Web Analytics

Static Wikipedia: Italiano -Inglese (ridotta) - Francese - Spagnolo - Tedesco - Portoghese
Esperanto - Napoletano - Siciliano - Estone - Quality - New - Chinese Standard  - Simple English - Catalan - Gallego - Euskera
Wikipedia for Schools: English - French - Spanish - Portuguese
101 free audiobooks - Stampa Alternativa - The Open DVD - Open Bach Project  - Libretti d'opera - Audiobook PG

Web Analytics

Static Wikipedia: Italiano -Inglese (ridotta) - Francese - Spagnolo - Tedesco - Portoghese
Esperanto - Napoletano - Siciliano - Estone - Quality - New - Chinese Standard  - Simple English - Catalan - Gallego - Euskera
Wikipedia for Schools: English - French - Spanish - Portuguese
101 free audiobooks - Stampa Alternativa - The Open DVD - Open Bach Project  - Libretti d'opera - Audiobook PG

Talk:Main Page

From Wikipedia, a free encyclopedia written in simple English for easy reading.



The Main Page is currently protected to avoid drive-by vandalism. If you need to edit the parts of the Main Page, do so by editing any of these templates. To make major formatting changes, contact an admin after developing your proposed plan.

Template:Ideas, Template:Introduction, Template:Main Page footer,
Template:Wikipedialang, Template:Wikitopics

[edit] Main page protection poll

(move protection same as edit level)

[edit] Changing Pages

Sould be made much easier, at the moment it is difficult.

[edit] Protection

Should the Main Page be completly protected?

  1. Archer7 | talk 00:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. Billz 22:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. --Jetman 15:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  4. --Vector (write me please)(Esperanza) 22:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  5. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 16:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC) --Editing the sections works just fine. Why change that? I think admins can make the required changes. Since the templates are not at all used now, why don't we delete them?
  6. Frits 00:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC) Agreed.

[edit] Semi-Protection

Should the Main Page be semi-protected?

  1. GangstaEB talk contribs 23:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  2. Picaroon9288 21:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
  3. Zginder 13:42, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  4. Alastor Moody (talk) 21:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
  5. Gray Porpoise 15:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  6. Ood 22:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  7. T. Moitie 22:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  8. Tdxiang 06:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  9. --TBCΦtalk? 00:59, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  10. --Menasim( discuss | ) 12:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
  11. --Copper -Tone-Editorial -Hope 00:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC) CopperTonetalkchanges We could help it and we are users and it is unfair that the admins would have more right than regular users.

[edit] No protection

Should the Main Page be unprotected?

OK, it looks like us admins sort of neglected this vote, and I guess I can't really argue with a 2/3 support for semi-protection. I'll semi-protect and see what happens, but I'm still not sure about it... Archer7 - talk 14:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikis with more than 1,000 articles

Belarusian, Langue d'Oc (Occitan), Tatar (Tatarça)... please update the list.

[edit] Wikipedia in catalan

In the section "Other languages" in the main page I have not seen the connection the Catalan Wikipedia, that works in 34.465 articles. Also, thanks. Sorry for my bad english.

A la secció d'altres llengues de la porteda no he vist l'enllaç a la Viquipèdia en català, que treballa en 34.465 articles. Igualment gràcies.--Albertsab

Also you can put in all other language links, like you can see on Esperanto Main Page. Many people lookin for them on the left side. --Rodrigo 18:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links on main page

Please put a direct link to the BE 850 and the BE 1500 lists on the main page. It would make it a lot easier to check my edits. Thanks!--HSTutorials 15:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Russian 100.000 articles

Russian have more than 100.000 articles. Ildefonk

thanks--Vector (write to me please) 12:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Update

The "Wikipedia in more languages" section has to be updated. Many Wikipedias have now several times more articles than mentioned here.

