Wikipedia:Simple talk

Simple talk

WP:ST

This is the place to ask any questions you have about the Simple English Wikipedia. Any general discussions or anything of community interest is also appropriate here.

You might also find an answer on Wikipedia:Useful, a listing of helpful pages.

You may reply to any section below by clicking the "change this page" link, or add a new discussion section to this page. Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~). Please add new topics to the bottom of this page.

Please note that old discussions on this page are archived periodically. If you do not find a discussion here, please look in the archives. Note that you should not change the archives, so if something that has been archived needs discussing, please start a new discussion on this page.

Some of the language used on this page can be complicated. This is because it is used by editors to talk to one another, so sometimes we forget. Please leave us a note if you are finding what we are saying too hard to read.

Are you in the right place?

See WP:AN to speak to an administrator.
See WP:RFCU for CheckUser requests.
See WP:OS for oversight.
See WP:RFRB to request the rollback feature (which administrators can grant).
See WP:VIP to report vandalism.

Add this page to your list of watched pages — Purge

change

Doing nothing about Fake sources (that come from 'Hallucination' from 'A.I. software')

This article was taken from 'Death row', then given a 'pat on the back' (on February 17), and then set free.--The fake sources (in the article), were not removed; The article was not nuked/Deleted.--Our system has failed (in regard to that article).--Now, one user has used time, and has also gotten the article put 'on trial', again.--Should there be suggestion for change (such as another formal justification for QD), for fake-sourced articles?--I am somewhat concerned about what will be the next new-article, that ' slips thru the cracks', and avoids being nuked, while still having fake sources 'from hallucination from A.I. software'. 2001:2020:8341:83A0:C0B6:1805:D64C:75C5 (talk) 08:26, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support a QD option for articles that have no non-AI sources. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:11, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you try to make things a bit more easy to read? There is no "death row", no putting "on trial" and there is no "system" for an article to "fall through the cracks".

If an article is about something that doesnt exist - WP:A6 is the appropriate QD. We don't delete articles on the sources they produce, rather how notable the subject is. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 21:15, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps the most difficult: how do you identify these 'AI generated sources'? Eptalon (talk) 17:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments?

Looking for opinions on this. I feel like edit ear is simplified enough as it is and also the warning template links to WP:Edit war. Either we move WP:Edit war to WP:Change war or change the warning message. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 10:37, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Considering we use "change" in the interface and most references to modifying a page, moving WP:Edit war to WP:Change war would probably be preferable.- FusionSub (Talk page) (Contributions) 10:43, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

clean up, eval 4 templates: hyphenate params (4×);

Is there any particular reason that edits like Special:Diff/7572875 were being made? Does it make any difference? 11USA11 (talk) 03:23, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@11USA11: Have you asked the user who made the edits? -- Auntof6 (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No. @Djsasso: is there a reason for these edits? 11USA11 (talk) 05:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Hi. It appears that unlike EN wiki that has a separate page for requested moves, here we have to put forth such requests on this page. The page in question is Razia Sultana which I think should be moved to Razia Sultan based on WP:COMMONNAME principle. There was a recent discussion at Talk:Razia Sultan on EN wiki which determined the common name to be "Razia Sultan", hence my attempt to have the page moved. I would appreciate it if one of the page movers or administrators could look into the matter. Thanks. Keivan.f (talk) 05:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a 'Category page'

simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:People_with_ankylosing_spondylitis
.--Please say if the page is okay or not (as a 'Category page').--I found the page while i was removing one person from the category (because there was no source (or mention) in the article, for him having the condition).--If the person has been added as a 'medical hoax etc', at English-wiki, i can not say.--Good luck (while i fix other 'category pages'). 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:9CC9:562C:7DCD:2913 (talk) 07:01, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is a category, or "category page", because it's in the category namespace. The text on the page belongs in an article, not a category, so I deleted it. I also changed the categories. Let me know if you have any questions. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:56, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the Simple English Wikipedia has no Portals like on the English Wikipedia???

