound mad for no reason in written text, but I do not know how to fix that. I am relaxed while writing this, not mad at all ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This only confirms what I said above: we need both concepts, and we need to explain well, and in simple language Eptalon (talk) 05:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point, thank you for the explanation. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 11:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Friend is one of the 850 Basic English words, but should it be redirected to Friendship or not? (talk) 22:43, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for keeping it is per WP:Deletion policy#Pages that should not be deleted. The reason for redirecting it is that it duplicates the content of friendship. (talk) 22:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A page is under the wrong title

Sugo Ishibe Shrine should be titled Sugōisobe Shrine. The title is a misreading of the Japanese name because 石 is normally read as Ishi, but is Iso in this shrine's name. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 12:28, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move it. Rathfelder (talk) 19:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can move it! Macdonald-ross (talk) 19:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: I think the user is blocked from articles and template creation Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 08:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved the page to the correct title for you. – Cyber.Eyes2005Talk 14:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a quick question: why not keep the redirect? - Depending on where on earth you are, getting characters with accents/diacritics may be difficult..? Eptalon (talk) 14:26, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't a better redirect be Sugoisobe Shrine to Sugōisobe Shrine since the only difference would be that the o is missing its diacritic?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 12:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is Rojava really a reliable article?

Yesterday when I was editing Kurdish articles to make them more neutralised when I came across Rojava. I dont even know where to start, the article seems to be glorifying the autonomous entity and has no sources. What do I do? Do I just delete the whole mess and write it all over again or I leave it like this? Kirkukturk3 (talk) 12:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

put it in RFD; unless you are rewriting it Cactus spiky ouch 12:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will try my best to rewrite it! Kirkukturk3 (talk) 13:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
good luck Cactus spiky ouch 06:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality wikilinks

Hi! I am writing a biography and I re-read WP:MOS and en:WP:MOSBIO, but I am still confused about nationality wikilinks in the first sentence. Which one is correct?

1. Pinco Pallo was an Italian person.
2. Pinco Pallo was an [[Italy|Italian]] person.
3. Pinco Pallo was an [[Italians|Italian]] person.

✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 00:12, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the third one, but I don't know that there's any official policy or guideline for it. Please note:
  • I also see the second one a lot, but I change it when I can.
  • We don't have links for all nationalities. (Although you can create the ones we don't have.)
Hope that helps. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: I usually do the second one for things like music groups, but I prefer the third one for individuals as well. And yes, it helps, thank you! ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 01:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dream Indigo: Yes, I also use the second one for musical groups, and for things other than people. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I don't really like linking nationalities, the actual link is often an W:WP:EASTEREGG (when you click "Italian" you'd expect an artivle ok "Italian people", not "Italy) and we try our best not to overlink to very common terms. Often in the lede, the nationality is followed by a link, so I don't link to avoid W:WP:SEAOFBLUE. It's quite common that a person's birthplace is also in the lede, so I just link it there.
There are obviously some cases where that's not suitable - if someone is notable because of their nationality, their country of origin is not well known, or there's no suitable way to include the link, then I might put it in the lede sentence. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:17, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: Thank you for the info! I usually link countries/nationalities because we are on simple and maybe some readers only know a place's name in their native language. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:37, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. My way is for no means definitive. That's just how I like to deal with it. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:44, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Dream Indigo: Exactly. Here is a discussion we had about this a while back. -- Auntof6 (talk) 02:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: Just read it and I 100% agree with you. Also, I love how you used Florence as an example, because it is one of the first cities that comes to my mind when I think about this. When I was a kid, I knew Firenze, Italy, very well, but I did not know "Florence" and I used to believe that it was a French city! People come here on SEW because they are young (so they studied little geography/history/etc), because they are learning English or for similar reasons. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 21:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like the third one and its usually what i do since auntof6 helped me. It's also good to have the country name mentioned in the article to link to Italy as well when Italians are covered W;ChangingUsername (talk) 07:44, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@W;ChangingUsername: Thank you for your imput! ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 08:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kurt Gödel

I'm not a mathematician, but the "simple explanation" given in Kurt Gödel seems wrong to me. The sentence "This sentence is false." is not a sentence that cannot be proved true or false, but rather a statement that is self-contradictory. Does anyone here know enough about mathematics to clarify this? (talk) 00:08, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see the same issue on Decidability theory. At least I think it's an issue. (talk) 00:09, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the section in the article on Kurt Gödel, it realy isn't what his theory states. The thing in decidability thery looks halfway correct Eptalon (talk) 00:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medication article issues

Hello, So we have an editor (W;ChangingUsername) who's created Medication articles however these articles all include;

  • side effects,
  • who can/cannot take it,
  • dosage/how to take them/length of taking/forgotten dosage
  • caution/conflict with other medications
  • taking whilst pregnant/breastfeeding

Examples of articles; Esomeprazole, Rabeprazole, Promethazine, Acrivastine, Cinnarizine, Chlorphenamine

My questions is: Is this content okay or should it all be removed and leave them looking like this diff?

