Wikipedia:Simple talk
Simple talk | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
This is the place to ask any questions you have about the Simple English Wikipedia. Any general discussions or anything of community interest is also appropriate here.
You might also find an answer on Wikipedia:Useful, a listing of helpful pages. You may reply to any section below by clicking the "change this page" link, or add a new discussion section to this page. Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~). Please add new topics to the bottom of this page. Please note that old discussions on this page are archived periodically. If you do not find a discussion here, please look in the archives. Note that you should not change the archives, so if something that has been archived needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page. Some of the language used on this page can be complicated. This is because it is used by editors to talk to one another, so sometimes we forget. Please leave us a note if you are finding what we are saying too hard to read. |
| |||||||||
Are you in the right place? |
Question from a new editor
changeHi there!
I've noticed that on the main page it's stated that this is a site for everyone, including children.
My question is, aren't children under 13 prohibited from creating an account under coppa law? (At least that's how it works on the wiki I come from). What do you mean for everyone?
Additionally, since Wikipedia isn't censored (it doesn't even look like there's a policy on graphic violence / graphical content) you can easily find both pornographic and extreme graphical content such as self harm hosted on Wikimedia Commons using the search tool from this site.
I'm a bit concerned, mainly confused.
Thanks, Wmyttmlimvty (talk) 09:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello. This is definitely a good place to ask such a question :). The main goal of simplewiki is to help people learn English - it is most often visited by students and people who want to learn the language. As far as I know, no local/WMF policy prohibits children under 13 from creating accounts. We even have a wiki specifically for kids. As for pornographic and other sensitive content: this is a problem that affects all wikis, editors' opinions are divided. On simplewiki we tend to avoid very sensitive content in places where the user wouldn't expect it. On the other hand, the photo of, for example, a penis in the article Penis is not sensitive, but purely educational. We don't have any pornographic photos here in places where users don't expect them. However, Wikipedia is not censored, and we cannot completely get rid of images that may be considered sensitive if they are used for education. Best regards, BZPN (talk) 10:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- @BZPN Please clarify what you mean by "we even have a wiki specifically for kids". 2601:644:907E:A70:6C22:C35:9395:7E3F (talk) 10:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think they mean Wiki junior. Simplewiki has no content aimed specifically for children. fr33kman 10:41, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- I meant m:Childrens' Wikipedia in the context of children under 13 creating accounts on Wikimedia. BZPN (talk) 11:41, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- @BZPN Please clarify what you mean by "we even have a wiki specifically for kids". 2601:644:907E:A70:6C22:C35:9395:7E3F (talk) 10:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- Depending on where you live being a child can mean anyone under 18-21. We aim to write pages that can be read by someone in US grades 7-9. This includes people who are 13. Remember also that our editors live in many countries not just the US. I'm not personally aware of any editor under age 13. Most of our article edits are made by anonymous users as well. Hope this helps fr33kman 10:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- Where it says this is a site for everyone, it's talking about reading, not necessarily editing. An account isn't needed to read the content. Actually, it isn't needed to edit, either, but I think that statement is about reading.
- As far as whether the content is appropriate for children, know that all Wikipedias, in any language, are not censored. That is Wikipedia policy. It is up to a child's parent or guardian to control, as they see fit, what a child looks at. -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, we don't require someone to have an account to edit. That's where the Wikipedia statement "an encyclopedia that anyone can edit" comes from. We aren't censored, but my opinion is that people have wildly different opinions on what items should be censored.
- Yes, a child could see an image, or read about something that might not be age appropriate, but, also on the other hand, it may be the only way to learn about certain things. Wikipedia is reader descression advised, the same as how the whole internet is. If there are specific images that are inappropriate for the topic being referred to in the subject, please let us know.
