This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
The Committee is expected to represent diversity in the Movement. Diversity includes gender, language, geography, and experience. This comprises participation in projects, affiliates, and the Wikimedia Foundation.
English fluency is not required to become a member. If needed, translation and interpretation support is provided. Members will receive an allowance to offset participation costs. It is US$100 every two months.
We are looking for people who have some of the following skills:
Know how to write collaboratively. (demonstrated experience is a plus)
Are ready to find compromises.
Focus on inclusion and diversity.
Have knowledge of community consultations.
Have intercultural communication experience.
Have governance or organization experience in non-profits or communities.
Have experience negotiating with different parties.
The Committee is expected to start with 15 people. If there are 20 or more candidates, a mixed election and selection process will happen. If there are 19 or fewer candidates, then the process of selection without election takes place.
Will you help move Wikimedia forward in this important role? Submit your candidacy here. Please contact strategy2030wikimedia.org with questions.
The Wikimedia Foundation tests the switch between its first and secondary data centers. This will make sure that Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia wikis can stay online even after a disaster. To make sure everything is working, the Wikimedia Technology department needs to do a planned test. This test will show if they can reliably switch from one data centre to the other. It requires many teams to prepare for the test and to be available to fix any unexpected problems.
They will switch all traffic back to the primary data center on Tuesday, 14 September 2021.
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.
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 Tuesday, 14 September 2021. The test will start at 14:00 UTC (07:00 PDT, 10:00 EDT, 15:00 WEST/BST, 16:00 CEST, 19:30 IST, 23:00 JST, and in New Zealand at 02:00 NZST on Wednesday, 15 September).
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.
This project may be postponed if necessary. You can read the schedule at wikitech.wikimedia.org. Any changes will be announced in the schedule. There will be more notifications about this. A banner will be displayed on all wikis 30 minutes before this operation happens. Please share this information with your community.
The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (first three 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 Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.
Hi! How do I connect items to Wikidata? Quite a few articles I created have been popping up in notices with "Mike Peel" or "Pi bot" connecting it to Wikidata. How do I do this?
Elytrian, when you create an article, see the area left of the page. Under "in other languages", there should be an "Add links" button. Press that. If the article you created is on enwiki, enter "enwiki" in the top box and the title of the page on enwiki in the bottom box. Then press "Link with page". It will say which pages the page is being linked to, you just need to press "Confirm". Now, your page is linked to Wikidata. --Ferien (talk) 12:57, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Elytrian: A tip about this: Make sure that the subject of the page you're linking is an exact match for the subject of the one you link to. For various reasons, sometimes there isn't an exact subject match for an article here. Also, a page on enwiki with the same title as a page here isn't necessarily about the same thing. The title of the matching page may be different, and that's okay. --Auntof6 (talk) 18:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and welcome to our Wikipedia. English Wikipedia has many more pages than we do, thir category system is different. So if a category you think should exist here doesn't exist, there are two options: Either you find another category that fits, or you create the new category. Note that categories need to have at least three pages (or categories) in them. If you you tell us what the page, is, we can also help you finding a category for it. --Eptalon (talk) 11:28, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
((DISPLAYTITLE:User:)) use this. after the user, insert whatever you want to put as your title. Colored characters are made using the <span> tag. See my page or TDKR Chicago 101's page for examples. Ely - Talk09:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please I want help to write a english wikipedia from a Simple Wikipedia can anyone help me If any user wants to help me so please give the username in my talkpage and after I give the article name and you have to create English Wikipedia by some reason I am unable to create that page I know how to create article in english wikipedia but I am unable to do it so please can you create that article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Educreationbilaspur (talk • contribs) 13:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, like here there are two cases where articles cannot be made: 1) Users who have shown bad bahavior in the past are blocked from editing; depending on what they did, the block may be temoporary, or it may be permanent 2) Certain aticles cannot be created by certain user groups; this usually means, that in the past, there has been a lot of vandalism / edit warring (by different editors) for the given article. Again, the block may be temporary or permanent.--Eptalon (talk) 14:19, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Educreationbilaspur: I think I know what the problem might be. I see you have made exactly three changes on the Regular English Wikipedia (en.wiki) and that you are not blocked. Sometimes, in controversial areas, new Wikipedia accounts are not allowed to edit or create certain articles. This is because people were making bad edits, as Eptalon says above, getting blocked, and then sneaking back in with new accounts, pretending to be different people. The Regular English Wikipedia admins made a new rule: People can only edit controversial articles if they have been on the Regular English Wikipedia for 30 days and made 500 edits.
