Hello, Marcus20, and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia! Thank you for your changes.

You may want to begin by reading these pages :

For some ideas of pages to work on, read Wikipedia:Requested pages or the list of wanted pages.

You can change any pages you want! Any changes you make can be seen right away. You can ask questions at Wikipedia:Simple talk. At the end of your messages on talk pages, please sign your name by typing "~~~~" (four tildes)

If you need help just click here and type {{helpme}} and your question and someone will reply to you shortly.

Good luck and happy changing! Osiris (talk) 04:42, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

New articlesEdit

Thanks for your new articles on fish! I wanted to let you know about a change I made to them. You had listed the English Wikipedia articles as references for these. We don't use Wikipedia as a reference, even Wikipedia in other languages. You can read about this at WP:CIRCULAR. I changed these references into interwikis, which link to the matching article in other languages without using them as sources. Using interwikis is not only allowed, it is encouraged! I look forward to seeing more of your articles on sea creatures. :) --Auntof6 (talk) 13:18, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry Auntof6 but I don't seem to understand what you are telling me :(. Are you telling me that we are not allowed to get any information from Wikipedia? Please reply to me soon. Marcus20 (talk) 15:15, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
No, he doesn't mean that. He means you can't use the article itself as a reference. So, in our article on (say) Clogs, we can't use the English wiki article Clogs as a reference. We can take material from it, including some of its references. But we can't just say (in effect) "see English wiki's article". Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:28, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
Mac is right. I'm talking about references. References are used to show that something said in an article is true. We can't use Wikipedia for that. If another Wikipedia article has references, we can certainly use them. Sometimes we say "sources" instead of "references", and that can be confusing. We can definitely take information from other Wikipedias to make articles here. When we do that, we need to make a note that we got the information from there, but that is different from an actual reference. You might want to read Wikipedia:Citing sources for more information. If that still isn't clear, let me know and I'll try to explain again. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Okay thanks a lot, I understand now. I'll keep this in mind. Thanks again! Marcus20 (talk) 14:30, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Biological classificationEdit

Please note that any link to the biological use of the words class, order and family need to be disambiguated as follows: class, order, family. Regards, Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:22, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


Marcus, please do not add excessive details to the taxoboxes. They should not contain the same level of detail as English wiki. This is covered by our general remit.

There is quite a big consensus on the wiki that we will not make our science pages too scary. It's bad enough that we have to use many words which are not simple, because they are essential to science.

Regards, Macdonald-ross (talk) 12:00, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Japanese spider crabEdit

Hi Marcus20,

I looked at your new article Japanese spider crab. It seems that much of the information is a shorter and somewhat simpler version of the article on English Wikipedia. That is OK, but I have two suggestions.

  • Please give attribution See point 15.
  • Please check your new references. The En references looked better. Weird Asia News and random blogs aren't very good references.

Thanks, Gotanda (talk) 06:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)


Please do not remove material which is supported by reliable references. If you do want to remove such material, please discuss on talk pages first, giving your reasons. For example, you removed a whole series of references plus text on Isurus. Why did you do this? Please put the material back, or explain why not. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Marcus, please stop making such big changes to a page (Shark) which is already pretty satisfactory. More is not always better, and additions must be simplified and well written. I have replaced your section on fins: if you read it through you will see that it needs a lot of editing. You must do this editing, not just plonk it down on the page! In general, leave alone what is in good shape; don't change it without a reason. You have given no reasons for the changes, and no discussion on the talk page of the article. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:21, 30 July 2013 (UTC)