Wikipedia:Simple talk

(Redirected from Wikipedia:SIMPLETALK)


There seems to be something wrong with twinkle. It's leaving QD notification on the talk page of someone completely independent from the page instead of the one who created it. I am not sure what's causing it, so leaving a note here to see if anyone else is facing that issue. And if there are any ways to fix it if this is a bug.-BRP ever 11:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[]

One issue for me since long is that occasionally no warnings is given to page creator. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:17, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[]
My guess without digging too deep is that they aren't using the Twinkle through preferences. They are calling something from their javascript. Which would be why its happening to them and as far as I know, no one else has seen it. -Djsasso (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[]
FWIW it happened so because that vandal was redirecting the talk page to some other page, and TW issues a warning on the redirect target page. JavaHurricane (talk) 11:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Yeah I didn't look too closely, that would do it. -Djsasso (talk) 12:08, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[]
It might be worth borrowing something from the enwiki version, since that stops the warning if the user talk page is a cross-namespace redirect. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]


Hello people, my usual annual thread. Who is interested in organizing this, been doing this for the last 2 years, it really don't need too much of time just making sure the article is meeting the usual standards (very similiar to the recent women edit-thorn in requirements I will say). IMO will be good for 2 or better 3 judges to be effective as if judges were to participate, it need to be marked by other judges and do remember there can be a person in competition with the judge for the title, so some sort of COI is hard to avoid if there's only 1. In other words, if there is only 1, the judge is better not to participate. I can try to guide any new judges if needed, but sorry I am quite busy recently IRL, and I simply don't have time yet to restore IRC access, so it will need to be on wiki, and I expect 2nd half of Nov to be busy. However, as usual I will try to do my best if needed as a judge.

For participants, is 4 articles related to Asia, new ones not expansion, 3500 chars, 200 words long, properly simplified and having references for all content and no maintenance templates can be slapped on them, then it's a pass. Welcome all to participate, as usual the judges won't make it hard. Prizes include postcards and barnstars (on simple at least).

If there are some participants and judges, I will then set up the page for this year. Best, Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[]

I can judge again this year --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 21:43, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Thanks @つがる for volunteering again, appreciate it. I had set up the pages for 2021, I will also tentative be the organizer. Do sign up at the sign up list on the page if you are interested, and some more organizers will be much welcomed :) Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:26, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[]
If possible, I will try to participate this year :) -BRP ever 09:15, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[]
If I were eligible, I would, but I'm not and I'm not sure if I can join since I don't live in Asia (unless you consider the Pacific regions to also be part of Asia as well). SHB2000 (talk) 09:57, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@SHB2000 Hello, anyone can participate, the article needs to be somewhat Asia related but not the participants. Anyway, like Association Football, Timor is also participating in the ASEAN cup, just as how Australia is in Asia Qualifiers for World Cup, so those can be in scope too. Welcome your participation. :) Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:55, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Bump: Last call for organizers, I will soon update meta on the local team this year. @つがる Last chance to quit if you want :P. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
LOL. Nope I am not quitting! :) --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Let's talk about the Desktop ImprovementsEdit


Have you noticed that some wikis have a different desktop interface? Are you curious about the next steps? Maybe you have questions or ideas regarding the design or technical matters?

Join an online meeting with the team working on the Desktop Improvements! It will take place on October 12th, 16:00 UTC on Zoom. It will last an hour. Click here to join.


