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 Note that you should not change the archives, so if something that has been archived needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.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? See WP:AN to speak to an administrator. See WP:RFCU for CheckUser requests. See WP:OS for oversight. See WP:RFRB to request the rollback feature (which administrators can grant). See WP:VIP to report vandalism. Add this page to your list of watched pages —    change

Oxford Comma

Should we or should we not include the Oxford Comma in wikipedia articles? Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 16:48, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Personally, I'm in support of what en wiki has Wikipedia has no preference between the two styles, but requests that the chosen style be used consistently within an article from w:WP:Oxford comma. The holy wars over which comma style to use are only slightly less well known that Star Wars vs Star Trek and vi vs Emacs. Ravensfire (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

We have the situation that hopefully, an article gets edited by many people. Thee people check the article, they fix things, make it simpler, perhaps they add content. As I read it, the Oxford Comma (or Harward Comma, or perhaps a few other names) is the comma before the last part of an enumeration/list of things. The focus of this wikipedia is to be simple, and in that context getting consitenct use (or non-use) is probably hard to get between different editors. Also keep in mind that the lvel of English of these people is probably different. Oner of the things that makes this Wikipedia interesting is that all the editors have a different background, and there are several varieties of the Engiöish language. Eptalon (talk) 08:03, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm being accused of copyviolation, is that true?

(I doubt whether I should ask this question here or at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. I'm happy to move it to there)

At my ongoing unblock request at the English Wikipedia I'm being accused of copyviolation here (at Simple Wikipedia). Because its a serious accusation I would like to raise the issue here. If it is copyright violation it is a policy violation and it should be removed and I would like to rewrite it.

I start this topic because 1) its about simple Wikipedia, 2) I would like to improve me edits/works if they are non constructive, 3) I would like to explain here what I did and 4) I didn't start it at the English wikipedia becaue I can't start a topic there.

• Valère Depoorter is "way too close paraphrasing of the source" of this source. (no specific sentences indicated)

The prose from Nieuwsblad van het Noorden after Google Translate translation; next to the article I wrote:

“Depoorter was best known in Avelgem for his 30-year political career,” says mayor Lut Deseyn. “When he first ran in 1964, he became alderman in a coalition with the then liberal mayor André Wymeersch.” “In the 1970 elections, Valère had to settle for a role in the opposition, but in 1976 he served as first alderman for the first 3 years under leader Roger Tack, after which Valère became mayor in 1980. He held this office until 1994. Valère Depoorter was loved by everyone because he governed his municipality like a true ‘father of the mayor’ without making any distinction between his residents.” — Joyce Mesdag (Nieuwsblad van het Noorden) (translated by Google Translate)

Valère Depoorter (c. 1930 – 9 December 2024) was a Belgian politician. His political career lasted 30 years and was for 14 years mayor of Avelgem from 1980 to 1994. Depoorter started his political career in Avelgem in 1964. He was a member of Christen-Democratisch en Vlaams (CD&V). He became municipal officer (in Belgium called "schepen") in a coalition with the liberal mayor André Wymeersch. After the 1970 elections, he ended up in the opposition. In 1976 he was for three years the first alderman under Roger Tack. Depoorter became mayor of Avelgem in 1980. He retired in 1994 and was succeeded by Lieven Vantieghem. Depoorter is praised that during his time he was mayor he made no "distinction between the residents" and that he was was "loved by everyone". Depoorter died on 9 December 2024, at the age of 94 years old.

I used four articles that are stating more ore less the same content. In the Wikipedia article I list the factual information from the four articles. Note that the for articles are short with a lot of factual information. If you start writing a Wikipedia article in a chronological sequence with the factual information from these articles, it is logical that the listing of the data is consistent and the time sequence is the same. But if the content is the same, it is not yet copyrightviolation.