[edit] Sister projects section

The main page really needs two things in the sister projects section: a link to the English Wikipedia (I don't know why it doesn't have one already) and one to Wikiversity, which now has its own domain. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 16:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, why in the world does the main page list this very project under "1000+" still, when we are very proud of reaching 10000 articles? --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 17:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
There isn't a section for 10000+ articles, unfortunately. Billz (Talk) 17:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
You're right. My mistake. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 18:54, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
It's no problem. I will have a look when I have a second to add a link to EN and to Wikiversity if someone else agrees. Billz (Talk) 19:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Are there other "Simple Language" projects - with a similar remit to this one (for those people who are between "basic/holiday knowledge" and "being able to read The Metro" (and to help with arranging translation of articles etc) Jackiespeel

There is Simple English Wiktionary, Simple English Wikibooks and Simple English Wikiquote. Please see the section called "In simple English" in the "Sister projects" box on the main page. Billz (Talk) 17:17, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I think he means, are there Simple Wikipedias for a language other than English. For example, I myself am trying to learn German, so a Simple German Wikipedia would be awesome. If there isn't, maybe just food for thought. - 19:44, 25 September 2006 (UTC) (HumanZoom)
As far as I know, they are going to be created soon. Billz (Talk) 20:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Nope, nope, and nope. The "Simple English Wikipedia" is regarded by many Wikipedians as a mistake, and similar projects in other languages are highly unlikely in the forseeable future. ~~~~
Why did you nowiki the four tildes? 18:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Temple of tipple

The reclining Buddha statue from which Bouddha Bar derives its intentionally misspelled name seems to define the leisurely vibe of this laidback lounge near Houhai. At first glimpse, the milieu appears mish-mashed, but the mix of band posters, alcohol advertisements and traditional statues that adorn the walls represent the three themes of this bar: drinking, dancing and divinity.

A lakeside seating area furnished with overstuffed suede sofas offers patrons a place to plop down, kick back and watch boats drift to and from a nearby dock. After 10pm on weekends, they can move inside to a stage-side seat to clap along with the live and lively flamenco and Latin music performances.

The stage features a modest but mood-setting lighting system and a crisp-sounding speaker set-up. Movers and shakers can sashay their way to a small space in front of the stage that sometimes serves as a dance floor, while those who want to sit it out can catch the show from the plump sofas, wicker chairs and hardwood stools that line the stage. 北京写字楼 A dimly lit couch-filled room on the far side of the stage offers a more intimate setting for conversation and seems to be the only space where traditional Eastern dcor doesn't cohabitate with generic Western-style tavern ornamentation. Those who don't want to get too far away from the alcohol can snag a stool in the bar room, where they can belly up to the bar or kick it at the foosball table. 写字楼 Boozers who like to mix it up can customize their drink orders by matching the type of alcohol they deem most potent with the mixer they consider most potable for 20 yuan a glass. The less inventive can select from Bouddha's list of house specialty drinks, which have names that come straight from the men's locker room. Local brews cost 20 yuan while imported beers are 35 yuan a bottle.

Bouddha Bar might not be the best place to find enlightenment in Beijing, but after meditating over several beverages at this temple of tipple, things do become a bit more Zen.

[edit] Needable change

Please move the name of Russian wikipedia from list of wikies which have 1000+ to 100000+ because it has already reached this number. Ру??кий (Russian)  • 




you make a better door than a frame estie.

[edit] speak?

"Use easy words and shorter sentences so people who speak little English may easily read them." Please change SPEAK to READ. This is a text database. Also, plenty of people can speak English but still be working on reading it. Kingturtle 18:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I think we should vote for deletion

... For obvious reasons. Why isn't there Simple Japanese? Simple German, or Simple Swedish? I'd be willing to start any of those projects.

Why would you be willing to start those projects but vote for deletion of Simple English? What is different about English that you think it should not have a Simple Wikipedia? --Coppertwig 14:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The tone of this wiki is absolutely patronising, and does not serve a purpose. Interestingly, as having discussions about this with people around me, it seems that only the English speaking community sees this wiki having value. For foreign people the concept turns out to be quite a blunder.

There may be more foreign readers later when there are more good pages. Many people may read these pages and not write anything. Some people may be able to read simple English but writing it is too hard for them. So we don't know how many people use these pages. Even if there are no foreign readers, only children, some deaf people and people who do not easily understand Statistics, and some other people, it will still be good. --Coppertwig 14:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

This is like pig-latin, not a proper language. Unfortunately the case seems to be that this wiki stays, as this already has over 10,000 articles. It seems that only the numbers matter, not so much going for the quality (which is pretty good in other wikis).