You need to be on the English Wikipedia for 30 days and make 500 good edits. I say make the best of your time there. Have some fun. Participate in an RfC. If you make fifteen edits a day or so, you'll hit 500 in almost exactly 30 days. The time will fly by! Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How to make this article more better by which it can be undelete
1) Some of your references aren't good. For example, you cite Wikinews. Wikinews is not a reliable source. What you should do is go look at the sources the Wikinews article uses and, if they're good, put those in the Simple English Wikipedia article.
2) The Deccan Herald and Times of India look like the exact same source. Are they both relaying the same thing from a third party. WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT applies, but this is really one source and not two. Also, Bonadea says those sources are fake anyway.
@Darkfrog24 I Helped that Wikipedia Page and added as many sources as possible and I want to say you that please recheck and then reply that the page is good or not because I have added some more sources and removed wrong sources Mr. Hindi (talk) 10:06, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This list is automatically generated, and only moderately useful. Example: List of ISO-639-1 codes, over 200 of the 600-odd codes are attributed. They are used for languages. 'nn' is Nynorsk (one of the two forms of Norwegian, similar to Swedish). 'nr' is South-Ndebele...--Eptalon (talk) 08:51, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This page as Eptalon mentions is just updated based on how many links go to pages. However, its not very useful as for lots of articles those number are raised up really high because the link is on a template that is used on many pages. -Djsasso (talk) 14:55, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to introduce myself before I get started editing here! I’m especially interested in dinosaurs and dinosaur related articles, which is where I plan on spending most of my time. I would also greatly appreciate any advice. Thanks! Don Jon Arnold (talk) 01:14, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just wondering but why? On the English Wikivoyage, whenever a commons file is going to be deleted, it leaves a message on the relevant talk page about that. Then later if it needs to be uploaded locally (such as FoP issues or something although not for copyright violations), it can be rather done in a timely manner instead of waiting and then you'll see a red link. SHB2000 (talk) 22:23, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000: can you point to one or two instances (in the last few month of editing here), where using the bot would have beeen beneficial (I am thinking along the lines of a page losing an image, because it got deleted from commons).--Eptalon (talk) 18:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The thing is, no one would know if it got deleted unless CTB would notify us, which is what is does on the English Wikivoyage. I'd presume there's many images deleted and no one's noticed. SHB2000 (talk) 22:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well a bot does remove the uses of the image here if they get deleted there. Notifying us isn't really necessary as we are a completely separate wiki and being notified of every image getting deleted at commons would be overwhelming for our wiki. -Djsasso (talk) 15:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
hello 👋 hope you have a great time
i have a problem: i installed unsignedhelper.js in my common.js but it does not work even though i added it in a proper way.
Thank you for helping me 😊🌸 🌸 Sakura emad 💖 (talk) 13:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's important here. Most LTAs that are active here have reports in the English Wikipedia. Besides, that would require more manpower for an already fairly small community. Nonetheless, I have done a small report on a LTA here who is currently inactive. Etoza (?)17:11, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Movement Charter Drafting Committee - Community Elections to take place October 11 - 24
This is a short message with an update from the Movement Charter process. The call for candidates for the Drafting Committee closed September 14, and we got a diverse range of candidates. The committee will consist of 15 members, and those will be (s)elected via three different ways.
The 15 member committee will be selected with a 3-step process:
Election process for project communities to elect 7 members of the committee.
Selection process for affiliates to select 6 members of the committee.
Wikimedia Foundation process to appoint 2 members of the committee.
The community elections will take place between October 11 and October 24. The other process will take place in parallel, so that all processes will be concluded by November 1.
We are very happy about the wide range of diverse Wikimedians that are running for the election and selection processes for the drafting committee of the Movement Charter! As the number of candidates is quite large and thus informing yourself about them might be a bit more complicated, we want to try something different this time: We want to organize a so-called “Voting Advice Application (or “Election Compass) with statements related to the Movement Charter. All candidates can propose their statements here.
For the full context of the Movement Charter, its role, as well the process for its creation, please have a look at Meta. You can also contact us at any time on Telegram or via email (wikimedia2030@wikimedia.org).