If almost all versions of Wikipedia have portals for specific things (like food, physics, biology and others), than why the Simple English version of Wikipedia (and other smaller versions of Wikipedia) have no portals? I think that the Simple English Wikipedia and other smaller versions of Wikipedia should have portals. Like: Portal:Food, Portal:Physics, Portal:History and others. Wikipedian2025 (talk) 10:49, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wikipedian2025 Because we do not have enough active users to maintain decent articles and there has been no consensus that exists for such a space. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 10:52, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ok thanks! Wikipedian2025 (talk) 10:59, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Even the English Wikipedia deprecated Portals a long time ago. They are only really there because people wouldn't give them up Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:25, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Help needed to Delete meme-thingy

Needs AfD, sub-set of meme-thingy, because it is not notable.

(It is part of non-notable meme-thingy.)--Good luck (while i fix other articles.) 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 18:07, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged it for quick deletion since the article is a copyright violation. Ternera (talk) 19:45, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can use WP:TWINKLE to do deletion nominations without help. Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 21:27, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

non-notable meme-thingy (minor edit of title), needs AfD or maybe QD? (Say, ~~re-creation of Deleted page~~? Justification: not sure how that should be worded.) 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 01:06, 24 April 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 01:10, 24 April 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D17:E55D:65B4:79E4 (talk) 01:13, 24 April 2025 (UTC) /original poster[reply]
non-notable meme-thingy (variation of name).--Salt needed upon re-creation. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:253A:A02B:2EB9:68F2 (talk) 01:11, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Please use WP:TWINKLE to create the nominations. Ieditrandomarticles (talk | contribs) 01:37, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Stub

Can anyone confirm if these instructions are still relevant on Wikipedia:Stub:

The MediaWiki software can make finding stubs easy for you. To make it do this, set the Threshold for stub display higher than 0. This makes it easy to find or fix (make into a longer article) a stub. See Special:Preferences to set your threshold, or Help:User preferences for more help on this and other settings.

I looked in my preferences and didn't see anything like that. A comment five years ago remarked on this. If this is outdated, it should be removed from the page and that section should be rewritten. TagUser (talk) 23:07, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Admin Assistance: Duplicate or Overlapping Articles

Hello Admin,

I recently created the article titled 2025 Pahalgam attack, but I noticed that another article, 2025 Pahalgam Massacre, already exists. Upon review, the latter appears to have been created recently and seems to largely replicate content from the English Wikipedia, potentially copy-pasted.

Both articles refer to the same incident, and having two separate entries may cause confusion or redundancy. I kindly request your assistance in reviewing both pages and making a decision—whether to merge, redirect, or retain only one with proper sourcing and neutrality.

Thank you for your time and help in maintaining the quality and consistency of Wikipedia. Qewse (talk) 12:51, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would support a merger of the two articles. Steven1991 (talk) 14:09, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Qewse: This doesn't require an admin. Anyone can do the merge, and then either redirect one article to the other, or ask for one to be deleted. Whoever takes care of this, please be sure to address the Wikidata link, so that the article that remains is linked in Wikidata. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 16:20, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Use the templates {{merge}}, {{mergefrom}} and {{mergeto}}. Eptalon (talk) 17:37, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Defending opening/helpme tag

I am making this post here to pre-emptively defend myself from the consequences of my last edit. The related link is: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_deletion/Requests/2025/Viruses/Did_you_know/1