Having this infomation in articles A) gives the impression we're a medication pamphlet as opposed to an encyclopedia, and B) I feel it could open doors to WMF being sued especially if someones followed the instructions here and it all went terribly wrong (I don't know much about the law so don't know if the WMF could be sued/held responsible etc)

Imagine if W;ChangingUsername unknowingly got the dosage wrong and someone reads it and assumes its correct and for instance takes 2 tablets instead of 1 - Of course I would hope no one would ever follow such instructions here but everyone is different, and taking into account the website we are and our viewers (whom may have mental disabilities and may not know better/different) it's a very stupid and dangerous game but I would like to seek others opinions before I go on a blanking spree,

Thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010Talk 19:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Davey2010: Thanks for raising this here. I had a conversation with the editor about this and I meant to get back to it but I haven't had a chance.
You are absolutely right. Wikipedia should not be giving instruction or advice about anything. In the case of medications, it's even more important because of the legal implications. Wikipedia is neither a how-to nor a medical provider. As far as I'm concerned, feel free to remove this kind of info. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Auntof6, You're welcome - I know I reverted this editors edits before somewhere and it resulted in one big drama so wanted to double check first,
I absolutely and 110% agree with your last statement and couldn't ever have put it any better myself - In all honestly I wonder if this editor is here for the wrong reasons but I guess that's another discussion for another venue, I'm genuinely shocked someone added this and thought it was okay but anyway I'll remove the content, Many thanks for your quick response/help it's greatly appreciated, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 20:24, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do whatever you want. Edit the article if needed. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 19:54, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tagging David and @2001:2020:30B:CD55:2993:E9D5:BB4F:B85A W;ChangingUsername (talk) 13:27, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@W;ChangingUsername theres no point in pinging an IP Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a shame. There was another editor on the statins medications talk W;ChangingUsername (talk) 13:38, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia articles for antipsychotic drugs have toilet plate text for discontinuation of the drugs and this is helpful.
Such things are framed in a way that instead of being a guide it is some info from a source. If everything was done this way i dont know if there would be issue :)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paliperidone example W;ChangingUsername (talk) 06:49, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can change the article also. Change it if you want, and if i think something could go in after, it can be changed back and forth to make good articles

