Wikipedia:Simple talk

Hello everybody! I have a plan to rewrite some articles from Standard English Wikipedia to Simple English Wikipedia. I’m a bit worried about the copyrights because I’m using the content, images, and sources from the English Wikipedia article, just simplifying the words. Do you have any suggestions for me? Thank you very much! Hanoifun (talk) 09:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

@Hanoifun One thing I'll recommend is linking to the EN revision rewritten on the article's talk page to avoid any attribution. An easy way to do this is by using Template:Translated page.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 09:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

You can also use Special:ContentTranslation, with English as a source for Simple English. Everything will be covered, from attribution to reusing citations, etc. Trizek (WMF) (talk) 09:59, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Welcome, @Hanoifun. You might like to look at this list I maintain of ways that Simple English Wikipedia is different from other Wikipedias. The list is not a policy or guideline, but it links to some relevant policies and guidelines. If you have any questions about the list or anything on it, leave a message on my talk page. -- Auntof6 (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I believe we give our fellow Wikieditors credit with the translation template: {{translated|en|[En's title]|version=######}} and by putting the "oldid=######" from the page history in the change description. At least that's how I do it. The policy is WP:TA. Darkfrog24 (talk) 21:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't know the policy, but when I use a translation for creating a Simple English Wikipedia article, I check the original sourced material. This prevents omitting or including references that are inappropriate (e.g., when editing a translation, the content for which a reference was given in the source Wikipedia article might not remain in one's Simple English article; or the original article might simply be in error with its citation). Going to the original source one is citing is standard practice in academic research and publishing. Kdammers (talk) 14:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello everyone, I have been working on English and Arabic wikipedia for a long time, I found a thing in Arabic wikipedia that if an article starts with the name of the infographic template, it automatically fills the infographic with information from wikipedia without any other information. In this case, they use a template like {{#استدعاء:بطاقة|تركيب|وحدة=تحكم}}google translate: {{#call:card|composition|module=disipline}} in the infographic template. As it did in ar:قالب:بطاقة تعليق. If you only put the name of the template in the article in Arabic Wikipedia, even if you don't give any other information, it will shoe because it automatically collects information from Wikidata, such as ar:علم الحيوان at the beginning of the article [[:ar:Template:بطاقة التعليم]] The template is installed without any other information, but it automatically shows the information about the wikipedia article. If you provide additional information, it will be combined with the information from Wikidata. No other wikis have this feature. Not even on the English wiki. Can simple english Wikipedia do this? 103.230.104.26 (talk) 03:41, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

it would really be nice, but I don't know if our templates currently support it Eptalon (talk) 11:34, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

It's based on whether or not the individual template has been setup to take information from WikiData. So, yes, it could be done, but most templates don't do this. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

In British English, it is usual to put dates in this order: dd/mm/yyyy. In American English, it is usual to put dates in this order: mm/dd/yyyy. Do we have a standard that prefers one or the other? Or is it like spelling, in which the topic "dictates" the style? I ask in particular reference to an article about an American poet (Elinor Wylie) in which the month-first (i.e., American) format was changed. That is, neither priority nor topic were given priority. Kdammers (talk) 17:42, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: Either of the all-numeric formats can be ambiguous if both numbers are 12 or less, so it's best to avoid the all-numeric formats where possible. MOS:DATE gives examples where the month is spelled out, and also gives guidance on formatting dates. I don't see where a date was changed in the article you link. In the case of specifying dates in template parameters, the templates often specify how to do it.

If that doesn't address your question, please give more specifics. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

@Auntof6 This is the edit where someone changed the date format: Special:Diff/4848769. 166.107.163.111 (talk) 21:45, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure why Rus793 did that. The subject is American, so I would think the mdy format should be used. Maybe Rus will reply here. -- Auntof6 (talk) 22:51, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and changed these as there really is no reason for an American subject article to have British date formats, That and Rus hasn't edited since 2017 so we'd have a long wait for an answer :-), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Auntof6 referred to MOS:DATE. I found the relevant passage there: 'Strong national ties to a topic: An article on a topic with strong ties to a particular English-speaking country should generally use the more common date format for that nation. For example, it may be more suitable to use the '14 February 1990' format in an article about a person from the United Kingdom, and 'February 14, 1990' in one about an event that happened in the United States.' Kdammers (talk) 14:28, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

In the corner of each article there's a tabber which has a directory to the same article on different Wikipedia language editions. I'd like to know how to add languages to that tabber in articles without them, I've read Wikipedia:Transwiki attribution but I've been told by an administrator that the article is incorrect. The article I'm trying to do this for is Christchurch Central City. Goose Green, 1982 (talk) 10:05, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

@Goose Green, 1982: You make the change in Wikidata. I have a (somewhat long-winded) explanation of a way to do that at User:Auntof6/How to#Interwiki language links for new pages. Feel free to ask if you have questions about it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

I figured it out, thanks for your help. Goose Green, 1982 (talk) 11:18, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