The person opening up the RfD - and closing it - deleting the article, is the same person. He also deleted another article with no RfD at all. He also made a post on my talk page to carry over a discuss from his talk page that I don't think he wanted to take part in anymore - and so did another DYK admin (Did you know). I am doing so because he is an admin and I am a normal user and the only other eyes on this is his buddy - I hope you understand. This is normal practise - even in real life - and still doesn't mean I am personally going against him now or in the future no matter the outcome if I wanted to wish him all the best before he gave his own talk/article approval. Catcus DeMeowwy{{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151{{SUBST:big} 06:43, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@TDKR Chicago 101 replying to tag you Catcus DeMeowwy{{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151{{SUBST:big} 06:44, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created the RfD because you wanted for discussion and I felt that hearing other users feedback would allow a better understanding. Other admin @BRPever: also shared the same thought that the articles you were creating were not suited to be their own articles hence the deletion. BRPever also wrote on your talk page explaining his justification as did I in my own talk page. I don't see a reason for you to defend yourself when BRPever and I were respectfully explaining our edits and reasonings. I do believe your edits are done in good faith which is why I suggested for you to continue your edits via sandbox as well. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removing the article closed tagging is not the way to complain about this. I agree there should have been more discussion at the RfD but the article is deleted now. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also to clarify, I did not delete the RfD article. I closed the RfD discussion because the article was already deleted (not by me). I opened the RfD because the user wanted more dialogue and seeing as how no headway was being made on my talk page discussion I felt the user reading other user's perspective on why the article was suited for deletion they would understand the point I was trying to get at via my talk page. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:50, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes my bad. Sorry, I just trusted the person making the comment. Clearly that was a mistake. ScrabbleTiles (talk) 07:03, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I gave you my reasons. The reasoning that you want DYK from enwiki portals to be copied into subpages just so you can link more pages makes no sense to me. I reminded you to read and follow our practices. I am not sure what the actual issue you come up here with is, but those pages should not exist here. You are free to keep them in your userspace. BRP^ever 07:05, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/AIDS Catcus DeMeowwy{{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151{{SUBST:big} 07:11, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image help

Hi can someone help me fix the image on Maria Konopnicka? Thanks, Adelaide What is it? 15:14, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fr33kman fixed it, thanks so much! Adelaide What is it? 15:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome fr33k man 15:26, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I won't ping as you just thanked me but I replaced it with the infobox from enwiki, Not sure if Fr33kman said but you were missing the |thumb parameter which is why it wasn't working :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:27, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! I need to start reading up on Infoboxes and such and how to add them lol Adelaide What is it? 15:29, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

De-indexing user and user talk pages

People like to add spam to their user pages here, because it gets indexed by search engines. However, on English Wikipedia, the user and user talk namespaces are set to not be included in search engine results. Can we get consensus to do that here?

The instructions for de-indexing a namespace are found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Controlling_search_engine_indexing#Other_namespaces_and_robots.txt TagUser (talk) 18:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was that way here. I know I remove the indexing when I see it hardcoded on user pages. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:34, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When I do a Google search for "Auntof6", I see your user page here and on commons. TagUser (talk) 23:49, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@@TagUser @@Auntof6 I thought it was indexed by default (says in the special "page information" on an article), or am I mistaken? Tagged user because that is why the pages show on Google search { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151 06:34, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Catcus DeMeowwy: OK, maybe it is.

By the way, I believe I asked you to stop putting codes on pages that don't belong to you. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:36, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151 06:38, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Catcus DeMeowwy: The string of numbers. -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:43, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's just my signature and it's the same every time { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 9189 86 83 80 77 747 1 6866 63 60 57 54 51 48 45 42 39 36 33 30 27 24 21 18 151 06:44, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Catcus DeMeowwy: Then to quote Emily Litella, "Never mind!" -- Auntof6 (talk) 06:59, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creation of Talk-page(s)

Creation of Talk-page(s) of salted Brain rot memes, is 'on the increase'.--Can I.P. users add anything (of what the original poster is suggesting), to talk-pages?--If my question is regarded as helpful (and relevant), then fine. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:FC35:132:41ED:26E8 (talk) 05:06, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Template: ... conviction", or "... case", or "... scandal"