- However, an article on a subject is likely to have an image related to that subject. We don't stop things being graphically shown. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:15, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
- After doing a bit of research and discussing this with some folks I've learned that Wikipedia is a not for profit organization, for which coppa does not apply. I'm still concerned about some images from Commons but I figured that since they are not used on any article and therefore not being used with an encyclopedic purpose I'll b fine to flag them for deletion. Wmyttmlimvty (talk) 16:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Wmyttmlimvty: Commons is a separate site, but I can tell you that the fact that an image there is not being used on an article is not a reason to delete it. Images on Commons are used in more places than Wikipedia. It's just that the Wikimedia sites are the only ones where they can tell you they are used. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, I will quickly summarize what I already wrote on Talk:Main page, where a post like this was originally made:
- Wikipedia does not record ages / birth dates of ediors, as far as I know. While some ediots may be minors (definition of what that means varies by country), we encourage ediots not to reveal their age, date of birth, locatioon or other sensitive information.As an oversighter, I have permanently removed such information in the past.
- As to our disclamers, Wikipedia is not censored; it may show content you might not want to see. As an example, out article on self-injury contains a picture, it shows a forearm with typical injuries. It is relevant to the article, and there's no point in asking for it to be removed.
- As to editing, everyone sees the same page.
- Wikipedia is non-profit, there's no selling or trading of addrress data. To my knolwedge, there's no way for an editor/admin to display the email address associated with an account, other than his/her own.
- Eptalon (talk) 23:02, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, I will quickly summarize what I already wrote on Talk:Main page, where a post like this was originally made:
- @Wmyttmlimvty: Commons is a separate site, but I can tell you that the fact that an image there is not being used on an article is not a reason to delete it. Images on Commons are used in more places than Wikipedia. It's just that the Wikimedia sites are the only ones where they can tell you they are used. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
Requesting a move
changeI think Gaia should be moved to Gaia (disambiguation) and Gaia (mythology) should be moved to Gaia as it's the primary topic. 2601:644:907E:A70:598C:4AE6:1FDF:ECC8 (talk) 04:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- Done by @BZPN Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 06:20, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- @BZPN: I did the move of Gaia (mythology) for you. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:34, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks @Auntof6 :). BZPN (talk) 11:58, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- @BZPN: I did the move of Gaia (mythology) for you. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:34, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
Looking for feedback
changeHi there :] Figured I'd look for feedback before nomming myself for adminship. Given the fact that I just recently returned, I won't do it this instant, but I'd like to help with clearing the backlogs. Anything would be appreciated! Justarandomamerican (t • c) 08:00, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Justarandomamerican Here are few things I noticed that will improve the chances:
- More work on the content. You barely have any page creations
- Lengthy period of continuous activity
- More participation in community discussions.
- --BRP ever 08:35, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, definitely! I have a few decent-sized articles, I'd say decent quality too, but I could always use more content work. The other points are great too! Justarandomamerican (t • c) 08:48, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- @BRPever: Do you perhaps mean continuous activity? -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Auntof6: oops, yeah fixed.--BRP ever 12:12, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Personally, I feel like you just need more contributions and participation. Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 04:57, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Red links are helpful
changeHi guys, if you do not know why red links are useful, it is because red links can use to make new pages and grow Wikipedia. In the 2008 study, they found out that the red links make Wikipedia grow. Thanks guys, thetree284 (talk) 17:55, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
- Okay!! Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 04:56, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Thetree284: Thanks for this reminder. There is info about this at the link above, and even more at enwiki's WP:REDLINK guideline.
- There are some places where red links are not good because they are specifically for directing people to other pages, more so than a red link in article text:
- In hat notes
- In a related pages section
- Hope that helps! -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Proposal: Add link to the global rights log to the Special:UserRights interface
changeI believe the the topic name is self-explanatory. Such a change would help in (admittedly rare) cases where user rights seemingly vanish or magically appear because they weren't changed in our local wiki (for example: CheckUser and Oversighter promotions are done through meta's rights log).
Even if it see's rare use it would not change the interface of Special:UserRights at all except from an extra line. Basically: Help track some changes in rights and wouldn't change the interface noticably (unless you have a keen eye).- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 12:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- Is there any difference in the way those logs are presented? I am slightly worried about the confusions it might cause. BRP ever 12:39, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm stupid, probably should've specified the "global rights log" I was talking about was the meta-wiki rights log, not the true global rights log. I probably got confused by mw.org calling it simply the "global rights log".
- My fault, sorry!- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 14:50, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Reminder: first part of the annual UCoC review closes soon
changePlease help translate to your language.