• Piet Zwaanswijk with "Copyvio/close paraphrasing"

It's about one specific sentense in the article. In the article I translated a part of a sentence literally on purpose from what was written; because he is according to that article regarded like that. After rereading I placed de two subjective statements between "" to make that even more clear.

"Piet Zwaanswijk was one of the most respected post-war visual artists of Haarlem. His work had a profound influence on the local art scene" — Wessel van Opstal (haarlem105.nl) (translated by Google Translate)

Zwaanswijk is regarded as "one of the most respected post-World War II visual artists of Haarlem" and his work had a "profound influence on the local art scene" After rereading I added two times "" Zwaanswijk is regarded as "one of the most respected post-World War II visual artists of Haarlem" and his work had a "profound influence on the local art scene"

(Side note: This secion is absolutly not meant for a discussion about my block request. But what in my unblock request, several people have problems with my English prose writing here at Simple Wiki (sorry I'm not native) or article notabilty. Please come to me and let me know as I'm happy to work on it.)

Thanks for your time, SportsOlympic (talk) 14:46, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

I believe en:WP:LIMITED applies to the Valère Depoorter example. For Piet Zwaanswijk, I agree that the original lack of quotations was a problem, not simply from the copyvio angle, but because it was a statement of the form "regarded as... the most <something>", which generally requires some form of attribution per en:MOS:QUOTEPOV, and that editors need to be careful to not express that statement in "Wikipedia's own voice". Chenzw  Talk  15:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

SportsOlympic, thanks for reaching out. I know it is a lot of work to create all these articles. In my opinion, to avoid influencing the discussion of your unban request at enWP, I believe it would be best if we review examples together with other content editors at a later time and decide how improvements can be made. That being said, although "x is regarded as ..." with a citation is actually somewhat common on Wikipedia articles, it is not supported by MOS. Griff (talk) 15:44, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

@Griffinofwales: Note the unblock request was unsuccessfull, mainly due to this accusation. There has been silence her since December. Please let me know if my style is an issue and if I should stop writing due to quality reasons? SportsOlympic (talk) 14:04, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Req for allowing these WP articles to be created

I'm requesting "clearance" to remake articles that I've posted (copied from another website and simplified) which have since been deleted, even though they should stay up. I'll put a lot of effort into taking the feedback and guidance that I got from the main two users that had a problem with them to do it properly and how the community wants it to be. But in putting in this effort and making the articles in my own free time I hope there can be some sort of guarantee that all of them won't be deleted suddenly and en mass.

Taking the feedback and WP rules in with these articles will involve: writing my own articles, in simplified English; following the same structure to include all of the information, but from lots of different (cited) sources and in my own simplified words; and not putting (the) Wikipedia at risk with the articles, wherein Wikipedia is NOT a medical institution, and I am NOT a doctor.

The articles I hope to make are all of the pharma/drugs articles for medications and medical alternatives that are both/all used by doctors to practises of the same alternatives which are more common, old, or perhaps used often used by some in the same countries that simple:WP targets. I will also be interested in Chinese medicines and herbs soon and would love to share that with the wiki if it would be appreciated.

The (first batch of articles) medications I would create are the same as the now deleted articles. My highest priority with these are the medications info that supports other simple wiki articles such as beta blockers (i am just making you aware here that i posted that article.) as an example, which is supported with links to these articles with more information on them for this topic such as [[labetalol] and propanolol, for example. These articles are useful information for the website for free information and should stay up, in my opinion. The example page is what I would like to do, the article linking to some articles on medication, a certain amount, and a certain amount of articles on others. I think it is important that other countries that are not as well off, or people that are not as well off or don't have access to the same education as other people do, have access to the information because they may be future doctors in their country. Conversely, patients using these drugs need to be fully aware and informed to not actually do something dangerous, so that having a simplified and English version from Wikipedia will make them safer.

The articles following that will hopefully be after I ask the government for some kind of help, to further improve the usefulness and reliability of my contributions or make sure the quality stays consistent. I also hope to create or edit articles in other medical fields and edit some of the speciality ones where it is relevant, make them about organ failure, bacteria, air pollution and so on.