  • Update on the recent developments
  • Sticky header - presentation of the demo version
  • Questions and answers, discussion


The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes will be taken in a Google Docs file. The presentation part (first two points in the agenda) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, and Spanish. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the talk page or send them to

Olga Vasileva (the team manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) 15:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Hello! I'd like to remind that the meeting will happen today. You are welcome to join! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 15:53, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Hi guysEdit

Hi gang! I know it's been a long while since I've said hi, but I keep you all in my thoughts and read from time to time I'm doing well, I've started another doctorate this year in clinical psychology (ClinPsyD) after doing a psychology degree (BSc(Hons) Psychology & Counselling, at the Open University in England. I've retired from medicine and wanted to do something else with my life, so look forward to me editing psychology based articles (and, of course, medical articles). I hope you are all doing well and that everyone got through Covid-19 okay. Big hugs to the old gang and hand shakes to those of you new to me. Yours, fr33kman 22:14, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[]

So very glad to see your name pop up in my watchlist today! Glad you're well, and welcome back around. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 00:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Fr33kman You don't probably know me, since I joined a few years ago but, HEYYYYY, I am so glad to hear from you! --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 00:45, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
hi guys i am new to this wiki good to be here i am really looking forward to getting to know everyone! Cocopuff2018 (talk) 00:52, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Nice to meet you! AnApple47 💬 00:55, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
+1 Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:46, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Welcome back! It's always good to see people return. Simple's barely changed. :) -BRP ever 04:53, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
A new editor that sees your past marks everywhere. 💠Ely - Talk💠 08:56, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]


Hello 👋 Everyone, Twinke is not working for me, i wonder if it is the same for everyone, whenever i use twinkle like for anything i'll get an error message shows Failed to retrieve edit token. what should i do about it. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 03:15, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Yep it is not working for me either. I can just do everything manually though. --Tsugaru Let's Talk! :) 🍁 03:33, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Same here. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:33, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Should we report that Bug on Phabricator? 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 04:37, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Twinkle is a user script, so I think the solution is to find the maintainer for that, it's not a system tool per say, so phab won't be suitable unless is a config change that changed the thing, but mostly it should be the script for TW to deconflict not the system to accomodate unless all scripts are broken. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:46, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Please someone help to recover the tool; otherwise we lost a great helpful Tool that helped us in a super speedy way to prevent vandalism and improve the encyclopedia. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 12:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
We faced the same problem in bnwiki. —Yahya (talkcontribs.) 18:17, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@Sakura emad this phab task about Internet Archive bot tagging issue, How it is connected with this problem? --MdsShakil (talk) 19:15, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@MdsShakil: Corrected. —Yahya (talkcontribs.) 19:36, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@MdsShakil i do apologize i was confused   🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 02:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@Yahya thank you alot. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:42, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@Yahya, you might want to take a look to the recent changes in simplewiki's Twinkle and try to apply them to your installation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:39, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
I'm happy to report AntiCompositeNumber and 1234qwer1234qwer4 have put in sufficient work to see Twinkle now currently operational. Thank you for the patience. Operator873 connect 04:20, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Thanks @AntiCompositeNumber indeed. My suggestions were pretty much just following the instructions at mw:MediaWiki 1.37/Deprecation of legacy API token parameters. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:38, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Automated systemsEdit

  • What is RedWarn? An automated system of some kind? Why do we allow new users to use automated devices? Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:12, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    Is it like Wikipedia:Huggle? Or even SWViewer. These are 2 tools that are sort of semi automated and can run here IRRC. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:43, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    See w:en:Wikipedia:RedWarn. 512 MB (talk) 14:45, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    Macdonald-ross, RedWarn is basically Twinkle, but it's more user friendly. It's used quite a lot on the English Wikipedia. It's just as automated as Twinkle is. --Ferien (talk) 15:52, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    There was an error in RedWarn icons in simple-wiki - I showed words instead of icons. The font I am using is ff-kievit-web-pro. How can I fix the icons? 512 MB (talk) 16:16, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    is there a version of redwarn we can use on simple? I'm looking for something new since twinkle isn't working at the moment. AnApple47 💬 18:43, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    Some users have copied the RedWarn script from the English Wikipedia and made a few changes, like User:JJPMaster/RedWarn.js, but there is no official RedWarn script here. --Ferien (talk) 18:46, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    @Macdonald-ross @Ferien @Camouflaged Mirage Please can someone fix Twinkle it was really great help for us. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    @Sakura emad See the thread below, seems like some mediawiki issues. There is a page to be fixed but needs an IA. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:58, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    well done thank you. 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:11, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Adding deletion tag to article: Failed to retrieve edit token.Edit