Pig-latin is a children's game. Pidgin languages are real, serious languages used by adults. Please do not mix pidgin languages like Simple English with pig-latin. --Coppertwig 15:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Simple English is a pidgin or something like a pidgin. It is not a full, natural language. Many pidgin languages have been very useful to many people, to say information when the people do not know the same full natural language. Please do not despise pidgin languages or the people who use pidgin languages. --Coppertwig 14:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
According to my dictionary, a pidgin comes from two other languages. So Simple English is not a pidgin. But it is like a pidgin. Pidgins are good. They help people communicate. --Coppertwig 14:21, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think this wiki should go away, and I do not have respect for those people who contribute to this wiki instead of the real English one. Unless of course, this simple.wiki resembles the quality you can produce - after consideration, it is actually a better idea that some of the contributors stay out of the Real wiki.

I will commission my 10 year old cousin to write articles here. I think he has just the proper English skills for this. When he turns fifteen, I'll guide him to start writing new articles to the real wiki.

Please do not despise children. Many children can give much good to Simple English Wikipedia, English Wikipedia and many other Wikipedias. --Coppertwig 15:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Paradoxically, the articles written in proper English are far more easy to comprehend than these pigified versions of them. It seems that people go to the English wikipedia, copy an article, come here and pretty much rape the English language to produce a "simpler" version of it. Which is not, of course, what actually happens.