This is a reminder that the first phase of the annual review period for the Universal Code of Conduct and Enforcement Guidelines will be closing soon. You can make suggestions for changes through the end of day, 3 February 2025. This is the first step of several to be taken for the annual review. Read more information and find a conversation to join on the UCoC page on Meta. After review of the feedback, proposals for updated text will be published on Meta in March for another round of community review.
Please share this information with other members in your community wherever else might be appropriate.
-- In cooperation with the U4C, Keegan (WMF) (talk) 00:48, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Possibility of new pages commuter town, exurb, and edge city
changeSo I'm wondering if commuter town (en:commuter town), exurb (en:exurb), and edge city (en:edge city) should be new pages, or should they be included in suburbanisation or suburb? 2601:644:907E:A70:E87A:50DA:5C34:E7D2 (talk) 08:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
- If you think that you can write more then 3-4 sentences on any of them please create them. Merging is always possible if we see there is not enough content. Eptalon (talk) 13:16, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Marking pages as patrolled
changeHi :) I accidentally marked a random page as patrolled (the page was appropriate, as it was an already-closed-as-successful request for deletion). But now I'm wondering: is there any point in marking non-content pages as patrolled? I mean pages like manteinance categories or requests for deletion. Stuff other than articles, templates and content categories. Stuff like userpages, talk pages, etc. Should I mark those as patrolled (if appropriate obviously), should I leave them alone or is it indifferent? I remember one day I marked many manteinance categories as patrolled, but maybe it wasn't as useful as I thought. Sorry if my question isn't clear or is dumb, I don't really know how to explain myself better than this. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 12:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- In general, the focus of patrollers should be on articles. There is no harm in marking other pages as patrolled, but it should be a secondary focus. For example, marking 50 maintenance categories as patrolled does not do any harm, but it also takes your time away from patrolling 10 articles, and those 10 articles are more important than those 50 categories. Griff (talk) 15:05, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Griffinofwales: Thank you :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 16:25, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Dream Indigo: Marking maintenance categories as patrolled probably isn't very helpful. Marking content categories can be helpful, but there's more need to focus on articles. -- Auntof6 (talk) 16:42, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Auntof6: Noted, thank you :) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 17:47, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
Category:Buses
changeHi, Just wondering; should articles in Category:Buses be moved to individual bus categories (ie to "Category:Alexander buses", "Category:East Lancs buses", "Category:Optare buses") etc etc,
It may seem daft me coming here but I know we don't create cats like En does and I didn't want to go off doing this and then find out there were objections so thought I'd come here and ask/seek peoples opinions first, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 19:35, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think that the categorisation you are proposing is appropriate per the guideline and makes sense. Griff (talk) 20:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @Griffinofwales, Brilliant thank you for replying and for your help it's very much appreciated :), Have a lovely evening, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 21:15, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- It's absolutely ok, but only if when those categories are created meet our limit of a minimum of three articles in the category. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:14, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not arguing with you as you don't make the rules .... but how is this place ever supposed to grow when we have backwards policies such as this ?, Still rules are rules and you wouldn't be doing your job if you didn't enforce them ... but it's bs that in 2025 this policy still needs to exist, Meh I know I'm moaning at the wrong person,
- Anyway noted - once I've finished I'll make sure to have the one-article-categories deleted, Thanks –Davey2010Talk 22:10, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
After the moving on English Wikipedia
changeCan we have consensus to move Israel–Hamas war to Gaza war (2023–present)? 205.154.244.130 (talk) 00:41, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- We have already renamed the article once to match enWP and I will note that enWP is using "Gaza war" for the article title. I believe that either the current title or the enWP title would be appropriate, but also think this is better suited for the article's talk page. Griff (talk) 01:39, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- I just thought nobody would look at the talk page, so I posted here. You could move it to Gaza war. 205.154.244.130 (talk) 01:40, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- I Support this move. Contributor118,784 Let's talk 12:17, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- I just thought nobody would look at the talk page, so I posted here. You could move it to Gaza war. 205.154.244.130 (talk) 01:40, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- It may be a good idea given the variety of non-state actors involved in the war, but it is also important to note that each project is independent of one another and that no content from any other project takes precedence over that on this project. One must ensure that any changes are reflective of facts and keeping any bias at minimum. Steven1991 (talk) 12:30, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