Best, Zuz (WMF) (talk) 13:13, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It only includes the one word because that word is regularly debated by people that are new here and is controversial and because one reason most people argued about it was because it wasn't put down in a guideline anywhere, so last year it was put in a guideline so future debates might be less likely to happen. Most other words are uncontroversial. -Djsasso (talk) 15:05, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you check the top section of my talk page you will see more examples. Also, it is not only words which need to be simple. Sentence structure should be simple, too. And read good English. Read George Orwell. Read anything! It'll all help. Macdonald-ross (talk) 07:39, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
can anyone please have a look at this
Hello, I have created a sand box draft User:Suryabeej/Ashish Chanchlani looking at all the awards and sources I feel it might pass GNG, but want a second opinion on this, can anyone please guide me with this?, Also if anyone over here feels like it meets the GNG please move it to mainspace Thanks Suryabeej⋠talk⋡08:21, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
SHB2000 Hello thanks for the response, I guess En wiki has nothing to do with Simple wiki though as both the platforms are different and have different notability criteria but also if we go on all the sources available like Forbes and him being listed under 30 under 30 list don't you think he passes GNG? Thanks Suryabeej⋠talk⋡08:38, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
YouTube channels are not inherently notable: "If a topic has received important coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable". Anyone can put up a YouTube channel. Macdonald-ross (talk) 13:20, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Macdonald-ross yes the topic has received important coverage in reliable sources which I feel makes him eligible!!
We're suffering a huge loss of long time editors like PotsdamLamb (in a fight), Darubrub (mental health and he's renamed to avoid detection) and IAmSwiz (mental health). In that time, only Sakura Emad has joined as a constructive non-anonymous editor. Is this slightly worrying? I've put up a recruiting template on my en-wiki page, and so has Ferien, but no luck.
Editors come and go, like on all Wikimedia projects, but unfortunately we have lost quite a few editors recently. However, I think there has been an increase in active editors though, since I started actively editing in late December. --Ferien (talk) 16:24, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
before coming here i was on English wikipedia on my first days there, i was quite stressed because i was new to the environment, somehow i was frustrated and got conflict with some editors because of my silly edits[1][2][Talk Page] Because of the conflicts that i got it gave me so much stress and i was unable to edit wikipedia for a while afraid that i make another mistake and will be frowned upon.
My Suggestion
Our goal is to build an environment which is helpful and friendly towards other editors, in a way that make them feel comfortable while editing wikipedia, Encouraging NewComers to edit wikipedia and help them be more familiar with the environment, Building a healthy and friendly Environment[3][4][5], wikipedia in General is for everyone regardless to gender and race and age everyone uses wikipedia, especially Simple English wikipedia the editors includes children, schoolers, and others who doesn't familiar with and can't be familiar so soon, i think instead of enforcing the rules, we should be more open to them, and talk to them more in a friendly manner, when they make a mistake[6][7]; Everyone make a mistake and it's quite a normal, they can't harm wikipedia by making unconstructive or bad edits;[8] that's being said Instead of assuming that fellow editors are out to harm the project and its ideals, assume that they don't know how they're contributing in a non-constructive way,[8] Because even bad editors and Trolls can turn to Reliable and Great editor who can build a better encyclopedia[9][10] in the end i suggest make the wikipedia more easier and friendly to others, and let them make a mistake and learn from it, and don't cause stress to anyone, will help us to build a welcoming environment.
I honestly do not see it as really worrying. It is sad that those editors left WP, but we have to work with what we have. We have had multiple new editors here that are greatly helping Simple Wikipedia. We can remember the past, but we shouldn't mourn it, instead, we should embrace the present and future. PS: I feel like some English Wikipedia users think Simple Wiki is a filler/pointless project, so I don't think advertising will do muchEtoza (?)18:02, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like simple wiki editors will always come and go, even if it is sad to see. We have what, like 30 really active editors here, most of which I can recite from memory. I think a more effective method of recruitment would be trying to get editors from other language Wikimedia projects that are trying to learn english. I also agree with Etoza that we should focus on maintaining what we have, like dyk, ga's, etc. AnApple47 (talk) 01:56, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I reluctantly disagree with trying to recruit people who are trying to learn English. Such people are part of our target audience (that is, people the articles are written for), but not necessarily the best for writing articles. Writing simple English is harder than writing regular English. People who are learning English tend to think that, since they are new to the language, whatever they know must be simple, but that isn't the case. Even people whose first language is English can have a hard time writing in simple language. We need people who 1) are very proficient in English and 2) know or can learn what makes language simple. Even when we recruit people who are proficient in English, there's usually a learning curve before they can write effectively here. That's one reason I created that list of ways that this wiki is different from others. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:31, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Auntof6: Yeah, I can see why that wouldn't be the best idea now. I still think we might be able to find new editors there who might know english well enough to edit. AnApple47 (talk) 13:53, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't really consider myself as "active" given that I'm more found on voy then here, although I do come time to time here.