Hello! Any idea why am I getting a Adding deletion tag to article: Failed to retrieve edit token. when trying to nominate an article for RfD? The article I am trying nominate is Peter Jean-Marie. --Ramaswar57 (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]

I think this is because of I think MediaWiki:Gadget-morebits.js needs correction.—Yahya (talkcontribs.) 10:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]
So, it seems the issue is caused by a config change which needs to have a fix in the js, so this requires an IA attention. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:24, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]
can anyone fix the problem? 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:11, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Still not fixed! :( --Ramaswar57 (talk) 16:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Unblock request of Purplebackpack89..Edit

Hello all,

Purplebackpack89 has recently requested for his block to be revieved. He was community-banned (after a discussion) in 2011. I think the community changed a lot since then, and it would be time for this decision to be re-assessed; after 10 years. Personally, I don't think that unblocking poses much of a problem, almost all people change in a decade. What do other people think? - Again: this is not a vote, it is a discussion; a support or oppose without argument is not really helpful. So, what do other people think?--Eptalon (talk) 16:54, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]

  • My initial thought here is no. The tone of the unblock request reads as openly confrontational, and looking back on the previous discussions it really is the same tone and behaviour that was part of what got him blocked to begin with. Doing some looking around, I found more recent discussions at en:User_talk:Purplebackpack89/Archive_17#ArbCom enforcement, and en:User_talk:Purplebackpack89/Archive_17#TRM running for ArbCom...really? where the user is still actively talking about how he dislikes the editors involved in this original ban discussion. All said, I just don't think the Wikipedia needs the drama that seems to follow this user around, and I am fine with the ban staying.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 20:41, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Comment The user need more patient to be unlocked Just do good (talk) 20:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • No. As much as I'd love to say that it's been a while and is worth another chance (even with their 11 blocks on record, all of them were 10+ years ago and relatively compressed), the evidence why this is still necessary would be the edits on other projects that led to the block in the first place. And the unblock request, which has both en:WP:NOTTHEM and how EVERY few words is in CAPS. If anyone has missed it, it reads: It is INSANE that this block has continued for A DECADE, during a time which I have made thousands of edits on other Wikipedia projects. Can somebody explain why something that happened a DECADE ago should disqualify me from getting an addditional chance on this project NOW? Indeffing in the first place was excessive and it should never have lasted a DECADE. I'd like someone to explain why I don't get a second chance, even though editors with more serious issues, such as sock- and meatpuppetry, have been reinstated. If anything, it shouldn't be my job to prove reinstatement, after this long, it should be others' job to provide evidence why this is still necessary, which, to be honest, they never did in the first place. I feel PERSECUTED. In many cases, the evidence demanded is evidence that can only be obtained by letting me be unblocked for awhile. Naleksuh (talk) 06:34, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • No. The tone of everything he has said after the block is an illustration of why we blocked him, plus the complete absence of any admission and promise to reform. It only just stops short of actually promising to carry on as before. I'm fine with the block staying. Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:23, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • For now, a Yes per Eptalon, pending reading about this specific person's case. People's editing styles change naturally over time. Frankly, I don't think any Wikiproject should have indefinite blocks. They should all have time limits, even if they're ten years. Per Macdonald-ross' concerns, if Purple does whatever it was again, block them again. Does anyone remember off the top of their heads? What is this person supposed to have reformed from? Darkfrog24 (talk) 11:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
The crucial point which you're not addressing is his lack of acceptance of his past behaviour, and his lack of promise not to behave that way again. No-one is released on licence who does not accept his misdemeanour and promise to reform. Whether a block is indefinite rests more on the individual than anything else. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:10, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
I disagree. The individual is not the one who decides to impose or lift a block. An admin or the community makes that decision, and it may in fact have very little to do with what the blocked person did or didn't do on-Wiki. I've seen people get blocked and punished for things that just plain didn't happen. A friend of mine got blocked from for "lying" about Mars when he was quoting NASA and providing links to the sources he'd used.
But we're talking about Purple, and not my not-lying space fan friend. The problem you point out is very easily solved. Someone has to go to P's talk page and say "Hey Purple, you got blocked for [this specific thing that you did]. Do you promise not to do [specific thing] again?" This is more important than people realize. For one of many things, I've learned that Wikipedia admins are the opposite of a conspiracy: They don't always agree with each other, and they don't always know that they don't agree with each other. What if some admins think Purple is blocked for WP:THIS and others think Purple is blocked for WP:THAT? Then even if Purple apologizes for WP:THIS, the second group of admins will feel the way you feel: That Purple hasn't understood or hasn't owned up.