MQ-9 Reaper.
"A reaper at the base".
"The reaper has cameras."--Please advise how the word reaper, should appear in those kind of articles.--Are there different choices (as long as there is consistency within one article)?--The Reaper has cameras.--The "Reaper" (quotation marks) has cameras.--Any other choices? Thanks. 80.67.37.2 (talk) 12:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

We are talking about a military drone, so 'Reaper' likely is a proper name... so either reaper or Reaper, no need for quotation marks... Eptalon (talk) 14:10, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

If a single article shows one or more of the following, then i will probably leave those name-thingies, alone: Reaper (no quotation marks)/ "reaper" (with nearly any kind of quotation marks).--However, reaper with non-capital letter, would maybe not be left alone. But, reaper with small letters and italics, i would probably leave alone.--Diff: simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MQ-9_Reaper&diff=9600343&oldid=9600210 .--Another way of looking at things: the first mention, should be written as an acceptable name; But all the following instances, one might consider looking the other way. Thanks for user:Eptalon's reply. The reply was inspiration, to change the article. 2001:2020:317:C5F6:B09F:D7D8:580B:75E3 (talk) 15:25, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, should just be capitalised as part of the title. It's a proper noun, so wouldn't be simplified. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

The Main Page looks weird on mobile after a recent update. Each word should be on a single line. TitanicGlitter (talk) 23:40, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes,I can confirm that Eptalon (talk) 23:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Can confirm as well. Cyclonical (talk) 00:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

It appears to look normal now. @Cyclonical@Eptalon Can you check again? TitanicGlitter (talk) 05:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Yep, back to normal now. The text however looks so large compared to the contents of the main page that quite frankly I think it's ugly. Cyclonical (talk) 05:38, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

This is the main page now. Cyclonical (talk) 06:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

For some reason all the words are bigger on my phone than yours, so "to" appears on a separate line. I do agree that "Welcome to Wikipedia" is too big. TitanicGlitter (talk) 06:48, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

first line: welcome

Second line: to

Third line: Wikipedia,

No comment on font size Eptalon (talk) 07:10, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

On Opera GX Desktop Simple English Wikipedia, the main page is still messed up... --Tsugaru let's talk! :) 02:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

If I could I would upload a screenshot, but I do not know how to licence it on Wikimedia Commons. Tsugaru let's talk! :) 02:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

On the statistics link (I ran across it by looking at my 'home'page), there is a section with a map of the world coded for statistics by country. One of the countries for which the stats are hidden is Kazakhstan. Is there any way to find out why the stats are hidden for this country? It's a relatively free and open country. Kdammers (talk) 14:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Should we tag this page with {{historical}} Since it hasn't been edited since 2009 and doesn't seem to serve a purpose anymore?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 15:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

yes, that's likely a good idea Eptalon (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

+1 Judging by the history it appears to have been a vanity venue that never took off but nonetheless it was still part of history even if it was very short-lived, We're not gonna get 2009 back so should make the most of the precious history we have of that era. –Davey2010^Talk 17:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Support ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 18:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I've tagged the page for now.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

The policy as to who can become an oversighter is now at meta, and or candidates are listed on the page, where the candidates for the other privileges are listed; given that you need 25 support votes, getting the flag isn't easy. Eptalon (talk) 09:05, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

May I ask what that has to do with this discussion?- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:38, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

... with "P versus NP problem"? Surely this is beyond our target audience? Macdonald-ross (talk) 09:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

In what way is it 'beyond our target audience'? - It likely is one of the big problems of computer science.... Eptalon (talk) 09:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Could you please provide a link as to what you are referring to, @Macdonald-ross? MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 09:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link: P versus NP problem —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Thanks MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 09:56, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hello, So we have an editor (W;ChangingUsername) who's created Medication articles however these articles all include;

• side effects,
• who can/cannot take it,
• dosage/how to take them/length of taking/forgotten dosage
• caution/conflict with other medications
• taking whilst pregnant/breastfeeding

Examples of articles; Esomeprazole, Rabeprazole, Promethazine, Acrivastine, Cinnarizine, Chlorphenamine

My questions is: Is this content okay or should it all be removed and leave them looking like this diff?

Having this infomation in articles A) gives the impression we're a medication pamphlet as opposed to an encyclopedia, and B) I feel it could open doors to WMF being sued especially if someones followed the instructions here and it all went terribly wrong (I don't know much about the law so don't know if the WMF could be sued/held responsible etc)

Imagine if W;ChangingUsername unknowingly got the dosage wrong and someone reads it and assumes its correct and for instance takes 2 tablets instead of 1 - Of course I would hope no one would ever follow such instructions here but everyone is different, and taking into account the website we are and our viewers (whom may have mental disabilities and may not know better/different) it's a very stupid and dangerous game but I would like to seek others opinions before I go on a blanking spree,

Thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 19:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Thanks for raising this here. I had a conversation with the editor about this and I meant to get back to it but I haven't had a chance.

