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 onWikipedia: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 tothe 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 Note that you should not change the archives, so if something that has been archived needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.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.
I was wondering if there was a way that we could add something relating toWikipedia:Good Articles on the main page? Something that could create viewer engagement right off the bat. Seeing as how there's a little over 100 GAs, I figured it'd be nice to shed some spotlight to those articles especially since naturally they may be harder to find/appreciated. I know it's not common at English Wikipedia to spotlight Good Articles, but seeing as how we're a small community and how we have 102 GAs, I feel like that wouldn't be a bad touch. I was thinking perhaps adding some language to the VGA section of the main page. Something like: "Other very good articles –Proposals –Requirements –Some good articles". Thoughts?TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)07:14, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think that's a good idea. We could also think about creating (shorter, without image?) teasers for GAs. And then list one GA teaser as well?Eptalon (talk)07:59, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Completely agree. For a community as small as ours, 100 GAs is fairly good, so why not showing them on our Main Page? That'd probably even courage people to work on them and get them to VGA status. -Barrastalk17:57, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. I’ve noticed some of the VGA blurbs are rather small compared to the leads they have on their articles. We could expand the VGA blurbs a bit and follow what Eptalon is suggesting: Two sentence blurbs for GAs?TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)00:04, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps what we could do is expand the "About Wikipedia" section to make it more elongated like the DYK section and then beneath the "About Wikipedia" section we could have a "Selected Very Good Article" (left) and "Selected Good Article" (right) previews?TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)23:05, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've also created asanbox that depicts how the GA blurbs would ideally look like for the newest 10 GAs :) I was also thinking for VGA blurbs and possible GA blurbs that are about shows, characters, books, movies, etc. that don't have a picture, we could place an image of a person related to them such as how I did for the Big Break blurb. English wikipedia does this for featured articles that have copyrighted images that can't appear on the main page.TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)23:31, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We can probably just write a new one every time a new article is promoted to GA. I would suggest having a dedicated page somewhere to be able to see all blurbs at once which could be admin protected, then in the talk page, people can suggest revisions, (grammar, spelling, linking, etc).MrMeAndMrMeTalk02:59, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we say there are 2 ga hooks on the page we perhaps need 4-6 such hooks to show. If it is just a layout proposal, even 2 hooks will doEptalon (talk)21:47, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Any other feedback from users who haven't chimed in? If this is the direction we'll be moving to, is there anyone who's willing to get the ball moving on this in terms of formatting the main page? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)20:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They may have been insufficiently simplified, but no, I do not know of a way to automatically simplify English to Simple English. I accept that there are issues with my approach for simplifying only the terms that seem complicated to me, and I am sorry if this has been causing issues. Have a great day!SchoolWikipedian (talk)14:54, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi everyone! After theCategory:Pages with broken reference names backlog was cleared in phase 4 of WikiProject TBA (Total Backlog Annihilation), a new phase has just begun to clear the next backlog:Category:Dead-end pages. Instructions are provided on how to help clear the backlog. You can find out more and register interest atUser:Ferien/WikiProject TBA/Phase V. All help is very much appreciated to try and clear as many backlogs on our wiki as possible! Thank you very much for all volunteers who have helped so far, and thank you in advance for all those who will help in this phase! --Ferien(talk |join TBA!)01:45, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay so I completed all the major ones except a couple random errors caused by cewbot. They really should be resolved very soon and have no links on that page anymore.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)23:59, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ferien I noticed a lot of links were added with a specific edit summary related to the backlog clearing. Is there some kind of tool that is being used or is it just that people are manually copying the explanation relating to the backlog thing here?Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)04:26, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
HiImmanuelle, sorry for not responding to your comments up until now. To answer your questions:
The current backlog we are focusing on isCategory:Dead-end pages but the categories are often suggested to me by other editors, so you are welcome to suggest other categories for the next phase. You're also more than welcome to work on other backlogs at the same time, so thank you for your work on the interlanguage link category.
There isn't a bot to remove the dead-end template from the ones with links as far as I know, and in the time it would take to develop and approve one, we can just remove them from the pages as we go.
I've encouraged other editors to link toUser:Ferien/TBA/P5 in their edit summaries to try and encourage more people to work on the project, but there's no tool being used for it.