So what was it that Purple did? I wasn't here on Simple in 2011. Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:40, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Okay, I read the conversations at the links that Chenzw was so good as to provide. I see a lot of "this person doesn't understand why they were banned." Again, the solution is simple: Someone with the authority to do so should just tell them. I feel like I might be projecting unfair treatment I've seen elsewhere onto Purple's case, so I'm going to take a break and come back clearheaded. EDIT: To be fair, some people did specifically cite "canvassing," "incivility," and "didn't change X when someone told them to," though that last one might not be misconduct, depending. Is that accurate? Is that what Purple is banned for doing? Could we, if we chose, go to Purple and say, "You were banned for incivility, for improper canvassing, for not stopping [specific], and not anything else"? Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:38, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Support As I did in 2019. Ten years is a long time when there is clear evidence of an intent to change and improve. What is Wikipedia if not a group of people that chooses to Assume Good Faith. The trusted status on other wikis is sufficient for me to believe this person can be constructive and a good contributor to this project. I'm more than happy to believe this person's intent is to be a good community member, but I am also not blindly trusting. I think the community ban should be removed with a one and done warning for a term of 1 year from the date of decision. In this period, any significant behavior or disruption issues would see the ban reinstated. However, if they rejoin the community, the editor would be considered in good standing on this project and enjoy the same treatment as any other editor on the project. Operator873 connect 20:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    I like this idea very much. PP89 wants a chance to prove themselves, but others here are concerned of a repeat performance. PP89 can hardly complain of getting the exact chance they've asked for. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:10, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    I think I'd be on board with this if the "clear evidence of an intent to change" part was more clear to me. From everything I'm reading, the user still thinks they were correct and the ban was wrong. I'm not sure what has changed. --Gordonrox24 | Talk 20:39, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Support unblocking with the conditions mentioned in the comment above. To me, blocks have always been to prevent abuse and not to punish users. The block has lasted for a long time, and given their editing history in other wikis, I think the editor won't cause any further disruption.-BRP ever 21:44, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  •   Oppose. Not convinced at this point, and that's too bad his actions ten years ago brought this block. I'm not convinced by the tone as well, and the mindset that Wikipedia is the only WMF project. SHB2000 (talk) 23:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • No based on PBP's own statements in the request. "Indeffing in the first place was excessive," shows they still do not accept why they were banned. "I'd like someone to explain why I don't get a second chance," ignores the long block history that led up to the indef; PBP had many, many chances. "even though editors with more serious issues, such as sock- and meatpuppetry, have been reinstated" is just plain whataboutism. "it should be others' job to provide evidence why this is still necessary, which, to be honest, they never did in the first place." again shows they have never accepted the reasons for the ban. Gotanda (talk) 22:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    • I do/don't agree. They/(S)he has not even addressed the reason to WHY they where blocked, and I still don't understand the last line which makes absolutely no sense: "In many cases, the evidence demanded is evidence that can only be obtained by letting me be unblocked for awhile." What sort of evidence? It could and CAN be obtained without editing. People can see the contribs freely. 11 bans is... more than enough to consider an editor unworthy. This line: "even though editors with more serious issues, such as sock- and meatpuppetry, have been reinstated." is almost an attack on a group of editors, and both sock & meat puppetry are forgiven if the socks (if the same user) are blocked and the sock master account is used for legitimate purposes, like a regular wiki account. Also, socking is allowed for legit purposes like doppelgängers.
  • Now obviously 10 years seems too much for a block (I would go mad for even a fortnight) and I think PP98 could be forgiven and we can assume good faith. It is possible PP98 was an en-wiki member (only member) and just... disrespected the simple community. In that case, the conditions for unblocking will change. Different wikiproject members have different opinions. Here, look at Hockeycatcat but on en-wiki... oof.
I think the block can be forgiven if PP98 edits like a regular user for constructive purposes. 💠Ely - Talk💠 09:13, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Oppose Nope, contrary to what User:Operator873 says above. I don't see any clear indication they intend to improve. They still blame everyone else for why they were banned instead of taking responsibility for their own actions. He is still openly confrontational which is a large part of the reason he was blocked. -Djsasso (talk) 20:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]


