Qwertyxp2000

Welcome

Hello, Qwertyxp2000, and welcome to the Simple English Wikipedia! Thank you for your changes.

You may want to begin by reading these pages:

• Help
• Rules
• Links to useful pages
• How to write Simple English pages
• How to copy from another Wikipedia

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! Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 07:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Using the cite web template

I noticed you were having some difficulty with the {{cite web}} template on the article Resultant force. There are two required fields that must have information in them; the url= and the title= fields. If one or both is missing the information, you'll get an error message (usually telling you which field is missing the information. The template I use is:

<ref>{{cite web |url= |title= |author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date= |website= |publisher= |accessdate= }}</ref>

If you want, just copy what you see above and paste it somewhere you can find and use it; like a notepad file. When using it, copy and paste in the url= address from the webpage, the title=, the author= field (it can be left as-is if there is no author mentioned), the date= (date, last updated date or if they're both missing use the copyright date at the bottom of the page), the website= field (optional), the publisher= (which you can find at the bottom of the webpage, usually) and finally the access date=. The access date is the date you created the citation. If everything is there you should get a consistent source citation from it. This is just one of several cite web templates. Best to pick one and use it consistently. If you have any questions just ask. Remember too, you can ask any question anytime at Wikipedia:Simple talk. Just add it to the bottom and someone will help you. Good luck. Rus793 (talk) 15:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

August 2014

Hello, Qwertyxp2000. It looks like "Zugzwang" was derived from the English Wikipedia or another version of Wikipedia. If that is indeed the case, please make sure you add some form of attribution, either in your change summary or on the article's talk page. This must be done, even for derivative works, or the article will be deleted in time. More instructions on how to do this are at Wikipedia:Transwiki attribution. Thank you. Attribution protects you and Wikipedia. Any and all articles copied from another wiki project must have attribution even if simplified. Thank you Rus793 (talk) 18:21, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Help with simplfying

In your recent edit comment at Copper wire and cable you wrote: Please help improve the new added part of the article. I need to know the simplified parts of those information that are in the English Wikipedia. If you're asking about how to simplify enwiki articles perhaps this might help. If you read the help article Wikipedia:How to write Simple English pages it explains quite a bit on how to go about simplifying a more complex article. As the page says, think of your readers. How would you explain something to a younger person or someone who is just learning the language? Typically you'd use simpler words, simpler sentences and you might not go into as much detail as you would normally. Say, for example, you were working on an article Battle of the Atlantic. The enwiki article has the sentence: "The convoys, coming mainly from North America and predominantly going to the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union, were protected for the most part by the British and Canadian navies and air forces." This might be simplified into the following sentences: Some convoys from North America went to the United Kingdom. Others took supplies to the Soviet Union. British and Canadian warships protected them. Planes also protected the convoys where they could.

This is just one of several choices an editor could make in simplifying an article. But hopefully it give you an idea of how to go about it. It's broken down into simpler sentences (you do the best you can with technical subjects) and uses simpler words and links to words not in Simple or Basic English. Note too that the linked words at enwiki don't always match the (internal) links at simplewiki. Either the article doesn't yet exist here or is under a different title. Also, to help readers we would link words (to other articles or to simple Wiktionary) that aren't linked in the original article. The choice of which words to link is up to the editor. There is more advice on wikilinking in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. The simple Wiktionary has a second purpose. It identifies words that are in Basic English. Some of these words might have articles but if they're already in Basic English then the link isn't really necessary. Say for example you wanted to know if the word "ship" was a Basic English word. Looking up ship at simple Wiktionary it says it is: "ship is part of the Basic English 850." If you looked up "convoy" you would discover it isn't listed in simple wikt and currently there isn't a simple wiki article for that word. But there is an article at enwiki. In that case you could create a red link (as I did above). This marks it as a future article that you or someone else could write in the future. An article shouldn't have too many red links, but a few are acceptable. Anyway, I hope this is helpful and that the articles linked here help you in simplify an article from another wiki. Don't worry if it isn't simple enough. Other editors will often pitch in and make small changes to simplify it even more. Rus793 (talk) 18:10, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Net force