But I should say that I prefer this smaller community over the larger English Wikipedia which is full of problems. Given the unfriendly environment on en, it's why I did retire. Although we have lost some editors, it may be for the better. SHB2000 (talk) 02:30, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Editors have always left (for various reasons), and new editors have joined the project. There's the right to vanish, so if an editor no longer feels like wanting to contribute he or she can leave the project. I think what is most important is to be friendly to new editors, once it is clear they want to conmtribute productively; and no, I am also talking about unnamed editors. As pointed out above, the "Language skills" required are usually not those of someone "learning the language", which doesn't mean that those cant contribute. Simplifying is long and tedious, and I welcome any ediotr helping this project, no matter what their background is. In most cases, a form can be found where the editor can contribute productively. --Eptalon (talk) 20:32, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't anything new. Sometimes we lose some editors and sometimes we gain a whole bunch at once. Also be aware that we often gain editors that you don't realize because you don't see them take part in discussions. As someone who has been on this wiki for well over a decade I can tell you if anything the last little while we have been growing faster than we have since the heydays of 2007-20010 when we were many times more active than we are now. We will most likely always be small because it takes a very strong grasp of the English language to edit here. As mentioned above, a mistake people often make is they assume people who are our target audience are the ones who should edit here more, but the opposite is true, editing here actually takes more skill than to write the average "regular English" article. As such most editors will always gravitate to the en.wiki as its easier to write and there is a bigger audience to write for. We will always be at the whims of people who find us "by accident" or who come here cause they got into block/ban trouble on en.wiki. There isn't much we can do about it, its been talked about many times and solutions like embassies on en.wiki are just not workable as most editors there just want us shut down. -Djsasso (talk) 20:44, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I notice on one of the people you mentioned they mention they started university. That is one of the biggest reasons we lose editors and not something we can help, for some reason minors gravitate to this wiki so we inevitably lose them when they discover "real life". -Djsasso (talk) 21:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We've always used simple talk as our teahouse, village pump and everything merged. While an introduction of a teahouse could be more welcoming to editors, and I would be willing to volunteer, the first thing this page says about Simple Talk is "This is the place to ask any questions you have about the Simple English Wikipedia." If this is the one of the main reasons for this discussion page existing, why do we need to have another place? --Ferien (talk) 16:12, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
maybe we could make simple talk more inviting, like having dedicated question answers, or pictures? I also don't think a Teahouse is a good idea because it might be confusing to newcomers. AnApple47 (talk) 01:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's working, but I might mention that it is a bit redundant since your archives are listed in your talk header and in a box on the side. Probably don't need both. -Djsasso (talk) 14:31, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just noticed you were doing it monthly and by numbers. I have fixed how the monthly ones work. I would create redirects for the other two or rename them so they fit the monthly pattern and they will all show up in one place. -Djsasso (talk) 14:39, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't think so. Simple is far behind en-wiki. Perhaps someone could make a script that could do this (though I doubt a script can do this). But dark mode would be epic. 💠Ely - Talk💠 14:54, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You can try it out now by turning on "Discussion tools" in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. The Beta Feature will also add a [subscribe] button to each ==Level 2 section== on a talk page. If you subscribe to the section, then you will get Special:Notifications if someone adds a new comment to that section (but not if they fix typos or edit other parts of the page). This can be very helpful on busy pages, especially if you only want to follow one conversation. Please try it out and share your thoughts at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications. (Only the Reply tool will be turned on for everyone. The other Discussion tools are still being tested.)
I've been using the reply function and it's very helpful. It figures out the correct indents for you and adds your signature. I highly recommend that people try it. Auntof6 (talk) 23:41, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@PPelberg (WMF) will be happy to see your comment, @Yahya, because the Editing team wants to do that soon.
Obviously, getting the Reply tool on the mobile site requires a bit of work, but the key design elements are done. One thing to notice: while you're typing on the desktop site, the editing box is moved over. It makes the box narrower, but you can see where your comment will go. On a smartphone, if the box gets narrower, there will not be enough room to type. On mobile, the box will be the full size. When you post your reply, it will end up in the right place. It will only be full size while you are typing. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:32, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Need help!