"I went throught WP Simple English and I was appalled by its condescendence! [For those non familiar: condescendence is a dominating attitude, someone thinking he is superior tries to help, but he is more rude than really usefull because he sounds despising.]" —This unsigned comment was added by (talk • contribs) 15:53, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Er... I'm not trying sound superior by pointing this out... but don't you mean "condescension" ? Blockinblox 16:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Was it really not obvious to you that that was what the person meant? It seems that you knew that and you are correcting someone's grammar -- that is condescending. Correcting grammar on article pages is fine. Correcting grammar in messages is usually not good -- it is only good if you are not able to understand the message. Making humour about people who do not write much English is not good on Simple English Wikipedia. It is not good anywhere. It is very much not good in a Simple English place where we want to welcome people who do not write much English. --Coppertwig 14:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
For obvious reasons? Please state these "obvious" reasons, as I cannot see any. I would like to see a Simple French; if you have an interest in starting a Simple version of the languages you stated, please initiate a request at the appropriate place on meta. I should bring to your attention the fact that the sister projects in Simple English recently underwent/are undergoing a proposal for closure at m:Proposals for closing projects. Except for Wikiquote, where there is no consensus as of yet, the projects were deemed worthwhile by the Wikimedia community and have remained. And thank you for having no respect for the editors here; for obvious reasons, the community here does not share your sentiments, and although you are certainly entitled to your own opinion, I hardly feel this is the correct place to voice it. You yourself may not feel any need for this wiki; if this is the case, then please go and use the English Wikipedia. However, some ESL learners, people with learning disabilities, and children will find this wiki useful, in future when it has improved more, if not now. As they say, Rome was not built in a day - all Wikimedia projects started out like this. And please welcome your ten year old cousin to contribute here - it will no doubt improve his writing skills, as well as increase his knowledge of the world. He will also be contributing to a valuable source of knowledge. - Tangotango (talk) 16:02, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
(After two edit conflicts)First off, we still know who you are, signed or not :). If you think that this page should be nominated for deletion, nominate it. It will most certainly fail, because people support this project. Also, are you a native english speaker? Because if you are, these articles will sound dumb and pointless. Now, I personally know a bunch of native spanish speakers who are just learning the language, and the english wikipedia is way beyond their vocabulary. They learn things like "door" and "shoe" and "throw" before they learn words like "collaborated", for example. A sentence from the "Acid" article on english: That approximates the modern definition of Brønsted and Lowry, who defined an acid as a compound which donates a hydrogen ion (H+) to another compound (called a base). That doesn't look very easy to translate, in my opinion. Once again, if you genuinely feel that it should be deleted, nominate it. If you want to destroy all the work that people have put into this, please, nominate. We have gotten this sort of comment before. If you are an advanced learner, please, GO TO ENGLISH. This is for people learning the language by immersion, not reading. PullToOpen Talk 16:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
I have seen one or two things I thought were condescending. The answer is to change those things. I saw something on one of the Main Pages about a SE wiki being for "people learning English". I changed it to "people who do not know much English". Maybe "read" is better than "know". I think it's condescending to assume that everyone using the SE wikis is learning English or wants to learn English. Probably many want to learn English. Some may only want to get the information. Some may be people with a spoken native language other than English. They may or may not want to learn more English than they already know. Some may be Deaf people; some Deaf people have learned a spoken language and some have not. Some want to learn a spoken language and some do not want to. Many Deaf people are not able to easily learn a spoken language or the writing of a spoken language. I would not call being Deaf a learning disability. I think that would offend some Deaf people. Some Deaf people are happy being Deaf and do not want to learn English. The answer is not to delete the whole wiki. The answer is to edit the Main Page and any other place you see condescending things and change them -- but not if you think using BE850 is condescending. If there were Simple Wikipedias in other languages I would probably enjoy reading them. I wuold read them to learn the other languages and to find information and to translate information into the languages I know better. I'm pretty advanced in French so I would probably not look much at a Simple French Wikipedia, but I would not vote to delete it. I might look at Simple French or even Simple English sometimes if I see something I do not understand on the French or English Wikipedia. I think Simple English can be good for native English speakers to understand complex subjects. Or it will in future when it has more good pages. I may translate Statistics pages into Simple English; I think native English speakers will read them. If you have a complaint like "condescending", don't just say that you saw a condescending page somewhere; change the page or talk about which page it was and which words were condescending. Or give an example if there are too many to list. I tried to write this in Simple English. I know that the person I'm answering and some other people reading this are able to read more complex English. I think it's good to write simple English because I think some people reading this may find simple English easier. I'm sorry I used some hard words. --Coppertwig 12:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
.*humour* I was in the children's part of the library and I saw some condescending books. Some seemed to be written for two-year-olds!! We should close all children's parts of all libraries. *end humour*
If there are not many users, one reason may be that not many people know that there is a Simple English Wikipedia. Maybe it will be a little better now because on the English Main Page now it says "Complete list" under the languages on the left. --Coppertwig 13:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