By doing so, I hope to make more information freely accessible in simplified English not behind paywalls, for the readers of this sub wiki to have access to it. I believe that knowledge should be like this, by the way, for any use the reader has for it (from feedback about dangerous information). The spreading and absorbing of knowledge should be unbounded. My long-term goal would be for the subject (and subjects) to be complete with information and connected together properly (such as with the beta blockers page with links out to an article on some medications in the article). Another big goal would be to have government help so these countries would benefit as a whole from this small or small-scale effort; and this includes putting correct information to those without the facilities to properly learn or train people. That would include making the information accessible to places without training in roles because of reasons that may be there. I would also like to gain employment or funding to then work for the government as a doctor after getting a medical license.

(This is not the final draft of this post and I will probably edit it later. I will be following this article and hope to see discussion on how to be able to create these articles without them being deleted) W;ChangingUsername (talk) 09:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

On the talk-page of user:W;ChangingUsername, i have today asked two questions.--(If the user can answer those 2 questions, on that talk-page, then those two (new) threads, might give some ideas on 'where we might be heading'.)

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AW%3BChangingUsername&diff=10127446&oldid=10054810
. 2001:2020:351:B494:F4DE:870:DF65:17F6 (talk) 14:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Is this article too complicatd?

I translated this from english wikipedia about 2 days ago but I don't know if its simple enough. I feel like it is fine but i'ts better safe than sorry. Metro Transit (Minnesota) Ieditrandomarticles (talk) 21:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Readability is good, so well done. Using an online readability checker (such as Hemingway) will help you find issues that could make it even better. Peterdownunder (talk) 22:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Let go of the rope ('non-specific' tags in chemistry articles; March 2025)

Regarding a small selection of chemistry articles:

I will be adding "citation needed" tag, and at the same time removing "no sources" tag.--The first mentioned tag, is 'non-specific'; The second tag is specific, about where citation is needed.--If those edits of mine, can be left alone, for say a number of months, then fine.

(There is a 'new user', who is doing a lot of good work regarding Chemistry articles.--Now, if someone can whisper words of advice, to anyone who is 'cluttering up' articles (with non-specific tags), by that 'new user', then fine.--If we do like we always do, in regard to treating those who do some of the best work in regard to chemistry-articles - then we will lose those users relatively quickly, like we always do. Just saying.--Another thing: If some or many do not understand this post, then "don't worry, because likely there are other subjects of concern on wikipedia, which might be easier to understand".--Good luck (while i fix articles). 2001:2020:345:F2D9:ED9A:E250:54A5:2F25 (talk) 23:36, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Example,

http://simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Equivalent_%28chemistry%29&diff=10131208&oldid=10131189

. 2001:2020:345:F2D9:ED9A:E250:54A5:2F25 (talk) 23:47, 13 March 2025 (UTC)

Need translation of Second Cold War

Hey there. I just now replaced this problematic revision of Second Cold War with the full copy of this revision from en:Second Cold War. I really hope a mere Simple English translation is made, not some full rewrite or something like that. George Ho (talk) 01:08, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi George, please do not simply replace the content with the Enwiki article. This is against our rules, and because of that I have reverted your change. The old version maybe problematic, however it was in Simple English which is the language used on this project. If the articel needs improvement, then please fix it, but you can not just overwrite and then expect someone else will do it. I often use the Enwiki version as a basis for creating a translation into Simple English. The best way to do this might be to copy the article into your own sandbox, and work on translating it. Many editors here would be happy to advise and check your efforts. When ready it could be then moved into the main space. We even have templates here to credit the original Enwiki article as being the starting point for the Simple English version. Peterdownunder (talk) 10:17, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Created User:George Ho/Second Cold War. You're more than welcome to edit/translate the page if you can. I just don't know which any other template than {{user sandbox}} honestly. George Ho (talk) 01:51, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

An improved dashboard for the Content Translation tool

Hello Simple English Wikipedians,

The Language and Product Localization team has improved the Content Translation dashboard to create a consistent experience for all contributors using mobile and desktop devices. Below is a breakdown of important information about the improvement.