I do not think there is that much of a backlog of the interlanguage link stuff now. Most of that stuff is resolved now. we are definitely working on the harder side of it now. Focusing on nonexistent foreign language pages and pages that are more ones that should be created than syntax errorsImmanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)21:02, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We don't have a bot. You need to remove the deadend template from the article when you are done adding the links. Please go back to the edits you've made and, if you feel you have adequately addressed the concerns, remove the template. Otherwise, other members of the project will go into the article to fix them unnecessarily.CountryANDWestern (talk)21:31, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The category is working as intended as is the special page. There’s no reason to add the template when we can just fix the page. It’s just adding extra steps.CountryANDWestern (talk)00:05, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The special page only tracks them with a substantial delay so this makes it much more difficult to track the work. Plus if you add one link it removes it from the special page even if it needs more.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)19:09, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. So if I were to have approval to mass tag these with dead end I would find it very easy to afterwards clear the backlog. Because I could then go through the entire category and just add links+remove template. Rather than the difficult task of remembering which ones on the special page need to have links added. This is my argument for tagging the ones on the special page. I think the category can be cleared very quickly but the special page requires days to effectively clear since it relies on information that is remembered/not shared among contributors.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)18:47, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle: Not a problem. Next time, maybe add a comment about what you did so that 1) people know and 2) the section doesn't immediately get archived based on the old timestamps. --Auntof6 (talk)21:55, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it needs to be expanded. Seems to cite the episode too which might not be best since it is a primary source (or even nullary source since you are citing the work in question?).Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)23:39, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This pageUser:Cewbot/Interlanguage link templates need to fix is now abnormally large since the bot was briefly run on all interlanguagelinks. I have been manually going through it and fixing links and then removing them from the page.
I think I got all of the easiest ones. But if anyone wants to take a look at them, feel free.
Best to leave this one on hold until the next cewbot cycle though. Since this would involve template editing that might have unexpected and technically difficult consequencesImmanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)04:20, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Now there are only ones of this thing, or ones that do not exist on the foreign language. The nonexistent ones I think really need a speaker of the language but these ones are all resolvable and would ideally need their own pages
== Missing converted local page, or the foreign / local page is not link to wikidata. ==
@Immanuelle: I agree that some page spaces could be excluded, but I don't think it should be only article space. For example, I've seen this issue in templates. It's also plausible that it could be in categories (in text at the top of them) and possibly in others. Also, things in userspace often become articles later, so we might want to catch those as well. --Auntof6 (talk)01:30, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would say no to userspace ones, because since this is a backlog thing, it tacitly encourages people to edit pages in other people's userspace. And the userspace stuff might just be a test or something.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)06:33, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Best to leave this one on hold until the next cewbot cycle though. Since this would involve template editing that might have unexpected and technically difficult consequencesImmanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)04:20, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Basically this is not an error in the pages it is a proposal for editing the template so that these pages would not be in the category since they are not in the scope of the editing
@Immanuelle: There might be some namespaces that could be excluded, but I don't think we should limit it to articles. For example, I've seen this issue in templates, and it's conceivable that it could be in other namespaces that we'd want to fix, such as talk pages (depending on what the actual issue is).
Besides that, I think we should do the same as enwiki on this, because we sometimes refresh our templates from enwiki.
I would say no to userspace ones, because since this is a backlog thing, it tacitly encourages people to edit pages in other people's userspace. And the userspace stuff might just be a test or something.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)06:33, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The reason is that no one is taking the time to copy over all the deaths from English Wikipedia to here. In fact, most of the work is done by unregistered users. Is there some other answer you're looking for?canadachick (talk)03:26, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MrMeAndMrMe: We don't necessarily have to have everything that enwiki does, but you're welcome to copy things over as long as you take the time to simplify the text. That might be what stops people from copy things.
@Auntof6 List articles do not take simplification, they are copy-and-pastable, which is mainly why I find it bizarre that these articles are lackluster. I was wondering if this was a negligence issue or if there is a cause.MrMeAndMrMeTalk02:51, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Back when I would update the death article, I would simplify a bit when copying and pasting such as if an actor has a movie credit that saysThe Movie (film) I'd simplify it toThe Movie (movie). If a person's profession says something like 'film director, film producer' I'd simplify it to be 'movie director, movie producer' or if a Nobel winner dies instead of having 'Nobel laureate' I'd have 'Nobel winner'. But that's usually it in terms of simplification (or at least what comes to mind).TDKR Chicago 101 (talk)14:41, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Content translation tool seems to not work with wikidata properly anymore
I tried out the content translation tool on the articleen:Hie Shrine and it has been giving this result
By contrast most of these links actually exist just fine here, and they are connected to wikidata. It also does not get templates.