At this point I think it is important for all participants to familiarize themselves with previous ban reviews:

I will be adding my thoughts to the above original section shortly. Chenzw  Talk  14:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Thank you, Chenzw. EDIT: But I'm not seeing a discussion with links and proof. Did it happen before the first ban discussion? Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:21, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]
If I remember correctly, the first link is the discussion that led directly to the community ban. Prior to the community(-sanctioned) ban, the editor was already blocked multiple times. Nevertheless, I will do another search in the archives and get back to you once I find anything new. Chenzw  Talk  16:38, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Wikipedia page hereEdit

If you look at it, above the Wikipedia logo there are two rude words. How do you remove it? Link:

Fixed.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 21:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Thank you.--SimpleWikiExpert (talk) 21:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Help for leaving warning messages while Twinkle isn't workingEdit

You can manually leave warning messages. Here's how to find the appropriate template to use.

  • Click on the Twinkle warning link to bring up the window.
  • Select the relevant warning level and issue.
  • To the left of the text describing the issue, Twinkle shows you the template to use. Make a note of it, then exit the Twinkle dialog.
  • On the user talk page, go to the section for the current month, or create the section if it doesn't exist.
  • Look at the template to see what parameters are required or available.
  • Add the template, being sure to substitute it, like this:
If you're using parameters, it might look like this:
{{subst:uw-vandalism2|page name}}

Hope this helps. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:42, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Wikipedia:User_talk_page_warnings will be an useful page for all the warnings / headings. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:54, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]
It can be useful, but the method I described tells you the template to use so you don't have to search for it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Category questionEdit

Should we adopt the same practice that enwiki does en:WP:TEMPLATECAT in which they dont use templates for adding pages to content categories? Nunabas (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]

I would be in favor of that for content categories, not only for the reasons given on the enwiki page, but also to stay in sync with enwiki since we copy templates from there. However, I don't think we should remove the cats from templates here if the corresponding enwiki template still has them--again because we copy (and occasionally update) templates from there.
So maybe the way we should implement this is to copy/update templates from enwiki that have had the categories removed. (In fact, that implementation might happen inadvertently.) And when we do that, we need to hardcode categories that are no longer added by the template(s). --Auntof6 (talk) 18:46, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[]
If someone wants to make it official and update the policy I can start migrating categories out of templates. Nunabas (talk) 13:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
I understand wanting to get this done, but something like this usually need a discussion with input from a good number of editors. Discussions usually go for at least a week, whereas you just raised this question yesterday. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:03, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Allow the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia to unblock me as I have been blocked for weeks until I cannot begin to create many new pages on different things such as the hadith, and all about the world..Edit

Hello. Could you please help me to be unblocked from the Ukrainian language Wikipedia, as I have been not editing in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia for weeks, and I would like to begin editing in it through the hadith qudsi and also the Polish author Nela the Little Reporter. Could you please allow the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia to unblock me? Thank you.