I don't want to lose on info on this article, so maybe some of you could come and help me simplify it? The article (though technically a draft, is massive.) You might want to see this as well. 💠Ely - Talk💠 16:58, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it was renamed at en.wiki. The template that was putting the articles there has been updated to go to the new category that en.wiki uses. -Djsasso (talk) 11:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Adding twinkle
Hello. I looked in my settings under the gadgets tab and I was not able to find Twinkle. How do I install Twinkle? Mikehawk10 (talk) 04:10, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Mikehawk10. You'll need to get autoconfirmed before you can use Twinkle. I'm pretty sure getting autoconfirmed works the same here as it does on enwiki, your account needs to exist for 4 days and have 10 edits. --Ferien (talk) 05:44, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I saw spamming in Google Translate article. People added crow language, fox language, ewe language, etc. in the list of languages supported. Besides, they added many human languages which aren't actually supported in the Google Translate in the list of supported languages. For example, Garo language was found added. I need other editors to rectify these errors in the article. We can take information from en wiki article en:Google Translate. There, we may find better information. Haoreima (talk) 13:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It seems the first eight languages (Abaza, Abellen, Abenaki, Abkhaz, Abure, Acehnese, Adyghe, and Afar) aren't even supported. The first one that appears for me is Afrikaans and the second is Albanian. SHB2000 (talk) 13:20, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have a feeling that almost a third of the languages mentioned there aren't actually supported by google given the high number of inaccuracies there. SHB2000 (talk) 13:32, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Haoreima: You say you need other editors to fix the errors. Is there a reason you can't do it yourself? You could go to GT and copy/paste the list of languages. I'd do it myself, but I'm using a tablet right now and it would be tricky. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Auntof6 Tablet? Are you well, sister? Are you ill? And, tricky? What do you mean by saying "tricky"? Please clarify me, I don't understand, "tablet", "tricky", "copy/paste" from Google Translate! :):-) Haoreima (talk) 17:20, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Haoreima: I am fine. Another meaning of "tablet" is a tablet computer. A tablet computer is a device like an iPad -- smaller than a laptop and bigger than most mobile phones. By "tricky", I meant that the kind of editing I'd need to do would be difficult on a mobile device. "Copy/paste" means to copy text with the copy function on whatever device you're using, then use the paste function to add it somewhere else. A common way of copying that way is with the control-C function on a PC, and then you paste with control-V. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:11, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Haoreima: I'm only suggesting you copy the list of language names, nothing else. I don't think there's anything copyrightable there. Of course, you'd have to format it. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:02, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Quick deletion of Ssgyysg gysgysygsgy gysyg gys ygs ygssyg
The page you wrote, Ssgyysg gysgysygsgy gysyg gys ygs ygssyg, has been selected for quick deletion. If you think this page should be kept, please add ((wait)) below the line ((QD)) and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. You can find more information about the reason here. Derpdart56 (talk) 15:27, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Universal Code of Conduct Draft Enforcement Guidelines review still needs your ideas and opinions
Hello everyone,
This is just a reminder that the Universal Code of Conduct Draft Enforcement Guidelines are open for review and comment. The Drafting Committee will start working on revisions and improvement in less than two weeks (October 17), so it is important that you give them your ideas and opinions soon!
There is now a short, simple version of the Draft Guidelines here to make your review easier. If possible, also help translate the short version into more languages!
On behalf of the Drafting Committee, much thanks to everyone who has given ideas so far. We hope to hear from more of you - the Guidelines will be much stronger if more opinions are included.
Does anyone know if Twinkle could be configured to be able to directly issue warnings (including the page name) for bad page creations, instead of just leaving a QD notice? That seems to me like it would be more useful, especially for repeat violations. J99116:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In those situations I don't leave the QD notice and just leave the warning notice, although being an admin I rarely leave a notice anyway since I am the one deleting the article as I see them. -Djsasso (talk) 11:33, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let's talk about the Desktop Improvements
Hello!
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.
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 sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.
Olga Vasileva (the team manager) will be hosting this meeting.
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, fr33kman22:14, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Adding deletion tag to article: Failed to retrieve edit token.
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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..
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.
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)[reply]
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
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
I have been not editing pages in the Ukrainian-language Wikipedia for a long time and the request to unblock me in it
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)[reply]
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 ever11:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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. --204.184.47.157 (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like to be blocked in the Chinese-language Wikipedia, as the Chinese-language Wikipedia is totally different from other-language Wikipedia
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.