I patrolled your latest article Net force on the New pages list and found a few problems. This is a near-duplicate of one of your first articles Resultant force. In fact, you used the same two source citations. The first problem is, in verifying these two sources, the term "net force" isn't used at all. They are good for the Resultant force article, however. In reviewing the two articles at the English Wikipedia, which I suggest you read also, I didn't see where either one indicated it was synonymous with the other. So they may or may not be correct on that point. But it is reliable sources that will dictate what the facts are. If you have found information saying the two terms are the same then this should be a redirect to the Resultant force article AND you need to add (and cite) reliable sources that say they are the same. I'm going to change this for now into a redirect and mark it patrolled. Would you be willing to do some research into finding out what the case is here, then come up with the appropriate edits to whichever article you think needs it? You can change the redirect back to an article if you find they are different AND you have new source citations for this article (Net force). Or, if you find they are the same and can verify this, then leave the redirect and edit the Resultant force article to show it is the same as net force. Wikipedia needs to be authoritative on subjects like this so even though we write simple articles we need to get this right. If you need any help, just ask. Thanks for looking into this. Rus793 (talk) 21:40, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Flags

Better to solve problems than add flags. When you add flags to a page you are just leaving it to someone else to do the work. If you can solve a problem, then please do it. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

History of New Zealand

Hi, Qwerty. I'm afraid this new article that you created wasn't simplified enough from enwiki. Besides that, the parts that were changed had a lot of bad grammar. I was going to move the article to your userspace, but then I saw that you already have it there, so I just deleted the mainspace article. Please work on improving it before moving it back. If you'd like some specifics, let me know. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I'll keep improving on it. However, I don't know anyone else who would help as well. Maybe I should create a draft from scratch, rather than rewording things from enwiki. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | changes) 06:33, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

You can do that, but there's nothing wrong with copying from enwiki as long as you simplify enough. Some of the linked pages in the welcome message above can help you do that. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Protection icon on Donald Trump

Hi, Qwerty. I noticed that you added a protection icon to Donald Trump. Not all protected pages need an icon. The problem with putting it on temporarily protected pages is that someone needs to remember to remove it later. Do you plan to keep track and remove it yourself? If not, please consider taking it back off. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:42, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes. I will promise to take it off upon removal. You know it is easy not to forget anything about Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, because they are featured in all media just about everywhere! Qwertyxp2000 (talk | changes) 01:43, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

OK, sounds good. We just have so many things that people forget to remove (for example, categories for future things) that I try to minimize using them. Thanks! --Auntof6 (talk) 02:55, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Donald Trump

Hi, Qwerty. You might have noticed that I removed the {{USPresidents}} template that you added to the Donald Trump article. That is because Trump is not President yet. A person becomes President when they are sworn in, which happens in January (usually on January 20, but once in a while that is changed). Please don't make changes that indicate that Trump is President until he is actually sworn in. Thanks. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:44, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

@Auntof6: But as soon as he is announced as actual president, please re-add. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | changes) 00:22, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm not planning to do that, but I'm sure someone will. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:24, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

WannaCry ransomware attack

• You should not replace an accurate statement by one which is inaccurate. Being simpler is not more important than being accurate (this has long been decided on the wiki). An arrest is the act of taking a person into custody. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:05, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Ultrasound

Good catch, I think! Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I think so too. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | changes) 08:44, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

comma

You removed the comma from Menstrual Cycle, I put it there, so it would be easier to read the sentence. But if you want to remove it it's okay. --Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I also refined the sentence structure for menstrual cycle to make it a little easier for readers to digest each sentence. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | changes) 02:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Sounds good! --Thegooduser Let's Talk! :) 🍁 02:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

RfD nomination of LZ77 and LZ78

An editor has requested deletion of LZ77 and LZ78, a page you created. We appreciate your changes, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in the nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Please comment on the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/LZ77 and LZ78 and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also change the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns. But you should not remove the requests for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you very much. Rathfelder (talk) 23:22, 7 February 2023 (UTC)