Policy | Technical | Proposals | Idea lab | WMF | Miscellaneous |
The proposals section of the village pump is used to offer specific changes for discussion. Before submitting:
Discussions are automatically archived after remaining inactive for nine days.
I invite the community to consider the following question: Do articles about cities need vector maps of cities in SVG format - editable, with a full CC-0 license, for free use in any media, publications, presentations, projects, etc.
Let me explain. I have been designing vector maps for many years. Now I have the opportunity to provide a large number of my city maps in SVG format.
I am sure that a map of streets and roads of a city is the main and most necessary content in Wiki articles about cities. In most cases - in articles about cities - there are no such maps. I tried to publish some of my maps in Wiki articles.
And I was extremely surprised that my maps were immediately removed. Reasons for deletion - some users did not like my nickname, some - my user page (and what is written there) - they considered it advertising, some - generally claim that city maps in articles about cities are not needed at all (most users) - and I’m sure that all these claims are unfounded and constitute a form of vandalism. Discuss. and all the arguments of the parties can be read HERE: /info/en/?search=User_talk:Vectormapper#Maps_and_promotion
LIST OF THE FREE CITY MAPS in SVG EDITABLE CC-0
[ [1]] [ [2]] [ [3]] [ [4]] [ [5]] [ [6]] [ [7]] [ [8]] [ [9]] [ [10]] [ [11]] [ [12]] [ [13]] [ [14]] [ [15]] [ [16]] [ [17]] [ [18]] [ [19]] [ [20]] [ [21]] [ [22]] [ [23]] [ [24]] [ [25]] [ [26]] [ [27]] [ [28]] [ [29]] [ [30]] [ [31]] [ [32]] [ [33]] [ [34]] [ [35]] [ [36]] [ [37]] [ [38]] [ [39]] [ [40]] [ [41]] [ [42]] [ [43]] [ [44]] [ [45]] [ [46]] [ [47]] [ [48]] [ [49]] [ [50]] [ [51]] [ [52]] [ [53]] [ [54]] [ [55]] [ [56]] [ [57]] [ [58]] [ [59]] [ [60]] [ [61]] [ [62]] [ [63]] [ [64]] [ [65]] [ [66]] [ [67]] [ [68]] [ [69]] [ [70]] [ [71]] [ [72]] [ [73]] [ [74]] [ [75]] [ [76]] [ [77]] [ [78]] [ [79]] [ [80]] [ [81]] [ [82]] [ [83]] [ [84]] [ [85]] [ [86]] [ [87]] [ [88]] [ [89]] [ [90]] [ [91]] [ [92]] [ [93]] [ [94]] [ [95]] [ [96]] [ [97]] [ [98]] [ [99]] [ [100]] [ [101]] [ [102]] [ [103]] [ [104]] [ [105]] [ [106]] [ [107]] [ [108]] [ [109]] [ [110]] [ [111]] [ [112]] [ [113]] [ [114]] [ [115]] [ [116]] [ [117]] [ [118]] [ [119]] [ [120]] [ [121]] [ [122]] [ [123]] [ [124]] [ [125]] [ [126]] [ [127]] [ [128]] [ [129]] [ [130]] [ [131]] [ [132]] [ [133]] [ [134]] [ [135]] [ [136]] [ [137]] [ [138]] [ [139]] [ [140]] [ [141]] [ [142]] [ [143]] [ [144]] [ [145]] [ [146]] [ [147]] [ [148]] [ [149]] [ [150]] [ [151]] [ [152]] [ [153]] [ [154]] [ [155]] [ [156]] [ [157]] [ [158]] [ [159]] [ [160]] [ [161]] [ [162]] Vectormapper ( talk) 01:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Discussion has moved on to Talk:Main_Page#Straw_poll |
The new, sixth section of the main page. There will be no editing protections on the article, or at least a very low level of protection. It will be modelled closely after Today's featured article in terms of format. I believe it will bring the following benefits:
1) Create an opportunity for more inexperienced editors to participate in the project by bringing forth a visibly imperfect article, possibly recruiting future long-term editors
2) Emphasize the participatory nature of Wikipedia
3) Improve the actual article being showcased
I would appreciate any thoughts. We could have a trial run before we implement it permanently. Bremps ... 00:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
In many of the articles linked to by Regional accents of English (separate note that many should be in Category:Dialects of English but are not), there are descriptions of each dialect's phonology. However, instead of using an extended version of Wells' Lexical sets, many articles refer to the broad transcription of rhotic RP English, according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation. Thus Southern American English#Modern phonology has a table where the first column reads ' English diaphoneme, /æ/, /ɑː/, /ɒ/, /ɔː/' instead of ' Lexical Set, TRAP/BATH, PALM, LOT, CLOTH/THOUGHT' (or something similar) and Indian English#Vowels contains 'Diphthong /eɪ/ is pronounced as [ e]' instead of 'FACE is pronounced as [e]'. Examples of articles using Lexical sets correctly are Scottish English#Phonology and American English#Phonology (for tables and not, respectively).