- The (warfare or) war did not start in Gaza, on October 7, 2023.--Another thing: Could one say that the "Israel-Hamas war", included warfare on the West Bank?--I am thinking Keep name for now.--Note: i have not looked at the En-wiki discussion about changing the name; there might be good arguments there, that go against "my" idea. 2001:2020:359:A0DC:B5C0:9C69:7329:5BBB (talk) 22:09, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
For now, it might be good enough, to have redirect to Gaza war (since 2023), and redirect to Gaza war (2023–present). 2001:2020:359:A0DC:B5C0:9C69:7329:5BBB (talk) 22:12, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
By the way, French-wiki and Italian-wiki have the same title as we do (and that might indicate that there is no hurry to make a decision). 2001:2020:359:A0DC:B5C0:9C69:7329:5BBB (talk) 22:18, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Reliable References
changePlease editors help me check if this site is reliable enough to be used as a source for Wikipedia article am just trying to clarify it. Signthepost (talk) 22:19, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, it looks quite reliable. Could you tell me what specific element you would like to use and in which article/information? BZPN (talk) 22:30, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- In an article related to science or biographies I would say. Signthepost (talk) 22:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- I don't see a problem with the source itself. It's basically a website that provides scientific publications. You can use it. Best regards, BZPN (talk) 23:17, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- In an article related to science or biographies I would say. Signthepost (talk) 22:34, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Zenodo is an open publishing site, so just about anyone can publish papers, notes, data - anything there without peer review. It's a good place to link to a paper, but this is about something science related or especially medicine / health related, it really needs to be published in a peer-reviewed magazine. Treat Zenodo similar to a blog with self-published material - use with great caution. Ravensfire (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- w:WP:ZENODO at the RSN/Perennial sources page on enwiki has some good info on that and similar sites and the reasons to be very cautious with using sources from them. Ravensfire (talk) 00:55, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Is deleting pages only admin?
changeHi, I know this may be a stupid question but are deleting pages only for admins? Or is there other permissions like rollbackers or something that can do it? Please help me clear this question up, thanks and happy editing! :) 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 (𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼) 18:27, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, only administrators can do this. In addition to them, global administrators (on some wikis), stewards, WMF employees and system administrators can also do this. I have not yet encountered the possibility of deleting pages by non-advanced user groups in any Wikimedia project. BZPN (talk) 18:37, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- @BZPN: The Portuguese Wikipedia has this (pt:Wikipédia:Eliminadores). JJPMaster (she/they) 18:58, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- @BZPN Oh okay, makes sense because they don't want inexperienced users or anons going around deleting a whole ton of good pages, am I right? (lol) Well I am an experienced user and I am not an admin (maybe someday). But thank you for answering! :) 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 (𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼) 18:39, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- @JJPMaster True, but I cannot read Portuguese yet. 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 (𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼) 19:04, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Adelaideslement8723: Google translate can be your friend! :) -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- True, but posting machine translated articles can also get you blocked. Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 08:44, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Cactusisme: We were talking about reading, not writing. -- Auntof6 (talk) 14:13, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- True, but posting machine translated articles can also get you blocked. Cactus🌵 spiky ツ 08:44, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Adelaideslement8723: Google translate can be your friend! :) -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Auntof6 Yes true, thank you. :) 𝓐𝓭𝓮𝓵𝓪𝓲𝓭𝓮 (𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴 ♡ 𝓬𝓸𝓷𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓫𝓼) 21:31, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- hello all, I think that this wiki has a policy where adminship is easy to get, and I would also guess that most regular contributors have the flag. AI generated content may be bad, but it's no reason to not run an RFD when in doubt Eptalon (talk) 11:54, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Two articles (with some I-am-not-sure-what)
changeDoes the text of the following two articles have a "common denominator, in a not-too positive way"? Are those two articles, good enough for this encyclopedia? I have my doubts (but I can not say for sure, what seems to be rubbing me the wrong way, about the style of writing in those articles).