What are the improvements?
The improved translation dashboard allows all logged-in users of the tool to enjoy a consistent experience regardless of their type of device. With a harmonized experience, logged-in desktop users can now access the capabilities shown in the image below.

Notice that in this screenshot, the new dashboard allows: Users to adjust suggestions with the "For you" and "...More" buttons to select general topics or community-created collections (like the example of Climate topic). Also, users can use translation to create new articles (as before) and expand existing articles section by section. You can see how suggestions are provided in the new dashboard in two groups ("Create new pages" and "Expand with new sections")-one for each activity.

In the current dashboard, you will notice that you can't adjust suggestions to select topics or community-created collections. Also, you can't expand on existing articles by translating new sections.

Does this improvement change the current accessibility of this tool in this Wikipedia?
The Language and Product Localization team acknowledges your concern with exposing the Content translation tool. So, be rest assured that it will remain in beta, ensuring that only logged-in users who activated the tool from the beta features will continue to have access to the content translation tool. Also, if the tool is only available to a specific user group, it will remain that way.

When do we plan to implement this improvement?
We will implement it on your Wikipedia and others by 24th, March 2025.

What happens to the former dashboard after we implement the improvement?
You can still access it in the tool for some time. We will remove it from all Wikipedias by May 2025, as maintaining it will no longer be productive.

Where can I test this improvement and report any issues before it is implemented in this Wiki?
You can try the improved capabilities in the test wiki using this link:https://test.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ContentTranslation&campaign=contributionsmenu&to=es&filter-type=automatic&filter-id=previous-edits&active-list=suggestions&from=en#/. If you notice an issue related to the improved dashboard in the test wiki, please let us know in this thread and ping me, or report it in Phabricator, adding these tags:BUG REPORT and ContentTranslation. Please ask us any questions regarding this improvement.

Thank you!

On behalf of the Language and Product Localization team. UOzurumba (WMF) (talk) 18:50, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

Your wiki will be in read-only soon

Read this message in another language • Please help translate to your language

The Wikimedia Foundation will switch the traffic between its data centers. This will make sure that Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis can stay online even after a disaster.

All traffic will switch on 19 March. The switch will start at 14:00 UTC.

Unfortunately, because of some limitations in MediaWiki, all editing must stop while the switch is made. We apologize for this disruption, and we are working to minimize it in the future.

A banner will be displayed on all wikis 30 minutes before this operation happens. This banner will remain visible until the end of the operation.

You will be able to read, but not edit, all wikis for a short period of time.

• You will not be able to edit for up to an hour on Wednesday 19 March 2025.
• If you try to edit or save during these times, you will see an error message. We hope that no edits will be lost during these minutes, but we can't guarantee it. If you see the error message, then please wait until everything is back to normal. Then you should be able to save your edit. But, we recommend that you make a copy of your changes first, just in case.

Other effects:

• Background jobs will be slower and some may be dropped. Red links might not be updated as quickly as normal. If you create an article that is already linked somewhere else, the link will stay red longer than usual. Some long-running scripts will have to be stopped.
• We expect the code deployments to happen as any other week. However, some case-by-case code freezes could punctually happen if the operation require them afterwards.
• GitLab will be unavailable for about 90 minutes.

This project may be postponed if necessary. You can read the schedule at wikitech.wikimedia.org. Any changes will be announced in the schedule.

Please share this information with your community.

MediaWiki message delivery 23:15, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

A opnion on promotional text

hey guys look i am here to say my opnion in promotional texts:i think any articles in Wikipedia should say information about a product of neutral way but when i was gonna add categories to the Baojun Yunduo article (because i am doing minor edits here like adding categories and etc) i saw someone added a sales section there is no problem with adding it.