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)[reply]
Communities typically block edits from IP addresses that obscure individual users. Usually, it has been about “open proxies” or virtual private networks (VPNs). Now, there's a new Apple service called iCloud Private Relay that obscures the IP addresses of desktop and mobile users of the Safari browser.
As Apple users adopt this new service, we estimate that 3-5% of all logged-in and logged-out editors will have these obscured IP addresses. If we don't change anything, they may be blocked within a few months. This wiki may be severely affected. A lot of people editing here use the Safari browser. Next, other browser providers may do the same. The problem will grow.
The communities, users with advanced MediaWiki permissions, the Wikimedia Foundation and others need to work together. We all need to decide how the security of the wikis can be maintained. At the same time, the pathways to editing should remain open for all good-faith participants.
Learn how Movement Strategy Implementation Grants can support your Movement Strategy plans
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)[reply]
How do I explain how a biological procedure is performed without citing the research of scientists who performed the procedure?
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 (talk • contribs)
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)[reply]
Okay, I see. So I shouldn't inherently look at the English Wikipedia page as a model. If you really want me to hold off on touching the page until English Wikipedia has resolved its issues, I won't touch it, but hopefully there's somewhere else relevant to students where it's less controversial for me to practice writing Simple Wikipedia content using the guidelines about secondary and tertiary sources Darkfrog24 has pointed me to. Fujippisensei (talk) 01:52, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Okay, got it. I need to adjust my frame of mind from writing as an expert to writing as a non-expert, which means that I should rely on secondary sources, which makes sense because I'm definitely not an expert in biology. I will either return to the page mentioned with that in mind, or look for somewhere else to contribute along those lines. Fujippisensei (talk) 01:57, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm definitely not an editor of English Wikipedia. I'm coming at this as someone who writes simple English, rather than as an encyclopedia expert. The idea is that if I learn how to contribute then I can teach other language teachers in my region to do it, and expand its usefulness to students. Fujippisensei (talk) 01:55, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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 sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.
@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)[reply]
This discussion has lasted for over 3 weeks and it's safe to say that there's no consensus to unblock Purplebackpack89 at this time. Purplebackpack89: I suggest you next appeal in no less than a year from today. Best regards, --Ferien (talk) 18:20, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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)[reply]
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 | Talk20:41, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 en.wiki 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.
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)[reply]
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 connect20:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 | Talk20:39, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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 ever21:44, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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.
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)[reply]
Weak Support I have to say, looking through PB89's CentralAuth, I'm seeing some improvement, especially on en.wp and other projects. However, I'd like to suggest removing his rollbacker rights temporarily until he can be proven to regain the trust of the community. He should also address what he did that got him banned in the first place and realize what he has done has had negative effects on the community. If he can prove that he really does realize what he has done wrong and can prove beyond reasonable doubt he will improve, I'd give full support. 209.232.149.23 (talk) 21:13, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctantly, I also oppose lifting the ban. Simply no indication that they have changed at all. Ten years passing is not enough alone to just unblock, they will have to show us they have changed. Unfortunately, the opposite appears to be true reading their unblock request. --IWI (talk) 05:02, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Context
At this point I think it is important for all participants to familiarize themselves with previous ban reviews:
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. ChenzwTalk16:38, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.
I think that sometimes our users get frustrated when they request QD, then it gets declined because the case doesn't qualify. This happens fairly regularly with the A4 option (notability); sometimes users don't realize that any claim of notability prevents deletion under that option. Having QD requests declined, for that or other reason, might make people decide to go straight to RfD when it might not be necessary. Maybe we could do some educating about the QD options, either targeted at users who use it incorrectly or aimed at the community in general. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:52, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think most of the requests for deletion currently on the page aren't eligible for QD and it is better to discuss older pages instead of quickly deleting them, in my opinion. --Ferien (talk) 20:34, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Instead of this, we can just quickly delete the pages that meet QD requirements among the ones nominated for RFD. Admins can close the discussion whenever they see it fit.
There have been many debates over the overuse of A4, and I don't this it's unusual for people to seek second or third opinions through RFD. I, myself, would like to do that for pages that have passed the initial new page state (where the article are usually nominated for QD or improved.)