New article of today
Another new article of today.--Both topics have articles at En-wiki - in addition the claim of notability, I am not contesting. 2001:2020:359:A0DC:B5C0:9C69:7329:5BBB (talk) 23:03, 7 February 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:359:A0DC:B5C0:9C69:7329:5BBB (talk) 23:07, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Is this site reliable
changeCan someone please help me check if this site is a reliable reference for Wikipedia article Amandachapin (talk) 03:20, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Basically, it looks like a regular news portal. I don't see any problems with reliability (it's the BBC). BZPN (talk) 08:49, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- I Support BZPN here. The BBC is a very reliable source. Contributor118,784 Let's talk 11:21, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Amandachapin, If you go to en:Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources that tells you all of the sources that are acceptable (and unacceptable) here, The BBC is a widely trusted, reputable and reliable news source so that can be used here, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 11:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Amandachapin Also no that website cannot be used as it's a user-made website hosted on NeoCities.... which to my knowledge has nothing to do with the BBC, Please only use https://www.bbc.co.uk/news, Thanks –Davey2010Talk 11:35, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- Indeed, thanks Davey for noticing this! The original BBC Igbo website is here: [1]. So this website is illegally impersonating the BBC. BZPN (talk) 11:42, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- I've reported it to Google as an impersonation site and (if I get time) will contact the real BBC to notify them of the impersonating page.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 12:03, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- I've also reported it to NeoCities to hopefully stop it at the source.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Amandachapin Also no that website cannot be used as it's a user-made website hosted on NeoCities.... which to my knowledge has nothing to do with the BBC, Please only use https://www.bbc.co.uk/news, Thanks –Davey2010Talk 11:35, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Amandachapin, If you go to en:Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources that tells you all of the sources that are acceptable (and unacceptable) here, The BBC is a widely trusted, reputable and reliable news source so that can be used here, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 11:32, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
- I Support BZPN here. The BBC is a very reliable source. Contributor118,784 Let's talk 11:21, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Grant (money)
changeIs it better to keep Grant (money) as its current AI version as a complete article, or revert back to the non-AI, incomplete, version? 2601:644:907E:A70:C990:69D7:57E4:7FC8 (talk) 05:48, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- I fixed the article, removed nonsense, added references and simplified it. It should be better now. BZPN (talk) 10:23, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
Hellabyte/Ronnabyte merge
changeHi, @No more redundancy had redirected Hellabyte to Ronnabyte per the "consensus" at Talk:Hellabyte#=_Marge_with_Ronnabyte,
Unaware of that discussion I had changed it and redirected Hellabyte back to Byte#Names_for_larger_units as per the Enwiki and per the fact the Ronnabyte article didn't even mention Hellabyte so it didn't make sense to me,
Anyway @Superfroggy21 has since stated in that discussion that they disagree with my actions and that it should be discussed here (I did state I'd come here if they objected),
Given consensus was achieved even though I wasn't aware of it I still sort of feel crap for changing this so wanted to seek opinions, I have wondered if both are the same thing but surely if they were the Enwiki article would point to the Ron article too ?, Anyway many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 21:00, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Davey2010: Yes, they are. en:Hellabyte redirects to en:Hella#SI prefix, which states:
An online petition begun in 2010 by Austin Sendek of Yreka, California, seeks to establish "hella-" as the SI prefix for 1027... In 2022, the International Bureau of Weights and Measures adopted the prefix "ronna-" to represent 1027, as the symbol H, commonly used to represent "hella-", is already in use in the metric system for the Henry, a unit of inductance.
- Sidenote: I strongly suspect that Special:Contribs/No more redundancy and Special:Contribs/Superfroggy21 are the same person. In particular, Special:Contribs/No more redundancy was created today, has done nothing outside of advocating for the merge, and has a username that suggests their account was created for this purpose. —76.212.74.243 (talk) 21:44, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hi @76.212.74.243, Oh okay interesting thanks for the heads up, If no one else comments then I'll self revert and add mention to that article,
- Re those two; Agreed it looks very odd so I've filed a CU request, I hadn't looked at their contribs so thank you for also pointing this out, Your help has been very much appreciated thank you :), Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 23:32, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
- Struck as both are now sock-blocked, Given Enwiki redirects I feel we should follow suit for simplicity but if others believe a merge should happen then I'll do that, Thanks 76 for spotting this your help is very much appreciated, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 01:02, 10 February 2025 (UTC)