TheHie Shrine (日枝神社,Hie Jinja) is aShinto shrine inNagatachō,Chiyoda, Tokyo,Japan. Its June 15Sannō Matsuri is one of the three greatJapanese festivals ofEdo (the forerunner ofTokyo). Other names for the shrine include Hiyoshi Sannō-sha, Hiyoshi Sannō Daigongen-sha, Edo Sannō Daigongen, Kōjimachi Sannō, Sannō-sha, and Sannō-sama.
The date of establishment of the Hie Shrine is uncertain. According to one theory,Ōta Dōkan established it in 1478. Another theory identifies the Hie with the Sannō Shrine mentioned in a 1362 record of theKumano Nachi Taisha.
Tokugawa Ieyasu relocated it to the grounds ofEdo Castle, and in 1604 his sonTokugawa Hidetada moved it out, so the people ofEdo could worship there. Theshaden was lost to theGreat Fire of Meireki of 1657, and in 1659Tokugawa Ietsuna rebuilt it at its present location. The shrine stands southwest of the castle, in theura kimon direction according toonmyōdō.}}So this is confusing. It likely indicates it is not properly fetching page and template names from the backend?
Content translation tool seems to not work with wikidata properly anymore
The behavior I expect is for it to give all the same text (no ai simplification or translation), but skip over articles that exist on enwiki and not simplewiki, and give piped links to the simplewiki pages if they differ, as well as giving all of the templates from enwiki, and doing the same for categories. But it appears it is only giving the raw text with all of the templates and links removed. It also does not apply categories.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)04:14, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What I am noticing is that it often gets the links right on the first paragraph but not doing any of the sources or categories or templates. So still not correctly workingImmanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)22:29, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle Do you mean that if you click the right column next to a paragraph that has links and sources, those sources don't appear? And that if you click next to a template, that template doesn't appear?canadachick (talk)22:37, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Canadachick here's an example since it is easier to show than explainen:Ichinomiya Shrine (Tokushima) it appears the references do not properly go through. See the results of this for referenceUser:Immanuelle/Ichinomiya_Shrine_(Tokushima). This is a problem since at least going from enwiki to simplewiki, getting the references directly from enwiki is the major reason someone would want to use the tool. Because there are often hard to copy things like access date (if you are simplifying the text) and weird urls and archives.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)22:59, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am still getting this very frequently even when I have a reflist on the page if that is what you mean. AndTemplate:Cite book exists on both enwiki and simplewiki
Thismight be related to my enwiki block which I am in the process of appealing. If my appeal is successful I will try again and see if the glitch continues. Although this is an intuition without much basis.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)22:16, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle: Basically, the Wikimedia Foundation that owns Wikipedia has a board of trustees that runs it. The Wikipedia community gets to elect some of these trustees. This year, two of the finalists were removed from the ballot shortly before the election started. This has caused a major controversy, including this petition calling for the Wikimedia Foundation to be reformed. If you read that petition, and agree with it, you can sign on to it with your Wikipedia username.QuicoleJR (talk)18:33, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
People who know me from old will know that I've tried multiple times to get non-free images approved on simplewiki. This time I'm asking something slightly different. PreviouslyBarras suggested that we approach the developers to make it possible so we could locally use images uploaded to enwiki here on simplewiki. This means we could use their images of logos, TV screen shots etc. without needing to upload them here. This would allow us to avoid the problems and work load of processing non-free images ourselves. Any thoughts?fr33kman23:33, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would like this to be possible but I don't think it is as each is done on a case-by-case basis. So each needs a table to check whether it meets the non-free use criteria and then can only be used on given pages. I'm not sure how we could get it so it can only be used on certain pages on another wiki. --Ferien(talk |join TBA!)00:19, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is a very bad idea. Using Commons is a clean and simple solution. The benefit of being able to use a copyrighted image is very small.Eptalon (talk)00:20, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A concern would be the licensing aspect. The non-free images are used for specific purposes and must state the article they are being used in and why. With Simple being included, a second license statement/justification would likely be needed. It'd add a layer of work to manage that kind of thing.CountryANDWestern (talk)00:41, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we started to allow non-free images on en wiki to be used here, we'd need the same type of bot that makes sure non-free images have a reason for that article. Basically, it would be if it's used on the en article it could be used here. Is that worth the effort? Perhaps. I don't think I'd want any other option for non-free images here, there's just not enough editors to patrol.Ravensfire (talk)01:29, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Their talk page is even blocked from being created somehow