But the editor included promotional reasons of why the car was the best s uelling EV in India (since its called MG Windsor EV there) which are these "its many features, comfort similar to a business-class flight, affordable price, and unique design" i think the text is very promotional i removed it and left only this "The MG Windsor EV became the best-selling electric car in India just one month after it was launched, selling over 3,000 units each month"

So yeah i am not a big fan of articles that have promotional text (and i know spam links are bad and etc) like the example i showed anyways i hope you all understand and what do you think about this let me know that best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Many editors who come here have no understanding of what Simple is, No one's a big fan of promotional text and we do our best to combat it, Please be bold and fix the articles]], Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 16:29, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

this is what i did i removed the promotional text lefting only this part The MG Windsor EV became the best-selling electric car in India just one month after it was launched, selling over 3,000 units each month. also i am doing minor edits like adding categories and etc anyways good luck with your contribuitions best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 16:41, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry I thought you were here complaining about it, Thank you for removing this :), Happy editing, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:22, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

No problem also i was just telling my opnion on this and best regards 179.109.143.22 (talk) 19:42, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

The thing people need to know about advertising is all ads are opinion only and not facts. For instance adding that a brand of hot dogs are the best in the world is just an opinion whereas saying that the brand is the best selling hot dog in the world is asserting a fact and needs references to back it up. The first can't be added to a page whilst the second can as long as its proven. We don't allow any advertising, spam, promotional content whatsoever. It is one of the core principles on all WMF wikis. So please do remove promotional matter when you see it. No need to ask if it's okay, it's always okay. Regards fr33kman 20:17, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

ok i was just saying about what is my opnion about this but yeah i agree that advertisement and spam and etc is not allowed in this wiki also good luck with your contribuitions best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 21:00, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

You did good: promotional text should be either removed or changed the way you did. For me, it's a question of what's fact and what's opinion, as well as what do we have a source for. If a general authority on cars, such as Motor Trend, says something that's opinion, we could have a sentence like, "Motor Trend said the car has a unique design," and have a reference for it. If it's an advertisement or the manufacturer's website saying it, that's different. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:43, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Opnion on ai-generated content

hey guys i have a question:what are your opnions on ai-generated content in this wiki? in my opnion i kinda dislike it because its:complex no sources promotional words with so many excessive praise to a product airline car city etc and it also has false info i think its better to write manually.

But for some people who wanna edit Wikipedia for the first time its maybe good for them receive help from a ai on how to edit what do you guys think? let me know best regards. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 21:42, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Properly using AI is a lot of work, and getting an AI to write something that is usable in this wiki is almost as much work as writing it yourself. In addition, the current AI models have the problem that they sometimes invent a link when there is none, and they cannot tell you where a generated snippet is from. Also adding references to such an article is a nightmare. In short: you are better off not using it here, in my opinion. Eptalon (talk) 06:22, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I somewhat feel like we should have something like w:WP:PROD for AI generated pages. It's too much of a hassle to handle a large volume of them. See how the progress came and delete at the end of the week if sufficient improvements haven't been made. Not sure if the volume right now is too hard to handle; so this could be a future solution. BRP ^ever 06:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Question: How do we know that content was created with AI?

I was neutral on this at the beginning, but now I've seen enough AI-generated articles with issues that I'd like not to see any more. I don't know if we can ban them within the spirit of Wikipedia, but I wouldn't be sorry if we did. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:38, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Most AI generated articles are pretty easy to spot, with oddly formal phrasing, sections and either a lack of sources or poor quality sources. I'm not a fan of those, as the "writer" often doesn't do much of a review, just cut and paste. Throwing the whole "can AI's retain copyright" out, does the article itself have copyright issues from the content, especially close paraphrasing? Have the sources been checked out to make sure they are reliable and actually refer to the topic at hand? Do the inline sources support the text where they are added or just added at the end of sections without care? Often, the language is not simplified at all.