The bottom line is that the whole points of Lexical sets is that we don't need to talk about dialects in terms of a 'standard' pronunciation, and we can easily refer to groups of nouns and see how they interact (it clearly makes no sense to talk about a / ɒ/-/ ɒ/ split rather than a LOT-CLOTH split). Therefore it is ridiculous to keep using broad transcription when Wells' system exists and is widely used already. Citation unneeded ( talk) 17:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Edit filter manager has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. EggRoll97 ( talk) 19:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
I understand that Indian courts have no jurisdiction over Wikipedia content, I would like to highlight that Wikipedia, as a global platform, has a responsibility to ensure that its content adheres to ethical standards and respects the laws and sensitivities of different cultures and nations. Article 17 of the Constitution of India explicitly abolishes the practice of 'untouchability' and criminalizes any enforcement of disabilities arising out of it. The use of the term 'untouchable' is deeply offensive and historically rooted in discrimination and oppression. I respectfully request that Wikipedia review below article content to ensure that it does not perpetuate discriminatory language. Instead of using the term 'untouchable', more appropriate and respectful terminology should be employed to discuss this aspect of India's history and social structure.
/info/en/?search=Pasi_(caste) 2405:201:300B:390E:E42A:45AE:34CC:F448 ( talk) 19:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
The List of common misconceptions contains more than 23,000 words and nearly 900 inline citations. We are already using workarounds to avoid some hard technical limits affecting reference display, and there are limits to what else can be done, especially if more citations are added. Please see Talk:List of common misconceptions#Split proposal, where we are talking about splitting it into two, three, or four separate lists, or alternatively discouraging the use of more than one or two sources per entry. Opinions and other ideas would be welcome. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 16:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
To whom it may concern, It is sad to say that some individual contributer are trigger happy of their power/privileges on denying new edits on article/talk without checking the facts on the edit. I'm promposing that one contributer can add but cannot delete or remove voices on Talk. Denying/deletions of article/talk or removal of an article / talk should be verified by at least one or more contributer process. This would limit the frustration, time and effort of anyone who worked hard on the research and simply be denied due to bias on the original authors article/talk or for unknown reason without explaining and confirming that the references or citations are indeed known relative fact from all know legal form or law on publishing such phrase, statements and or quotes. I'm proposing also that the privilege/power of denying an edit on article/talk should only be possible with a two contributer or more editorial editor processe confirming false statement or factual unless a publication is false or link to an article was null ie. References/Citations without ISBN or Link page etc. can be edited by adding only to an article/talk that it is null but can not be deleted unless confirmed by more than one contributer/editorial authority procedure, Respectfully ( The Summum Bonum ( talk) 00:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Unnecessary line on fundraiser banner. It is about a controversial line in current fundraiser (putting invitation here as it is kind of a proposal to remove it). – ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 14:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at WT:CSD § F8 and keep local.-- Marchjuly ( talk) 03:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Policy | Technical | Proposals | Idea lab | WMF | Miscellaneous |
The proposals section of the village pump is used to offer specific changes for discussion. Before submitting:
Discussions are automatically archived after remaining inactive for nine days.