"Template:... sex trafficking scandal".--A high-profile victim died recently. Please consider using other (Simple) words in this template - not "scandal".--'Side topic'; is it fair to say that the case goes beyond "scandal", and on to tragedy or travesty.--Note: using the word "case", can be regarded as downplaying the crime.--One questions, if our template can use (or find) a 'more encyclopedic' title, than "... scandal".--Another thing: "sex trafficking" in the title, already highlights which (of the worst) crimes, this is about; using the word "scandal", can make one feel/think that things might be approaching 'hyperbole of sorts'. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:FC35:132:41ED:26E8 (talk) 04:56, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Jeffrey_Epstein_sex_trafficking_conviction
. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:FC35:132:41ED:26E8 (talk) 04:58, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

'AI slop et cetera', from blocked user

This article about a Technology company.
Not ready to stay in mainspace.
QD (promotional) is an option. However, if anyone takes to AfD, then i expect to "vote" Delete, in a heartbeat.--This article does not have 'only a little bit problems'. Therefore, i will not add tags (but everyone else is welcome to do so).

('Suspected') AI slop, from blocked user.--If this post is regarded as helpful, then fine. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:C98B:66B2:F01:2FF3 (talk) 23:09, 26 April 2025 (UTC) /2001:2020:8355:B9EA:C98B:66B2:F01:2FF3 (talk) 23:10, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Justification: 'Not simple'; and/or 'Promotional'. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:C98B:66B2:F01:2FF3 (talk) 23:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Need for c. one template for star-thingies (or constellations)

Hi!
If anyone could create one (or more) templates, then that would be quite nice. Please see,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Leo_(constellation)
.--For whatever reason, there seems to be a rather large interest (among wiki-users), for 'stars and astronomy and things far-away into the sky'. With an okay template, there will not be less interest in these things!--Note: i created c. 3 categories yesterday, in regard to 'the 12 zodiac-related constellations'.--Good luck (while i try to start writing (more) about 'common misunderstandings about the night sky, and its stars and other heavenly bodies'.)--Have a nice day. 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:A1BC:E271:B457:785A (talk) 13:34, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sub-referencing: User testing

Hi I’m Johannes from Wikimedia Deutschland's Technical Wishes team. We are making great strides with the new sub-referencing feature and we’d love to invite you to take part in two activities to help us move this work further:

Try it out and share your feedback
Please try the updated wikitext feature on the beta wiki and let us know what you think, either on our talk page or by booking a call with our UX researcher.
Get a sneak peak and help shape the Visual Editor user designs
Help us test the new design prototypes by participating in user sessions – sign up here to receive an invite. We're especially hoping to speak with people from underrepresented and diverse groups. If that's you, please consider signing up! No prior or extensive editing experience is required. User sessions will start May 14th.

We plan to bring this feature to Wikimedia wikis later this year. We’ll reach out to wikis for piloting in time for deployments. Creators and maintainers of reference-related tools and templates will be contacted beforehand as well.

Thank you very much for your support and encouragement so far in helping bring this feature to life! Johannes Richter (WMDE) (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Striking-out text (mainspace)

"Artificial intelligence".
See section 3 (or 4).--Someone with 'rollback tools' might give it a quick fix. (If i had seen the strikeouts earlier, i would have reverted or informed admins 'directly'.)

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Artificial_intelligence&oldid=10210720
. Good luck (while i fix other parts of the article). 2001:2020:8355:B9EA:1D28:F2B7:1BE5:E3E (talk) 16:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probable fake / hoax

It seems that a group of accounts - at least Kochamyizrael, Maxim4447, and SPAStepinski - is trying to push a hoax about a supposed Polish village named Jajomyje in various projects. I became aware of this through a speedy deletion request in German-language Wikipedia, where I'm an admin, and deleted that article, see there. There's not much more than an X account, a page at the freehoster Neocities, and a recently uploaded YouTube video to be found about this "place" in the web, certainly nothing on maps, and I believe it doesn't exist. The only Wikipedia language version which now has an article is this one, and I noticed that there was already a speedy deletion request filed by User:WTM which got reverted by the articles' author as "griefing". I filed a speedy deletion request as well, which the author reverted again. So I'm pointing this out here, otherwise not being active in Simple English Wikipedia, for the local community to deal with as you see fit. Gestumblindi (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should medical-related templates be added to talkpages?