Each wiki makes its own decisions. We cannot make decisions for another wiki. Sorry. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:29, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]

I have been not editing pages in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia for a long time and the request to unblock me in itEdit

Hello. I have been not editing any pages in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia for a long time, which is more than a month, so could you please allow the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia to unblock me, as I gonna start editing new pages in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia with hadith qudsi and Nela the Little Reporter? I sincerely week to you this thing.

Thank you.

Sorry, 548asiaslavia. We here at Simple have no say in what the Ukranian Wikipedia decides to do. You should look at its own unblock policies. ...but if you scroll up you'll see a Simple user, Purplebackpack89, asking to be unblocked/unbanned here. Look at what people do and don't like about what Purple wrote. Maybe others on the Ukrainian Wikipedia would react the same way. Good luck! Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:55, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@Darkfrog24: Socking user from this years archives. 💠Ely - Talk💠 09:27, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]
The above user + IP (Previous section) is evading a lock. The master is User:Adam Asrul. This is a known LTA from zhwp etc, suggest we DENY. --Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Citrivescence's disruptive editingEdit

You really need to block Citrivescence as they had sent admins to block similer IPs like this one,2600:6C40:5400:1D2B:849:F134:9A1F:9A1A on different wikis in which the IPs were learning to change Wiki sites. This message that Citrive left: [[1]] seems like he is tired of the messages an warnings. They want the harassment to go away. Can you look at Citrivescence's changes on the different wikis. -- (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Asking what one is and is not allowed to do about harassment is not Wiki misconduct. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:44, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[]
This IP is a troll of Citrivescence. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]


What on earth is a token parameter? I'm having trouble reverting text. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:28, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Yeah, Twinkle isn't working for me either. I also get the same "token" error. But RW works good for me and seems to be more fast than TW. --Hulged (talk) 08:35, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Same issue! Redwarn saved me. 💠Ely - Talk💠 09:27, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Voting begins for the MCDC ElectionEdit

Voting for the election of the members for the Movement Charter drafting committee is now open. In total, 70 Wikimedians from around the world are running for 7 seats in this election.

Voting is open from October 12 to October 24, 2021.

The Movement Charter committee will consist of 15 members in total: The online communities will vote for 7 members, 6 members will be selected by the Wikimedia affiliates through a parallel process, and 2 members will be appointed by the Wikimedia Foundation. The plan is to assemble the committee by November 1, 2021.

You can learn more about each candidate to inform your vote here

You can also learn more about the Drafting Committee here

We are piloting a voting advice application for this election. Click through the tool and you will see which candidate is closest to you! To try out this tool, visit: App

Go vote at SecurePoll: Vote

Read the full announcement: here

Best,Zuz (WMF) (talk) 18:43, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[]

I don't like to be blocked in the Chinese-language Wikipedia, as the Chinese-language Wikipedia is totally different from other-language WikipediaEdit

Hello. As I see that the Chinese-language Wikipedia is totally different, I would like to ask you for this thing: Could you please encourage the Chinese-language Wikipedia to unblock my account, or could you bring me to the question part in the Chinese-language Wikipedia? I indeed don't like to be blocked in the Chinese-language Wikipedia for too long as I understand it is totally different from other-language Wikipedia which I used to experience it. I will be to much worried if I'm being blocked in the Chinese-language Wikipedia while I already experienced that the Chinese-language Wikipedia is totally different from all experiences that I feel in other-language Wikipedia.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 548asiaslavia (talkcontribs) 18:35, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]

  • Each wiki decides for itself how to administer the blocking procedure. We have no influence there, and they have no influence here. I notice you did not sign your post, so a good start to your quest would be that you learn how WP works. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:03, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
This is an LTA evading their global lock. SHB2000 (talk) 10:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Effect of Apple’s iCloud Private RelayEdit

SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 21:34, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Learn how Movement Strategy Implementation Grants can support your Movement Strategy plansEdit

Movement Strategy Implementation grants now provide more than $2,000 USD to put Movement Strategy plans into action. Find out more about Movement Strategy Implementation grants, the criteria, and how to apply here.