Also, there has been some interesting development in a few cases that are worth considering. For example, in Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2021/Candice Pitts. I remember reading that she had become an ambassador, but I had no idea about the coverage she was getting. Although I think some more coverage is required and the article needs a fair bit of improvement, I think this one is a fruitful discussion.
I think the habit of RFDs should be encouraged for cases that are not black-and-white. And overloading is not really a problem as pages will be deleted even if there are no comments. It's only that the process takes place 7 days later. And in the cases where the page have already stayed here for a long time, I don't think it's a problem. Thanks :) -BRP ever20:52, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The problem here isn't that people are going to RFD when they shouldn't. The problem we have is that people are using QD when they shouldn't. In particular A4 gets abused way to often. The most minor claim negates the ability to use it. Also remember our Rfd acts as PROD which means if there are no votes in 7 days it still gets deleted. So our Rfd is never overloaded because the deletes happen automatically if no one votes. And any of the questionable ones get more eyes on them than an incorrect QD. -Djsasso (talk) 12:48, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't our RFD sort of PROD elsewhere, so an overload isn't the issue. The issue is that we need to have people !voting based on policy / guidelines. Things like per nom - etc can be omitted as these seems unnecessary as our RFD work like PROD. Things like it's notable without giving sources / explanation doesn't. Socks are of course not helpful. The issue I think is not the load, is the quality of commentary on the RFD. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 07:57, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Darkfrog24 I will say give QD a go, if it does fulfill QD, then RFD won't be unnecessarily loaded. Just try, if declined, we can always go to RFD.
As of RFDs it's always a vote based on policies, hence it's called !vote not vote. The absolute vote count doesn't always matter, unless in situations where the !votes are very close which is rare. Votes that are useful are always policy based, as of if you want to claim a subject have notablity, good quality sources needs to be provided to make it strong. It's pretty useless to do this Keep notable and meets GNG. It will be more useful to do this: Keep meets GNG as [good source 1][independent source 2] is presented. Hope this clarifies. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 08:43, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, some comments are so baseless that you don't even know what to respond. It's like they just state their opinion with no real understanding. But I guess we can always extend time for cases where the concerns are not sufficiently addressed.-BRP ever09:54, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, Camo. I mean that I go RfD for something that is, for example, a hoax but not an obvious one. I use QD quite a lot.
I am familiar with the idea that Wikipedias aspire to be "policies and sources, not votes," but in my experience it usually is votes as in number of people and not number of sources. I had an idea for a whole different RfC structure once. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:34, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Darkfrog24 Oh yes, at times it's sadly vote counting for some cases, but I will rather it be consensus counting. But to digress, isn't this what political systems around at times function, with first past the post elections can be won by 1 vote. However, Wikipedia is NOTDEMOCRACY that's helps at times. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 11:50, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Keep notable and meets GNG." is actually perfectly valid comment that explains what policy you think supports its being kept. Could it be more detailed sure it could. But it is a policy based argument which is a good one. -Djsasso (talk) 17:50, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, 0 votes is the key. Weak !votes filled RFD might end up diluting the fact that RFDs can be PRODs. Not policy based arguments can make RFDs be more complex than what it should be. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 13:04, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not really because a prod is removed with a single objection which is the equivalent of one keep vote. Quality of argument is irrelevant to prods. Once it has been objected to it forces a discussion. Rfd isn't intended to be easy, that is what QD or Prod are for, anything that doesn't qualify for those should require a more comprehensive discussion. -Djsasso (talk) 17:46, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One thing I might suggest is maybe we don't trim the Recently closed section to 5, given the large volume. Maybe leaving 3 days worth of closures up would be worthwhile, so there is a chance for anybody interested to easily review any recent closures.--Gordonrox24 | Talk20:31, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How to report sockpuppets and not request checkuser
Hello. I believe that I have identified a sockpuppet of an account that is globally locked. However, the master is almost certainly stale. I would like to know how to report this sockpuppet without requesting a checkuser (as I would do on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser). Is there a way to do this on simple wiki? Mikehawk10 (talk) 14:23, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How do I get help on improving articles like peer review in enwiki?
Above, for SpaceX Starship. I want to have more people commenting on the article, since having just me writing it can be tricky sometimes. It is especially useful for proofreading as well, as [2] said. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:32, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Here is the venue, hope someone will be able to help, by posting here is right, but do note that we have a small community of editors, so the comments might not be that much. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 12:33, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! I am going to iron out the issues as much as possible until it seems perfect to me. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:23, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]