You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:
The title "User:Nehal Khan Jit Who Is He in Dhaka Bangladesh" has been banned from creation. It matches the following disallowed titles list entry:.*neha.*khan.* # [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arshifakhan61]]Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)05:17, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am looking at this articleKatseye I tagged it as an unsourced BLP but I am not sure about it. A band isn't really a person but it is definitely more like a person than say a corporation in some ways.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)17:46, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please put back"D'Angelo" as the disamgiguation title, see
simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=D%27Angelo&diff=10570840&oldid=10570311. --Of course we do not have to follow En-wiki,exactly how they do their titles.--"D'Angelo" does not have one main meaning (and it sure is not the dead musician, who unfortunately passed away).~2025-28382-09 (talk) 21:36, 14 October 2025 (UTC) /~2025-28382-09 (talk)21:38, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would think that based on the way that the bot resets it every hour, it would be a useful feature for people to be able to edit it as an ip user, and then have it moved to a userspace or article space, and then the bot will convert the now redirect back to the default state. Was this the case but it caused problems?Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)20:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you move the page, the sandbox itself becomes a redirect to someone's userspace. It wouldn't be great for a different user to find that and not know what is happening.Lee Vilenski(talk •contribs)13:43, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle, usually I consider it a test when an editor adds random letters or numbers to an article (maybe on accident). Vandalism usually looks like it was done on purpose and the editor may continue adding it after being warned.Ternera (talk)12:57, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears pretty much all of these date to 2013 from when wikidata was implemented and the interwikis were removed. Many were created by a bot in 2009 and were never edited by humans.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)05:11, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I noticedthis diff while patrolling new pages and saw a template I've never used ({{ill}}) that links to other wikis: enwiki in this case. I thought that we didn't encourage linking to other projects. Is this something that we use or should we not have links to other wiki's articles in our's? Just asking because it's something I've never seen before. Thanksfr33kman22:45, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That template will show both a red link to the simplewiki page, and a working link to the enwiki page. It doesn't hide the fact that the article is missing on simplewiki, or that the live link goes to a different wiki. So I think it's beneficial.canadachick (talk)23:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Fr33kman I’m surprised that you haven’t seen it before that. I have used it on almost every single page I’ve ever written and spent an extremely long time specifically editing mistakes with the templates.
I asked about the template earlier and Auntof6 said it didn’t really count as a foreign language link because it is added with a very different intention. The purpose of this template is more to encourage the creation of a page and it goes through wiki data to figure out if the page exists on the wiki and you have linked to the wrong title. I cleared the backlog of wrong title link ones this past week.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)01:18, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen the little en links before but didn't realise it was a template. Just goes to show you learn something new every day :)fr33kman02:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Fr33kman: Thank you for raising this. I don't like these because they look sloppy, especially when there are links to more than one other Wikipedia. However, since it technically doesn't keep us from seeing that we don't have the article, I haven't said anything. --Auntof6 (talk)19:02, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The page talks about a condition of the penis, so showing an image of a penis with this condition is not that unexpected. What exactly do you suggest should be changed?Eptalon (talk)18:53, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Prince Andrew", is no longer "Duke of York". Be that as it may.
I urge, that the community changes the title (of the wiki-article) to "Prince Andrew" (and not call the article the same as en-wiki is doing, "The Prince Andrew").~2025-28382-09 (talk)18:22, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Enwiki's article is still aten:Prince Andrew, Duke of York. There's discussion on their talk page about renaming. There's apparently some disagreement about whether Andrew's announcement really has any effect. I recommend waiting until there's consensus on this. --Auntof6 (talk)19:08, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The cabinet members are no longer using 'the phrase' "PrinceAndrew, Duke of ...".
Parliament is no longer using 'the phrase' "PrinceAndrew, Duke of ...".