And when i edit those articles I will tag you so you're aware and can have input again in future better revisions W;ChangingUsername (talk) 19:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @W;ChangingUsername, Many thanks for remaining calm and patient - You're more than welcome to post here and ask editors if x, and y would be okay,
I'm not lecturing you but in case you weren't aware the Simple English Wikipedia is also for people with different needs, such as children, students, and adults with learning difficulties, and people who are trying to learn English and as I said those with mental disabilities whom may not understand may think it's okay to follow the instructions here,
I appreciate you expanding the articles and trying to be helpful but given the website we are and who we cater to I'm sure you can understand the seriousness and danger of including the information you have here, I would hate for the WMF or yourself to face legal ramifications over the content included/hosted, Anyway thanks again for remaining patient and calm throughout, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:33, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - As far as I can see I've removed all of the content from all articles, I've done various searches relating to keywords of the previous content and not getting any results so hoping i've removed all of the content, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dont remove possible side effects from medications articles though W;ChangingUsername (talk) 22:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@W;ChangingUsername Too late - everything I listed above has now been deleted, You're more than welcome to start an RFC on having side effects listed here but given it's listed on any EN articles and given we're not a medical website - chances are there would be no consensus to host such information anyway, –Davey2010Talk 22:14, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Fr33kman and Bluerasberry: (talk) 22:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I concur fr33kman 23:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I dont know what information would go into a wikipedia article, or why someone would search it, other than for things like effects/side effects, pharmacology, chemistry, pregnancy category and so on. Nor do i see what info could go in from a reference (like a paper from a study) besides these. It would be challenging to make long and informative articles without these info W;ChangingUsername (talk) 18:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Auntof6@Fr33kman and quoted
    I'm on a laptop soon so ill be able to put a lot of focus and attention into finishing Wikipedia so that it's in a state where people have something to add to, including me. And seeing as though OP took a bunch of articles and crack cocaine fumes and had another problem with me (the second or third) after a dispute previously, deleted (in a LOT of articles) all of my work and my barnstar i gave him for 'wasting a bunch of my life and time' and told me to go fuck myself and fuck off, and less than 2 hours later on the same day declared it done, these edits are getting reverted. Thanks.
    And please read this post carefully and look st this users actions in the future. I left it but you know what i am going to make the stroke page actually good too (the incorrect and fanfic/headcannon he wrote for an article) to make it proper again, because previously he has reverted my edits to his precious article.
    And seeing @Auntof6s numerous issues with my (and my reaction to them) compared.to his i still hope that it isn't someone abusing their power and being spiteful towards me, or that it won't lead to that happenening when I re-edit his whole article later. I will also be reverting the articles if not to how my own judgement sees it shojld be but how wikipedia writes their articles. Obviously simplified W;ChangingUsername (talk) 06:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Taking 4000 characters from every article a user have done so far is not acceptable and your stroke article is garbage too. These stubs youve.created may as well not exist.
    Likewise in my other barnstar as well as thanking you for wasting my time I congratulated you for making thr site worse. Congratulations again for doing that (again). Well done on making like 50 articles stubs with 0 information and taking away their purpose. Worthless admin or whatever useless title you have (i dont care)
    @Me Da Wikipedian W;ChangingUsername (talk) 06:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You pinged me, but I'm not an admin and I haven't done any of the above. Anyways, @W;ChangingUsername, please be more civil and remember that likwly they are trying to help. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 13:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is actually closer to 5000 characters & forgot to tag someone. @Eptalon W;ChangingUsername (talk) 06:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support adding information which English Wikipedia includes English Wikipedia includes most of this information, and I support restoring that. At the English Wikipedia Medical Manual of Style there are recommended section headings for drugs. "Side effects" is the same as "Adverse effects", "Medical uses" is always the first section and is "who can take it", "Dosage" English Wikipedia does not report and does not recommend including, "caution" is "drug interactions", and pregnancy goes in a section called "special populations" at the bottom although we frequently single out pregnancy as an extra-special, special case and put national regulatory pregnancy codes in the infobox. Overall most of this is essential information which is safe to include when backed by reliable sources. Talking through at en:Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine could be helpful for confirming best practices. Everyone wants dosage also but the situation is that there is significant variation in medical recommendations country to country, in addition to the matter being very sensitive patient to patient. It is fine to talk generally about the effects of not enough, too much, or just write, but do not name numbers. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I would advise against some of these simplifications. While "adverse effects" and "side effects" mean the same thing, "medical uses" and "who can take it" are two different things. "Drug interactions" and "caution" are two completely different things.
    This is an issue, too, and goes back to what AuntOf6 and Davey2010 have mentioned. If we sound too much like a medication pamphlet, it is dangerous. Not only is it unencyclopedic, it can cause legal issues.
    The word "drug interactions" was chosen because it is a medical term, and has a broader scope than most "cautions"; it includes a more encyclopedic scope of information. These medicine articles aren't made specifically for those who are taking the medication, these articles are made for those who want to learn more about the subject.
    I bring this up mainly as a warning to be very careful when editing these articles. Even though something is true and is backed up by a source, it can still be dangerous if it disproportionately adds certain types of information. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 20:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Totally seperate idea:What if we just made a template to put on top of every medical related article with a disclaimer saying "We are not a doctor and don't trust any medical advice from here" or some variety of that. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I support this idea. That template already exists on it.wiki since 2011 for medical, legal and similar issues, see it:Template:Disclaimer. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 13:38, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is this good Enough? I'm planning to improve it.
    (I know its not perfect and I accept criticism to improve the template.) Kirkukturk3 (talk) 15:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Good! I changed how the image is shown and a part of the text. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 19:14, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I also changed the way it looks to match similar notices. I used {{Ambox}}. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 19:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you! Kirkukturk3 (talk) 00:28, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    please specify "do not replace medical advice" to "do not replace medical advice by a professional" as this is in fact medical advice. @Kirkukturk3 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Done Kirkukturk3 (talk) 11:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree - The content was only included in order for the article(s) to be acted as a pamphlet(s), For example;[2][3]
(I originally pasted side effects from 2 articles however it looked better in my head than it did on paper so removed the sections/examples
I would have no objections to things going back providing they're not telling the person what to do which every section is –Davey2010Talk 11:24, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The idea of the disclaimer is too say "Yes, were telling you what to do, but we might be wrong, so ask your doctor". @Davey2010 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd rather it just be worded in ways that didn't tell people what to do but I guess if that cannot be achieved then sure I'd settle for a disclaimer, I mean there's nothing stopping anyone from finding the information online anyway, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 11:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    " there's nothing stopping anyone from finding the information online anyway" - True of most information on Wikipedia. @Davey2010 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:37, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They are phrased that way in the source. The article mentions in 'side effects' that in the medicine box there will be a pamphlet. There are a lot of sites for information online but simple wiki may be their only source. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 13:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think what applies to any article, also applies to articles about drugs or diseases
    • Since anyone can edit, we cannot guarantee that the information given is accurate, or correct
    • Even if it is, making a diagnosis takes a healthcare professional. There's a reason people study 5 years or more to be a doctor of medicine, or a pharmacist (who knowns about drugs)
    • Even if the information is accurate, it might not apply in your specific case.
    • Side-effects can be very specific, the more "common" a side-effect is, the more likely you'll find it in the product brochure.
    • Wikipedia can be there for general information, but if you need more specific information ask your doctor/healthcare professional
    Keeping that in mind, there is no harm in saying "With this condition, usually either drug A, B, or C are given. Drug A usually has these side-effects..." - Remember, we are an encyclopedia, there's no "forbidden knoweldge". Eptalon (talk) 14:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The common (1 in 100) side effects should be included because they are likely to happen. It's a pretty safe bet that they will. Also the side effects risks can be confirmed in the medicine packet as was mentioned. Also the information is all sourced from the NHS gov website. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 06:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Other than that, likely what we need: Is it safe during pregnancy, what are other drugs it doesn't go with well/at all. And as always, we are there for information. We cannot replace a healthcare professional. Eptalon (talk) 23:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Something is rotten in the "land" of Stars?