I invite the community to consider the following question: Do articles about cities need vector maps of cities in SVG format - editable, with a full CC-0 license, for free use in any media, publications, presentations, projects, etc.
Let me explain. I have been designing vector maps for many years. Now I have the opportunity to provide a large number of my city maps in SVG format.
I am sure that a map of streets and roads of a city is the main and most necessary content in Wiki articles about cities. In most cases - in articles about cities - there are no such maps. I tried to publish some of my maps in Wiki articles.
And I was extremely surprised that my maps were immediately removed. Reasons for deletion - some users did not like my nickname, some - my user page (and what is written there) - they considered it advertising, some - generally claim that city maps in articles about cities are not needed at all (most users) - and I’m sure that all these claims are unfounded and constitute a form of vandalism. Discuss. and all the arguments of the parties can be read HERE: /info/en/?search=User_talk:Vectormapper#Maps_and_promotion
LIST OF THE FREE CITY MAPS in SVG EDITABLE CC-0
[ [1]] [ [2]] [ [3]] [ [4]] [ [5]] [ [6]] [ [7]] [ [8]] [ [9]] [ [10]] [ [11]] [ [12]] [ [13]] [ [14]] [ [15]] [ [16]] [ [17]] [ [18]] [ [19]] [ [20]] [ [21]] [ [22]] [ [23]] [ [24]] [ [25]] [ [26]] [ [27]] [ [28]] [ [29]] [ [30]] [ [31]] [ [32]] [ [33]] [ [34]] [ [35]] [ [36]] [ [37]] [ [38]] [ [39]] [ [40]] [ [41]] [ [42]] [ [43]] [ [44]] [ [45]] [ [46]] [ [47]] [ [48]] [ [49]] [ [50]] [ [51]] [ [52]] [ [53]] [ [54]] [ [55]] [ [56]] [ [57]] [ [58]] [ [59]] [ [60]] [ [61]] [ [62]] [ [63]] [ [64]] [ [65]] [ [66]] [ [67]] [ [68]] [ [69]] [ [70]] [ [71]] [ [72]] [ [73]] [ [74]] [ [75]] [ [76]] [ [77]] [ [78]] [ [79]] [ [80]] [ [81]] [ [82]] [ [83]] [ [84]] [ [85]] [ [86]] [ [87]] [ [88]] [ [89]] [ [90]] [ [91]] [ [92]] [ [93]] [ [94]] [ [95]] [ [96]] [ [97]] [ [98]] [ [99]] [ [100]] [ [101]] [ [102]] [ [103]] [ [104]] [ [105]] [ [106]] [ [107]] [ [108]] [ [109]] [ [110]] [ [111]] [ [112]] [ [113]] [ [114]] [ [115]] [ [116]] [ [117]] [ [118]] [ [119]] [ [120]] [ [121]] [ [122]] [ [123]] [ [124]] [ [125]] [ [126]] [ [127]] [ [128]] [ [129]] [ [130]] [ [131]] [ [132]] [ [133]] [ [134]] [ [135]] [ [136]] [ [137]] [ [138]] [ [139]] [ [140]] [ [141]] [ [142]] [ [143]] [ [144]] [ [145]] [ [146]] [ [147]] [ [148]] [ [149]] [ [150]] [ [151]] [ [152]] [ [153]] [ [154]] [ [155]] [ [156]] [ [157]] [ [158]] [ [159]] [ [160]] [ [161]] [ [162]] Vectormapper ( talk) 01:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Discussion has moved on to Talk:Main_Page#Straw_poll |
The new, sixth section of the main page. There will be no editing protections on the article, or at least a very low level of protection. It will be modelled closely after Today's featured article in terms of format. I believe it will bring the following benefits:
1) Create an opportunity for more inexperienced editors to participate in the project by bringing forth a visibly imperfect article, possibly recruiting future long-term editors
2) Emphasize the participatory nature of Wikipedia
3) Improve the actual article being showcased
I would appreciate any thoughts. We could have a trial run before we implement it permanently. Bremps ... 00:29, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
In many of the articles linked to by Regional accents of English (separate note that many should be in Category:Dialects of English but are not), there are descriptions of each dialect's phonology. However, instead of using an extended version of Wells' Lexical sets, many articles refer to the broad transcription of rhotic RP English, according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation. Thus Southern American English#Modern phonology has a table where the first column reads ' English diaphoneme, /æ/, /ɑː/, /ɒ/, /ɔː/' instead of ' Lexical Set, TRAP/BATH, PALM, LOT, CLOTH/THOUGHT' (or something similar) and Indian English#Vowels contains 'Diphthong /eɪ/ is pronounced as [ e]' instead of 'FACE is pronounced as [e]'. Examples of articles using Lexical sets correctly are Scottish English#Phonology and American English#Phonology (for tables and not, respectively).