If anyone knows where to find Simple German (maybe five year old level) please tell me. I need to practice German. I would like to see Simple Chinese in pinyin, with definitions in a language I can understand. --Coppertwig 14:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I agree, this project makes no sense to me. The way i view it, teaching someone the term "body water" will complicate the learning process, adding an additional step towards understanding "sweat" whilst throwing in a new piece of data that is effectively useless in communication outside of the SEWikipedia. Additionally, if a person is never exposed to the word "sweat," how are they ever going to know what the word means? If the goal is comprehension, we can see that the brilliance and beauty of wikipedia step in. Any word that is not understood can be linked to, where an entire article is dedicated to explaining that subject. While comprehension may not be very great immediately, that is exactly the essence of the process of learning. I understand correlation is key to understanding, but in terms of humans that correlation is typically through a combination of the information given by the senses, in which case a text database will never be ideal for someone trying to understand (as opposed to parrot). Put simply enough, teach a person in simple terms and you will get a person with a simple mind (for example, look at feral children, which shows that limiting stimulus to a developing mind limits the potential of that mind). We do not have simple minds, we never do. In response to above, "acid" is described in complex terms because it is a complex topic. If your friends were to look up the articles for "door" and "shoe," they would probably be much more likely to understand what is being talked about. They might even be able to expand their knowledge of the language by clicking on the links that are words they don't understand within that article. I speak and read and write english plenty fine, but i still don't understand some articles.
The optimum state of "simplicity" for ESL students is a/an _________ to english dictionary. 01:08, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. When I am learning a language I like to read a simple text in the language I am learning. I do not like to go from one language to another every second. Looking in a ____ to English dictionary means looking at another language every time. Learning a language is better if you can stay in that language for many minutes at one time. A phrase like "body water" can help a person stay in the language and understand and not look at another language in that minute. Maybe some people learn well if they go from one language to another every second. Maybe other people do not. Maybe you learn languages easily using a dictionary of two languages, and maybe it is hard for you to understand that some people do not like to learn that way or do not learn well that way. This Wikipedia is for people who know that they like to read Simple English. Many books for language learners use simple text. Also, this Wikipedia is not only for people who want to learn English. It is also for people learning to read, and for some deaf people who may be able to read Simple English but not English, and for people who do not have time to learn English but need information quickly, and for other people who want to read Simple English for many reasons. --Coppertwig 05:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
I have gotten much pleasure from reading simple texts in languages I am learning. It is hard for me to find simple texts. Sometimes I find books for children in a language I want to learn, and then I am happy. But I would be much more happy if I could find simple text written for adults, about something I want to read about. Learning a language is a pleasure but it is also hard work. It is much easier for me to learn when reading something that is in simple text and is talking about something I want to read about. Books for children are simple text, but frequently they are not very simple. Children know many words. Also books for children are talking about things children want to read about. They are not talking about things I want to read about. Different people want to read about different things. I hope later there will be Simple Wikipedias in many languages with pages about many things. Then I will find the pages about things I like to read about. I will have much pleasure reading them and learning a little of the languages. After a person has learned a little of the language, if they want to learn more they can read hard words. It is much easier to find hard words. Now there is Wikipedia in many languages so it is very easy to find hard words about many things in many languages. That is also very good for language learners. Some people may learn better by starting with hard words, but they do not need to delete the Simple English Wikipedia which is for the people who learn better by starting with simple text, and is for people who cannot learn English or do not have time to learn English or do not want to learn English and cannot find information in any other language they can read -- some people cannot easily read any language. We do not delete wheelchairs just because for most people it is healthier to walk. --Coppertwig 14:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Almost all Simple English does not sound like "body water". Yes, maybe teaching "body water" will make learning more complex. Teaching "body water" is not very good. But almost all Simple English is much more like English than "body water" is. The reason "body water" can be good is that someone can understand "body water". Saying "body water" is not for the purpose of teaching English. It is for the purpose of helping the reader understand. The rest of the page can be for teaching English because the rest of the page probably sounds like English. Saying "body water" makes the person stay and understand and read the rest of the page, and get information or learn English. Maybe the person just wants to get information and does not want to learn English. Maybe the person is learning English but looking in a dictionary that tells the meaning of "body water" in another language makes it hard for the person to learn English because they start to think in the other language. For some people that makes it difficult to learn a new language. So it is good for the language learner to see "body water" and think in English. And it is good for the person who wants information and is not trying to learn English, if they can understand "body water" but can't understand a harder word. --Coppertwig 14:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Is there a vote somewhere? Can I vote for no deletion? --Coppertwig 14:20, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Einfach German

Is 'einfach' - simple - German wikipedia coming out any time soon, if ever? 21:02, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You can always propose a simple German at meta:Requests for new languages. That'll be the only way it'll ever get made. Archer7 - talk 21:07, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I would support it. I need to practice German. I might write as well as read it. --Coppertwig 04:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bosnian wikipedia

Bosnian wikipedia has more than 100+ articles. Please correct. Thanks, Amer

[edit] Link to Simple talk

I would like to see a link to "Simple talk" on the left, near where it says "Main Page" and "Community Portal". Simple English Wiktionary and Simple English Wikiquote both have that. --Coppertwig 04:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Header

I think it should be "Welcome to Wikipedia – the free encyclopedia that anyone can write." Sounds better than "change". 02:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bit of a wording proposal

Could the line "Simple English Wikipedia currently has xx articles." be changed to say "Simple English Wikipedia has xx articles right now."? Seems a bit... simpler. --en:User:tjstrf 11:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

  • I don't find it that hard English, so I say nay. Frits 18:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured articles

Does this wikipedia have some type of featured articles system? Frits 16:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)