Jump to content

Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Faithful15 (talk | contribs) at 21:59, 28 January 2024 (→‎O Iran Problem: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 
Shortcuts
The miscellaneous section of the village pump is used to post messages that do not fit into any other category. Please post on the policy, technical, or proposals sections when appropriate, or at the help desk for assistance. For general knowledge questions, please use the reference desk.

Discussions are automatically archived after remaining inactive for a week.

« Archives, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79

How would I get Turkish Wikipedia to have a news feed and request template

Hi, I am working on the wikifeeds service and fixing the feeds and hoping to add more features such as a news feed which isn't currently implemented on the wiki. I can probably copy a news request template from other wikis but I assume that the Turkish Wiki would need a bot to grab news from Turkish news media sources and place them in specifically named pages. I am just starting to look at the news feed capability and how it is implemented in other language wikis, but anyone with insights about this would be very helpful. SBailey (WMF) (talk) 21:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SBailey (WMF): probably better to ask this at WP:VPT, imho, the people there will understand the technical issues better. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will check with WP:VPT
Regards,
Shannon SBailey (WMF) (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Feminism and Folklore 2024

Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wiki Community,

You are humbly invited to organize the Feminism and Folklore 2024 writing competition from February 1, 2024, to March 31, 2024 on your local Wikipedia. This year, Feminism and Folklore will focus on feminism, women's issues, and gender-focused topics for the project, with a Wiki Loves Folklore gender gap focus and a folk culture theme on Wikipedia.

You can help Wikipedia's coverage of folklore from your area by writing or improving articles about things like folk festivals, folk dances, folk music, women and queer folklore figures, folk game athletes, women in mythology, women warriors in folklore, witches and witch hunting, fairy tales, and more. Users can help create new articles, expand or translate from a generated list of suggested articles.

Organisers are requested to work on the following action items to sign up their communities for the project:

  1. Create a page for the contest on the local wiki.
  2. Set up a campaign on CampWiz tool.
  3. Create the local list and mention the timeline and local and international prizes.
  4. Request local admins for site notice.
  5. Link the local page and the CampWiz link on the meta project page.

This year, the Wiki Loves Folklore Tech Team has introduced two new tools to enhance support for the campaign. These tools include the Article List Generator by Topic and CampWiz. The Article List Generator by Topic enables users to identify articles on the English Wikipedia that are not present in their native language Wikipedia. Users can customize their selection criteria, and the tool will present a table showcasing the missing articles along with suggested titles. Additionally, users have the option to download the list in both CSV and wikitable formats. Notably, the CampWiz tool will be employed for the project for the first time, empowering users to effectively host the project with a jury. Both tools are now available for use in the campaign. Click here to access these tools

Learn more about the contest and prizes on our project page. Feel free to contact us on our meta talk page or by email us if you need any assistance.

We look forward to your immense coordination.

Thank you and Best wishes,

Feminism and Folklore 2024 International Team

Stay connected  

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:26, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Loves Folklore is back!

Please help translate to other languages.

Dear Wiki Community, You are humbly invited to participate in the Wiki Loves Folklore 2024 an international photography contest organized on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from different regions, including, folk creative activities and many more. It is held every year from the 1st of February till the 31st of March.

You can help in enriching the folklore documentation on Commons from your region by taking photos, audios, videos, and submitting them in this commons contest.

You can also organize a local contest in your country and support us in translating the project pages to help us spread the word in your native language.

Feel free to contact us on our project Talk page if you need any assistance.

Kind regards,

Wiki loves Folklore International Team

-- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:26, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Informing you about the Mental Health Resource Center and inviting any comments you may have

Hello all! I work in the Community Resilience and Sustainability team of the Wikimedia Foundation. The Mental Health Resource Center is a group of pages on Meta-wiki aimed at supporting the mental wellbeing of users in our community.