When the RS become clear and overwhelming, about the current state-of-things, then administrators can move title of page, to "PrinceAndrew ('country') ".--Simple enough, one might say.~2025-28382-09 (talk)06:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the prince and the government aren't using the phrase doesn't mean that he isn't the Duke of York. It takes some kind of official action (possibly by Parliament) for it to really take effect. Until then, the article should keep the current title. --Auntof6 (talk)16:13, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some people might know that I am blocked on enwiki and was blocked here for about 2 years. I was unblocked here onJune 14. The blocks were for relatively similar reasons. I hope that I am doing well and appreciated here, and I am interested if anyone has advice for me doing an unblock request on enwiki. I was blocked for about 2 years here before being unblocked, and similarly I am approaching the 2 year mark again on enwiki.
I guess my big issue is I am feeling anxious about potentially making a bad appeal that would hurt my chances of getting back. Not sure if I should just push through the anxiety and try to do an appeal right now. I have been sitting on a draft appeal for at least a week.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)02:18, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd recommend just doing it. As long as your request is thoughtful and polite it won't make a difference when you do it. Good luckfr33kman02:54, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like we should have a template or something that warns a user that they need to pick a new username without just outright blocking them. I am saying this in reference toUser:Chhetri Sux who has a likely offensive username but their contributions have been all good so far.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)03:49, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Eptalon I hope I did not come off too hostile to him. The main issue with his edits was just that they were very large and children's shows seem to be kind of high risk for vandals for some reason. But I saw no actual red flags aside from sources not being added.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)05:21, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will not comment on the content, as I am generally not a fan of lists. But as I said, technically a legal edit. If you think the page has issues, add the respective tags?Eptalon (talk)05:26, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle: There's something called "one-click archive" that, I believe, lets you selectively archive individual sections. Maybe that would help? I've never used it, but maybe someone who has will see this. --Auntof6 (talk)16:31, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If that article gets deleted, then i immediately hope to startsub-stub: "The South West region is one ofWestern Australia's nineregions."--Thereafter, we can roll back, when 'AI stuff repeatedly will get entered'.--If that is helpful, then fine.~2025-28382-09 (talk)13:33, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'Deletion tag', is being removed from the (problematic) article, see
.Be that as it may.--The 'similar substub' (good), that is not tarnished with AI-stuff and/or copyvio, has now been created.--We should Delete the bad one, and then we are left with a substub that iscleaner than thewhitest snow.~2025-28382-09 (talk)07:36, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The RFDtag wasremoved for 6 hours,until now. (Please put this article onyourwatchlist. See,
I have just noticed that an IP has changedTemplate:Birthdecade and other categories to include Category:Beginnings and Category:Endings to all birth/death/establishment/disestablishment categories. While this edit was unhelpful and I might revert these edits, it has reminded me to bring this up on Simple Talk. Beginnings and endings have never been supported on simple wikipedia, though it has not really been discussed why on Simple, other than the occasional brief discussion. I therefore have a proposal.
I have a few reasons for my proposal. First of all, "Establishment" and "Disestablishment" is too complex of a word to use on simple. Second of all, we do not have a category system for "introductions", either, which I have usually just lumped in with establishments, but is technically incorrect and fits better under "beginnings" and "endings".
We move all categories that mention "establishment" and "disestablishment" to "beginnings" and "endings", respectively, and turn them into redirects,
We make "birth" and "death" subcategories of "beginnings" and "endings", respectively.
Any categories that exist that refer to "introductions" can be moved to "beginnings".
I do not see any problems yet.--One reservation, though: There has to be clarity 'about some examples, of use-of-text in articles'; One kind of example:
"Company ABC wasestablished (orgiven a kind of start), in 1771."--It is not okay to say that the company had itsbeginning (or began), in 1771.--The Wright brothers (c. 1900), repaired things together, and years later registered a company together.--There were at least two kinds of beginnings, but 'only one' establishment of a company.~2025-28382-09 (talk) 13:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC) /~2025-28382-09 (talk)13:32, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In cases when it is legally specific to say establishment, then the word can be kept, provided it had a definition or link. Otherwise, whatever word most smoothly and grammatically describes the situation can be used. "started", "began", etc.MrMeAndMrMeTalk12:59, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it would qualify for QD because it has some content (disambiguation pages also do not qualify for A2), but you could send it to RFD.Ternera (talk)16:32, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle: Deletion is not needed. Red links are okay on dab pages, even if there are a lot of them. It's possible that an article might link to the dab page, but need to link to one of the items on the page instead. Having the dab page lets us find those pages. It also lets us use automated tools such as AWB to change the links to one of the items listed.