Also, the Movement Charter Drafting Committee election is still ongoing. It would be great to increase community participation. If you haven't voted now is the time. Please vote here before October 24. Regards, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 13:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

How do I explain how a biological procedure is performed without citing the research of scientists who performed the procedure?Edit

I was warned not to cite sources too close to the author when attempting to put together a page on iPS cells to fill the gap of information available in simple English for EFL students on how the calls are produced. Context being that it's a common topic in English textbooks in Japan, and the new push towards BYOD means that students are encouraged to supplement the information in the textbook by examining sources online.

It's my first edit, and I was immediately arrested by the vandalism cops for using sources too close to the author. Which, you know, can obviously be a massive problem. But what's the actual procedure in this case? If I can't cite the article about how they were discovered then what do I cite? My background is in CS and not biology, and I can't imagine a reason it's mistaken to cite a paper other than the one an algorithm was originally proved and analysed unless it was withdrawn from publication when explaining how an algorithm works.

Am I insane? I've read the en wiki article on third party sources, and asked for clarification from the bloke who rolled me back but received no reply.

I'd really like to contribute to the wiki because I feel like it could be a useful educational resource going forward. Am I unwelcome? Do I have to wait for a professional biologist who is also proficient in simple English to write the page? What do you want me to do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fujippisensei (talkcontribs)

  • If you don't tell us what you are referring to, how can we answer you? Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:39, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    • En page on iPS cells is heavily flagged as being dependent on sources too close to the subject. My judgement is we should wait until the En wiki page is stable before doing our version. In any event, our version will need an experienced editor rather than a specialist subject-matter editor. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Another thought: I wonder if the user is really familiar with En wiki? The obvious place to discuss his point of view would be on the En Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular Biology/Molecular and Cell Biology. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:05, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[]
@Fujippisensei:, since you're here on the Simple English Wikipedia, I'll tell you how to do this for here: Go to WP:PRIMARY, WP:SECONDARY and WP:TERTIARY. They're all part of our big No Original Research policy. The short version is that Wikipedia's favorite food is secondary sources. It sounds like you're trying to use an original academic study as a source. Here, we treat that as a primary source. You can use a few primary sources in an article, but they must not be the only or the main sources. That's because we require proof of notability, proof that an idea or thing is important enough to be in a Wikipedia article. The best proof is someone else, someone independent of the original research team, writing about it and getting published.
What you want is secondary sources: Did anyone other than the original research team write articles about the subject? (If "IPS" is "induced pluripotent stem cells," then lots of people did.) Newspaper articles. Magazine articles. Reviews. It may seem counterintuitive, but for a Wikipedia article source, Scientific American or the science section of a normal newspaper is a better choice than Nature, Science or Lancet. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:59, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[]
Yes, that's right. Also, the secondary source can help you to phrase the content in a way suitable for non-expert readers. We usually only have non-expert readers! Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:53, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Talk to the Community TechEdit

Read this message in another language


We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will begin on 27 October (Wednesday) at 14:30 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. Click here to join.


  • Become a Community Wishlist Survey Ambassador. Help us spread the word about the CWS in your community.
  • Update on the disambiguation and the real-time preview wishes
  • Questions and answers


The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, German, and Italian. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 23:00, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Vandal Talk pagesEdit

How should I warn a vandal who redirects their talk page? AnApple47 💬 17:03, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[]

@AnApple47 You could undo the redirect first, the do the warning. You could also manually edit the page and type in the warning over the redirect. The first option is probably better if there was other talk on the page before. -- Auntof6 (talk) 17:28, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[]