The bottom line is that the whole points of Lexical sets is that we don't need to talk about dialects in terms of a 'standard' pronunciation, and we can easily refer to groups of nouns and see how they interact (it clearly makes no sense to talk about a / ɒ/-/ ɒ/ split rather than a LOT-CLOTH split). Therefore it is ridiculous to keep using broad transcription when Wells' system exists and is widely used already. Citation unneeded ( talk) 17:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Edit filter manager has an RfC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. EggRoll97 ( talk) 19:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
I understand that Indian courts have no jurisdiction over Wikipedia content, I would like to highlight that Wikipedia, as a global platform, has a responsibility to ensure that its content adheres to ethical standards and respects the laws and sensitivities of different cultures and nations. Article 17 of the Constitution of India explicitly abolishes the practice of 'untouchability' and criminalizes any enforcement of disabilities arising out of it. The use of the term 'untouchable' is deeply offensive and historically rooted in discrimination and oppression. I respectfully request that Wikipedia review below article content to ensure that it does not perpetuate discriminatory language. Instead of using the term 'untouchable', more appropriate and respectful terminology should be employed to discuss this aspect of India's history and social structure.
/info/en/?search=Pasi_(caste) 2405:201:300B:390E:E42A:45AE:34CC:F448 ( talk) 19:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
The List of common misconceptions contains more than 23,000 words and nearly 900 inline citations. We are already using workarounds to avoid some hard technical limits affecting reference display, and there are limits to what else can be done, especially if more citations are added. Please see Talk:List of common misconceptions#Split proposal, where we are talking about splitting it into two, three, or four separate lists, or alternatively discouraging the use of more than one or two sources per entry. Opinions and other ideas would be welcome. WhatamIdoing ( talk) 16:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
To whom it may concern, It is sad to say that some individual contributer are trigger happy of their power/privileges on denying new edits on article/talk without checking the facts on the edit. I'm promposing that one contributer can add but cannot delete or remove voices on Talk. Denying/deletions of article/talk or removal of an article / talk should be verified by at least one or more contributer process. This would limit the frustration, time and effort of anyone who worked hard on the research and simply be denied due to bias on the original authors article/talk or for unknown reason without explaining and confirming that the references or citations are indeed known relative fact from all know legal form or law on publishing such phrase, statements and or quotes. I'm proposing also that the privilege/power of denying an edit on article/talk should only be possible with a two contributer or more editorial editor processe confirming false statement or factual unless a publication is false or link to an article was null ie. References/Citations without ISBN or Link page etc. can be edited by adding only to an article/talk that it is null but can not be deleted unless confirmed by more than one contributer/editorial authority procedure, Respectfully ( The Summum Bonum ( talk) 00:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF) § Unnecessary line on fundraiser banner. It is about a controversial line in current fundraiser (putting invitation here as it is kind of a proposal to remove it). – ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 14:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at WT:CSD § F8 and keep local.-- Marchjuly ( talk) 03:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)