Hello. Please help pick a name for the new Abstract Wikipedia wiki project. This project will be a wiki that will enable users to combine functions fromWikifunctions and data from Wikidata in order to generate natural language sentences in any supported languages. These sentences can then be used by any Wikipedia (or elsewhere).
There will be two rounds of voting, each followed by legal review of candidates, with votes beginning on 20 October and 17 November 2025. Our goal is to have a final project name selected on mid-December 2025. If you would like to participate, thenplease learn more and vote now at meta-wiki.Thank you!
Do we really need daily posts on here about this topic? If there’s a concern with a particular article, then tag it as being AI generated. I’m not seeing the need for daily updates.CountryANDWestern (talk)22:36, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why does the interwiki here go to Village pump instead of teahouse on enwiki
Immanuelle, we do have WikiProjects, but they work slightly different to WikiProjects on the English Wikipedia. All WikiProjects are stored in wikispace and they don't have influence on article ratings or anything like that. There is a list onWikipedia:WikiProject – I personally have the Total Backlog Annihilation and United Kingdom projects in my userspace. --Ferien(talk |join TBA!)20:55, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle: I don't see anything obvious. Maybe put the talk header template on a separate line? IIRC, that bot can be picky about where its code is, so maybe it's also picky about its code being on a separate line.
Also, maybe replace the underscore in the archive parameter with a space? It doesn't seem like that would make a difference, but I just spot-checked some other user talk pages for multi-word user names, and they all have spaces rather than underscores. --Auntof6 (talk)16:51, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t know enough about archiving bots, but if I had to speculate, it’s because there’s too much “stuff” on there that doesn’t look like discussions, and too much disjointed threading where new threads have been created above old ones. My suggestion is to manually archive all but the last couple of threads. Then, set the archive time low, like 24h, and see what happens.CountryANDWestern (talk)22:04, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't do what I said, though. THere's still a ton of stuff on the page and a ton of stuff out of order. Reduce it down to just a few sections (like 3), reduce the archive time to 24h, and then see what happens.CountryANDWestern (talk)00:10, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The bot only runs once a day at a set time, currently 04:00 for Wikipedia: space pages, 05:00 for User talk: space pages and 05:30 for Talk:Main Page, all UTC. --Ferien(talk |join TBA!)22:09, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@MrMeAndMrMe: That might be because of the settings. You specified to archive things over 30 days old, and you didn't specify minimum number of threads to archive so that defaults to 2. I see only one thread that's over 30 days old, and that default tells the bot not to archive just one thread. If you wait a few days, you should see several sections get archived. --Auntof6 (talk)17:06, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Feedback request for draft: Michael Koch (entrepreneur)
Following a discussion with the administrator Fr33kman about the previously deleted page "Michael Koch (entrepreneur)," I have created a new draft in my user sandbox. As per his suggestion, I am posting here to request community feedback before considering moving it to the main article space.
I want to be fully transparent that I am a paid contributor with a conflict of interest, as my client is Michael Koch. My goal is to follow all of Wikipedia's policies to create a neutral and well-sourced article.
I have built my new draft with what I believe are sufficient reliable and independent sources to meet this community's standards.
Could you please review the draft and provide any feedback or suggestions? I am particularly interested in whether the sources are sufficient to establish notability and if the tone is neutral.
@Nabiresearcher considering that is an English wikipedia article we cannot really help you that much on it. If you made a simple English wikiepdia draft we could help more. I recommend going toen:WP:Teahouse and asking for help there. Just remember to disclose your paid editing.Immanuelle ❤️💚💙(please tag me)06:43, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! My sincere apologies! I mean my sandbox page here:
Can admins consider moving that request, to therelevant talk page.--And/or explain to user:Immanuelle, that Simple-Talk isnota good place to discuss how to improve 'text that has alongrecord ascross-wiki spam'.--See also link at post, "12:53, 21 October".~2025-28382-09 (talk)07:40, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If thefirst edit, 'had a lot, orquite some, AI', then delete.--(InSandbox, now, i have an okay version.) After Delete, I am ready tostarta 'clean-slate article, or quite clean' slate.--That might seem like a good idea.