The Mental Health Resource Center launched in August 2023. The goal is to review the comments and suggestions to improve the Mental Health Resource Center each quarter. As there have not been many comments yet, I’d like to invite you to provide comments and resource suggestions as you are able to do so on the Mental Health Resource Center talk page. The hope is this resource expands over time to cover more languages and cultures. Thank you! Best, JKoerner (WMF) (talk) 21:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, on my user page I came out as a schizophrenia patient. I'm very stable and not delusional. While I was viciously attacked sometimes, those were just words, and I never experienced any real abuse. I say this because I know at least a couple of other editors who came out as psychiatric patients, and I think they are just the tip of the iceberg. Perhaps Wikipedia attracts such editors, especially in the areas of religions and esotericism. And also the usual fringe POV pushers who get summarily dismissed. My view of Wikipedia is that is requires a keen mind, and it is in some respects a very dog eats dog environment. This is because we deal in knowledge, which requires epistemological responsibility—a minority of people are scientifically literate, and a minority of those who are scientifically literate behave epistemically responsible, hence the edit conflicts which are all too common at Wikipedia. Sometimes reasonable people disagree, but in many respects I find that being an Wikipedian means fending off edits from people who are unreasonable. The gravest Wikipedic sin is not believing in e.g. quantum mysticism, but in being unable to realize that quantum mysticism is WP:FRINGE.
And sometimes being viciously attacked is empowering a sense of personal worth, rather than denying it. Days when I'm not attacked seem lazy and pleasant, but I wouldn't like too many lazy days. A truly shocking day for me was when Facebook was displaying only positive news. tgeorgescu (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vote on the Charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

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

Hello all,

I am reaching out to you today to announce that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) Charter is now open. Community members may cast their vote and provide comments about the charter via SecurePoll now through 2 February 2024. Those of you who voiced your opinions during the development of the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines will find this process familiar.

The current version of the U4C Charter is on Meta-wiki with translations available.

Read the charter, go vote and share this note with others in your community. I can confidently say the U4C Building Committee looks forward to your participation.

On behalf of the UCoC Project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 18:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign policy of Germany

Requesting a new section: please see the discussion. --Pegasovagante (talk) 16:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Germany#Foreign policy of the Scholz cabinet. Let's keep the discussion in one place. Remember that people have lives outside Wikipedia, and are in different time zones, so you may not get an immediate response. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:45, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copy Wikipedia website

I found Google Search these website are copy a webpage. I don't know for Wikimedia policy can copy or not.

47.234.198.142 (talk) 22:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So long as the websites abide by the terms of the CC-BY-SA license, they're freely allowed to copy content. You may wish to add them to WP:Mirrors and forks Mach61 (talk) 22:43, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright, reliability, citogenesis and the relation between Wikipedia and professional encyclopedias where contributors are the same

Note I am an experienced Wikipedia contributor, reasonably familiar with copyright. I am also a scholar, my user page disclosses my real name and academic affiliation. But I am a bit stumped about the best practices in the following case.

I was recently invited to write some encyclopedic articles for a professional encyclopedia (non-profit, actually, and open access, but using traditional copyright: The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction). For some cases, those topics have only a poor article on Wikipedia, or none at all, so I would like to improve it here as well. There are some MoS differences, so the entry I write for us would not be identical to the one I will write for them - for example, they do not require footnotes, nor to they have lead or section headings), but obviously, there would be some overlap. Crucially, I don't want to waste time paraphrasing my own words, but I am also expecting they might be resistnat to the idea of using CC-BY-SA for my entry in their project. So question one is: is it possible for me, as the sole author of a text, to both put it on Wikipedia (as I usually do) but also to donate it to that other encyclopedia, where it would not be CC-BY-SA'ed? To avoid issues with CC, would I have to not publish my entry on Wikipedia until it is ready to be "forked" - because usually I work on an article over here over a period of days or weeks, and occasionally helpful editors make minor tweaks, but as soon as someone tweaks an entry, even fixing a single typo, I am not a sole author and I am bound by CC, right?

Second dimension to discuss. That encyclopedia is seen as RS and cited on Wikipedia. Regardless of whether they agree to use CC-BY-SA and attribute Wikipedia as one of the sources, how does that play with WP:CITOGENESIS? Will the entry I write for them be prohibited from use on Wikipedia, even through it goes through their peer review system (or editorial review)?

To add yet another wrinkle, that encyclopedia accepts original research claims (like all the others except, well, us). Again, they have internal review (they are a reliable, academic work). So if I publish vesion 1 on Wikipedia, and version 2 (with some OR), on their site, can this OR now be used on Wikipedia? Do I need to self-report it to COI first if I want to cite my own entry there for some claim? Do we need a RSN discussion to accept the use of such entries?