You are absolutely right. Wikipedia should not be giving instruction or advice about anything. In the case of medications, it's even more important because of the legal implications. Wikipedia is neither a how-to nor a medical provider. As far as I'm concerned, feel free to remove this kind of info. -- Auntof6 (talk) 19:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Auntof6, You're welcome - I know I reverted this editors edits before somewhere and it resulted in one big drama so wanted to double check first,

I absolutely and 110% agree with your last statement and couldn't ever have put it any better myself - In all honestly I wonder if this editor is here for the wrong reasons but I guess that's another discussion for another venue, I'm genuinely shocked someone added this and thought it was okay but anyway I'll remove the content, Many thanks for your quick response/help it's greatly appreciated, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 20:24, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Do whatever you want. Edit the article if needed. W;ChangingUsername (talk) 19:54, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

I can change the article also. Change it if you want, and if i think something could go in after, it can be changed back and forth to make good articles

And when i edit those articles I will tag you so you're aware and can have input again in future better revisions W;ChangingUsername (talk) 19:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi @W;ChangingUsername, Many thanks for remaining calm and patient - You're more than welcome to post here and ask editors if x, and y would be okay,

I'm not lecturing you but in case you weren't aware the Simple English Wikipedia is also for people with different needs, such as children, students, and adults with learning difficulties, and people who are trying to learn English and as I said those with mental disabilities whom may not understand may think it's okay to follow the instructions here,

I appreciate you expanding the articles and trying to be helpful but given the website we are and who we cater to I'm sure you can understand the seriousness and danger of including the information you have here, I would hate for the WMF or yourself to face legal ramifications over the content included/hosted, Anyway thanks again for remaining patient and calm throughout, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:33, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done - As far as I can see I've removed all of the content from all articles, I've done various searches relating to keywords of the previous content and not getting any results so hoping i've removed all of the content, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Dont remove possible side effects from medications articles though W;ChangingUsername (talk) 22:05, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

@W;ChangingUsername Too late - everything I listed above has now been deleted, You're more than welcome to start an RFC on having side effects listed here but given it's listed on any EN articles and given we're not a medical website - chances are there would be no consensus to host such information anyway, –Davey2010^Talk 22:14, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

• @Fr33kman and Bluerasberry: 73.170.137.168 (talk) 22:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

  I concur fr33kman 23:35, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

  I dont know what information would go into a wikipedia article, or why someone would search it, other than for things like effects/side effects, pharmacology, chemistry, pregnancy category and so on. Nor do i see what info could go in from a reference (like a paper from a study) besides these. It would be challenging to make long and informative articles without these info W;ChangingUsername (talk) 18:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

• Support adding information which English Wikipedia includes English Wikipedia includes most of this information, and I support restoring that. At the English Wikipedia Medical Manual of Style there are recommended section headings for drugs. "Side effects" is the same as "Adverse effects", "Medical uses" is always the first section and is "who can take it", "Dosage" English Wikipedia does not report and does not recommend including, "caution" is "drug interactions", and pregnancy goes in a section called "special populations" at the bottom although we frequently single out pregnancy as an extra-special, special case and put national regulatory pregnancy codes in the infobox. Overall most of this is essential information which is safe to include when backed by reliable sources. Talking through at en:Wikipedia:WikiProject_Medicine could be helpful for confirming best practices. Everyone wants dosage also but the situation is that there is significant variation in medical recommendations country to country, in addition to the matter being very sensitive patient to patient. It is fine to talk generally about the effects of not enough, too much, or just write, but do not name numbers. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

  I would advise against some of these simplifications. While "adverse effects" and "side effects" mean the same thing, "medical uses" and "who can take it" are two different things. "Drug interactions" and "caution" are two completely different things.

  This is an issue, too, and goes back to what AuntOf6 and Davey2010 have mentioned. If we sound too much like a medication pamphlet, it is dangerous. Not only is it unencyclopedic, it can cause legal issues.

  The word "drug interactions" was chosen because it is a medical term, and has a broader scope than most "cautions"; it includes a more encyclopedic scope of information. These medicine articles aren't made specifically for those who are taking the medication, these articles are made for those who want to learn more about the subject.

  I bring this up mainly as a warning to be very careful when editing these articles. Even though something is true and is backed up by a source, it can still be dangerous if it disproportionately adds certain types of information. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 20:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello everyone,

The voting to ratify the Wikimedia Movement Charter is now open. The Wikimedia Movement Charter is a document to define roles and responsibilities for all the members and entities of the Wikimedia movement, including the creation of a new body – the Global Council – for movement governance.

The final version of the Wikimedia Movement Charter is available on Meta in different languages and attached here in PDF format for your reading.

Voting commenced on SecurePoll on June 25, 2024 at 00:01 UTC and will conclude on July 9, 2024 at 23:59 UTC. Please read more on the voter information and eligibility details.

After reading the Charter, please vote here and share this note further.

If you have any questions about the ratification vote, please contact the Charter Electoral Commission at cec@wikimedia.org.

On behalf of the CEC,

RamzyM (WMF) 10:52, 25 June 2024 (UTC)