When we run into those articles, there's a question of volunteer time and "fairness". Is it fair for the "creator" to spend 30 minutes and then expect a volunteer here to spend 4 hours cleaning up their mess? Now repeat that multiple times. But ... content is good, so a QD criteria for AI material is not where I'd want to go. I like the PROD suggestion, but PROD is seven days, so it RFD, so allow "Appears like AI generated content" as a valid RFD reason. The article can be saved by rewriting or stubbing if it's really bad. Ravensfire (talk) 02:10, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

And the content that is based on generated text but then rewritten and reviewed? It means notability? Written decently and in simplified language? Good for them, I'm probably okay with something like that. Lot of "ifs" there though. Ravensfire (talk) 02:12, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

If you generate the article or section using AI and then spend the time to clean it up and make it meet the rules and guidelines of this wiki, then likely we can't say much. The problem is just that if you don't and we are left with some AI generated content. Eptalon (talk) 12:03, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

In my opinion, LLM-generated content has no place on Wikipedia. It is unreliable, unsourced, badly formatted and lazy. Most editors and I do not want to fix an article that nobody wanted to write, I don't even want to read it. We will only end up with many bad articles full of allucinations (fake content created by AI). What's worse is that AI is demotivating. Why should we spend our time writing a simple article, when somebody else can just ask an AI to make the article in a few seconds? An article made with words stolen from human writers. Either way, AI fans do not read Wikipedia anymore, they just ask chatgpt for answers. People go on Wikipedia because they want to read human-written content. ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:00, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

well i prefer reading articles written by humans for me the biggest problem with ai-generated articles are the promotional text with excessive praise to products like cars (mainly electric and hybrid ones) airlines cities and etc also it has fake info as well so yeah but as i said people who wanna edit Wikipédia probably ask to ais how to edit and create pages on there. 179.109.143.22 (talk) 19:35, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Mourning dove

There've been some edits to the page, such as moving all but one sentence out of the intro. It's a VGA, so can people please check if these edits are good? 2601:644:8184:F2F0:9063:3662:C192:4BB0 (talk) 05:59, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

They seem okay. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 09:40, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Isn't it kind of strange to have only one sentence in the intro? 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F8AE:4783:30B2:16C3 (talk) 16:34, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

@Steven1991 what do you think, since you made those edits. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 11:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

I've reordered the lede a bit. It is supposed to be a summary of the rest of the article, so could probably have a bit more from elsewhere too. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:42, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Now Steven1991 has made similar changes on Sun, for example a section with only one sentence. Also, I don't think a heading for "Overview" is needed unless the introduction is quite long. Can you explain this? 169.229.202.227 (talk) 17:14, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. You can rewrite it in a way you see appropriate. I initially made that change as I felt that the article was somehow disorganised. Steven1991 (talk) 17:19, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Change filter/Mistakes

I am not sure if If it warns you or stops you from making a helpful change, please don't report it here. is correct. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 09:51, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Special:Diff/10045039 was vandalism and it needs to be reverted. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F8AE:4783:30B2:16C3 (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Impressive that nobody spotted that edit when it happened. Yeah, that needs to get changed back. Conflicted edits in the mean time, so I'll work on a manual revert. Thank you for calling out the specific edit. Ravensfire (talk) 16:41, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Okay, reverted the changes in a series of edits, if any of them are wrong hopefully it's easy enough to revert back / change as needed. Diff of my changes. Ravensfire (talk) 16:47, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Good although there may need to be a 'd' after '(counter)'. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:F8AE:4783:30B2:16C3 (talk) 16:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