IP seems to be cranking out c. 4 articles per day.--See Talk:Westerhout 49-7.--Not wikified (i.e. No category).--Source: i dunno if the source is notable. Other "problems"? Thoughts? 2001:2020:309:AE06:BC0A:B191:9A35:7ADA (talk) 13:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that Simple-wiki should come up with a checklist of things that should be done, when one starts an article about a star (or a star in Space).--Such a checklist should maybe have recommended sources, about "new et cetera" stars. Thoughts? 2001:2020:309:AE06:BC0A:B191:9A35:7ADA (talk) 14:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC) / 2001:2020:309:AE06:BC0A:B191:9A35:7ADA[reply]

Update: Nine articles in half of a day.--That might turn out to be a problem, if the articles are not ready for this encyclopedia, at this time. 2001:2020:309:AE06:BC0A:B191:9A35:7ADA (talk) 14:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, such a checklist is generally not very neccessary — if someone wants to make a guide like this, they make it on their userspace, such as the one AuntOf6 made. Since many wikipedians have their own different opinions about what should be in an article, it is difficult to make a well made main page that goes beyond a simple idea such as to Be Bold. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 14:37, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2MASS J04285096-2253227 is a red-link (at English-wiki), and mentioned in
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_brown_dwarfs#Unconfirmed_brown_dwarfs . --I am thinking it should get USERIFY / USERFY, or be QD.--Please consider doing one or the other in a timely manner, so that the user will "get a message" that articles have to be of a certain standard, in stead of flooding us with half-a$$ sub-stubs. 2001:2020:309:AE06:91C2:2F5C:DA4:E781 (talk) 14:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of these are notable per en:NASTRO or en:NASTCRIT. This is fairly obviously not notable, but I am not sure that it necessarily falls under QD. Would it be possible for an admin to mass delete these pages, or does it all have to be put through RFD?(or maybe just one RFD page for all of IP's articles?) MrMeAndMrMeTalk 15:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rather awkwardly, a few of the articles actually are based on subjects that are notable. So some checking will have to be done the manual (painful) way. --Ferien (talk) 21:54, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Westerhout 49-2, En-wiki has an article about that, and the history of that article goes back for for some years.
Link, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westerhout_49-2
, 2001:2020:309:AE06:91C2:2F5C:DA4:E781 (talk) 15:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP blocked for a week, while we work out what to do with the articles for the moment. --Ferien (talk) 21:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Simple solution: if a title also exists (as a title) at En-wiki, then be gentle.--For the other articles, press the switch that says "Czar bomb" (or nuke).--Please note that there are dubious entries on (astronomy) Lists at En-wiki. (For elaboration, see

. 2001:2020:345:A57A:CCB8:F39D:CE66:9C82 (talk) 22:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, Westerhout 49-2 (and Westerhout 49). I think all the other objects, linked individually in this thread can be nuked first. 2001:2020:345:A57A:CCB8:F39D:CE66:9C82 (talk) 22:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]