@Catcus DeMeowwy is spamming {{Reliable sources for medical articles}} on articles, Do we really need these templates on talkpages?,

I originally reverted stating no one uses talkpages often/at all so was pointless but Catcus has reverted and taken issue with this so thought I would ask other peoples opinions,

Irrespective of peoples opinions I won't be edit warring/reverting (unless consensus is to remove these), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:46, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conversation carried over from User talk: edit reverted on Munchausen Syndrome where not much has been said. This discussion is not an issue with me either (I understand Davey has no problem with me doing this), but I do take issue with the template not being on medical article talk pages (it does not belong on the article) - or does it? Note that I have also created in a section on the Munchausen syndrome talk page along with my undo (revert: added template back in). It is linked in the first comment by @Davey2010. Thanks (comment by Catcus DeMeowwy original UTC: 20:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)). updated. sig: { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 22:09, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the community decides that the talk pages can have the template (reliable sources for medical articles) then another article talk page Talk:Artificial_insemination could benefit from it as the article is sort of just hanging out there. { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 22:56, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also had a reason to come here, about another mass change but I will do it later. I would like to say again (it was said in the original comment and on talk page) that I have added this template to multiple articles.

{ Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 20:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I don’t think it necessary, as here no one really check the talk pages often. So there is really no point in doing so. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 22:41, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well I believe that I am being held back much (with what I am allowed to do), and for the reasons I have said already, elsewhere, I think it matters less if people check the talk pages often than if it is necessary. I think I should be allowed to do it { Catcus DeMeowwy (talk) | User_talk:Catcus DeMeowwy 22:44, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see no issue with this template, and in the case that a discussion does occur in the talk page of a medical-related article, having this information can be considered important. The number of people that will end up seeing this template on a talk page and will find it relevant on a discussion, however, is trivially low, and it is likely not necessary to add many of these templates at once. MrMeAndMrMe_Talk 23:21, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vote on proposed modifications to the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines and U4C Charter

The voting period for the revisions to the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines and U4C Charter closes on 1 May 2025 at 23:59 UTC (find in your time zone). Read the information on how to participate and read over the proposal before voting on the UCoC page on Meta-wiki.

The Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is a global group dedicated to providing an equitable and consistent implementation of the UCoC. This annual review was planned and implemented by the U4C. For more information and the responsibilities of the U4C, you may review the U4C Charter.

Please share this message with members of your community in your language, as appropriate, so they can participate as well.

In cooperation with the U4C --

Keegan (WMF) (talk) 03:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"QD ruled out?"

Has there been instances, where scummy articles have thereafter been (succesfully) thrown into AfD (or QD), with no further prompting? Yes.--Is this a volunteer project, where folks choose what areas one will work with, (and within guidelines)? Yes.--Do busybodies et cetera, present themselves (and their platform), from time to time? Yes.--Have i recently been trying to make get a message across to any particular user? I think not.--If this post is somewhat illuminating, to at least one 'complainer et cetera, of today', then fine.--Good luck, while i am off to fix this-or-that article, of my choice. 2001:2020:C305:834B:9DCC:B381:D69B:36B1 (talk) 15:55, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean that a article you created was deleted without you knowing? Please be clearer. Cactus🌵 ^spiky ^ツ 12:36, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

POV pushing at 'Invasion of Ukraine'

There are c. two users, that insist that Donald Trump and JD Vance and Elon Musk, do not like Ukraine. (And one of the users is also doing revert,without making edit comment; That user has been warned about such, some months ago!)--The text is not saying which experts of political science have given their view about the two 'hangarounds' and the president do not like Ukraine.--Please also help those c. two users, in seeing the light, about how English-wiki has not come to the same conclusion.

simple.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine&diff=10229430&oldid=10229423
. Thank you in advance. 2001:2020:C305:834B:381A:B204:F2B:BBC5 (talk) 18:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]