I went back into late 2024 when the bot was archiving and the counter just had a number. Reading through the config template docs, the counter just gets appended to the end of the archive name, and when the bot determines it is time to rollover to a new archive, it updates the counter value. In the template docs Variables section, it does have %(counter)d, but the d there means this should be a decimal value. Short version, I don't think it needs a d at the end. Ravensfire (talk) 17:07, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Alright, thanks all. Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 11:34, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi

Hey all I have started a discussion here and would like your valuable feedback and any suggestions you have on this matter (move). Thanks Cactus🌵 ^{spiky ツ} 10:58, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Football seasons sounds more simple. also it has some things like "

• 2013–14 Luton Town F.C. season" Which is a football time season

207.157.127.91 (talk) 14:19, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion started at the link on my talk page that Cactus mentions, but should continue here, not on my talk page. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:32, 18 March 2025 (UTC)

Reinstate List of goat breeds on Simple Wikipedia

I want to reinstate this article in Simple English Wikipedia. Can someone help me in solving this problem here now? 2409:40F4:A8:2BD9:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 15:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

I've been reverting as per Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/List of goat breeds although that RFD was in 2021 and consensus does change, An IP did remove all of the redlinks in this revision but I'm not so sure that this is any better?,

That being said we do have List of bus routes in London which is also redlinked/unlinked so seems unfair to have that page exist and not this one (something up until now I didn't think about when reverting), Anyway I'd have no objections to the goat breed list article existing but felt consensus should be sought, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 16:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

No. That IP who removed all the red links is me only. I am telling that you should reinstate and expand the article by yourself now itself here on. 2409:40F4:A8:2BD9:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

@Davey2010 That RfD said "since the entire list of goat breeds is missing it don't really makes sense", so I don't think the reason applies anymore. 169.229.202.227 (talk) 17:26, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Indeed, The article was only a short stub when it was nominated, Duly noted, Apologies for the unintentional disruption, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:32, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

No, other editors can help out too, it's just not @Davey2010. ⭐ Adelaide Do you have to say something? 16:41, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

considering there is a (admittedly poorly visited) RfD, it's wise to see if an article now meets the criteria (for a list, that is W:WP:NLIST).

I do think there's nothing inheritedly wrong with this article existing. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:46, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment @Lee Vilenski, Indeed I agree I don't think there's anything wrong with this article existing either, I just thought because of the RFD that it had to stay as a redirect but yeah consensus changes all the time, I've reverted myself, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 17:27, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

How do I do recent changes on mobile?

Hi, this is Adelaide but this is my mobile account, I don't have my PC on me so it is not a sock puppet. But how do I view recent changes on mobile or is that a PC thing? AdelaideMobile542 (talk) 23:58, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

PC, because mobile doesn’t have recent changes. Nassiv64 (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh, okay AdelaideMobile542 (talk) 23:59, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Nassiv64 (talk) 00:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

@AdelaideMobile542 and Nassiv64: That's not true; you can view recent changes on mobile. Just go to Special:RecentChanges. 166.107.163.247 (talk) 00:04, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Ah got ya, thanks! AdelaideMobile542 (talk) 00:05, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, I’m iPad not mobile. Nassiv64 (talk) 00:06, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Just an FYI but at least on Chrome you could use desktop version which takes some getting used too but I found all of my scripts worked, Hope that helps, (Tick desktop version and then change the url from simple.m.wikipedia.org to simple.wikipedia.org ), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:15, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Someone left a message that's a bit strange

Can I remove the message from my own talk page? What should I do with this user? Justjourney (talk) 04:13, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

I already left a warning template Justjourney (talk) 04:13, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Looks like it's gone, but, yeah, you can remove anything from your own talk page. Just be aware if you remove things like warnings or the like, they still apply. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:21, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Some one Guide me please

We can create article on a topic that have article on English Wikipedia. If such article are not present on simple Wikipedia? Bensebgli (talk) 15:28, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Bensebgli, Yes you can but you need to simplify words and sentences, Please Wikipedia:About and BE850 to get a better idea, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)