To give us some practical examples:

  • case 1: I recently wrote and got to Good Article status the entry on Władysław Umiński. While I am the principal author of this (95%), any rewrite of this for SFE would have to be CC-BY-SA there, with attribution to Wikipedia. Fine. But I can obviously add some claims to SFE that would be ORish for Wikipedia. How to go about adding them to Wikipedia? Report my intention to COI and RSN...? Nobody bats an eyelid when SFE is used on Wikipedia as a source, but because this entry would be written by non-anonymous contributor, i.e., me, would all those extra steps be required? (If so, it seems like yet another case where by disclosing my identity on Wikipedia I open myself to more pain, here, COI review, which would not be needed if I were anonymous?)
  • case 2: I am not sure if I'll be adding any OR to Umiński's SFE entry (would need to think more about that oone), but I would like to use SFE to finally add a claim to another of my Good Articles on Wikipedia, namely the one on hyperspace: that the color of hyperspace in the TV show Babylon 5 was red (or red-black). It still irks me that this fact has no reliable source out there, and I intend to ask SFE to allow me to revise that entry. And actually, I recall numerous discussion with a fellow sf editor, User:TompaDompa, about sysbias issues in our sf entries - we often think that certian examples or arguments should be made, but they are never made in RS (for example, disucssion of non-English classics). Working with SFE (which, again, has editorial peer review) would allow us to improve such entries, by adding content to SFE, then citing it at Wikipedia. But then, again, should one go through COI and RSN here each time? It seems somewhat ridcolous...
  • case 3: Let's say they balk at the use of CC-BY-SA. Fine. I itend to improve some stubby bios of Polish sci-fi writers, for us and them. Ex. Jarosław Grzędowicz. I can write something from scratch, but I don't want to do this twice. If the text is published at SFE with full copyright, can I, as the sole author, simoultanesly use it on Wikipedia under CC-BY-SA? And, sigh, once again, would I need to deal with COI and RSN each and every time?

Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:08, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To answer copyright issues: As the author you can put the content on both encyclopedias. However you should prove that you are the same user / author on both encyclopedias, so on SFE you should have a statement that you are the same person as Piotrus on Wikipedia. Then anything you contribute on both is proved to have permission. Self citing is not a great idea and we tend to treat it as a form of promotion or advertising. So best not to put your own original ideas on Wikipedia in articles. If SFE is counted as a reliable source here, then you could use OR from there and reference it to SFE. however please consider whether it is TRUE, or just an opinion that needs attribution to an author. And just do that for other's writings rather than your own to avoid COI and own-idea promotion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 06:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation banner fundraising campaign in Malaysia

Dear all,

I would like to take the opportunity to inform you all  about the upcoming annual Wikimedia Foundation banner fundraising campaign in Malaysia (on English Wikipedia).

The fundraising campaign will have two components.

  1. We will send emails to people who have previously donated from Malaysia. The emails are scheduled to be sent between the 13th of February to the 2nd of March.  
  2. We will run banners for non-logged in users in Malaysia on English Wikipedia itself. The banners will run from the 28th of May to the 25th of June.

Prior to this, we are planning to run some tests, so you might see banners for 3-5 hours a couple of times before the campaign starts. This activity will ensure that our technical infrastructure works.

Here are some example banners. If you have any comments or suggestions on them, please get in touch with me or reply below:

Generally, before and during the campaign, you can contact us:

Thanks you and regards, Julia JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 06:53, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation banner fundraising campaign in South Africa

Dear all,

I would like to take the opportunity to inform you all  about the upcoming annual Wikimedia Foundation banner fundraising campaign in South Africa.

The fundraising campaign will have two components.

  1. We will send emails to people who have previously donated from South Africa. The emails are scheduled to be sent between the 1st to 24th of May.  
  2. We will run banners for non-logged in users in South Africa on English Wikipedia itself. The banners will run from the 28th of May to the 25th of June.

Prior to this, we are planning to run some tests, so you might see banners for 3-5 hours a couple of times before the campaign starts. This activity will ensure that our technical infrastructure works.

I am also sharing with you a community collaboration page, where we outline more details around the campaign, share some banner examples, and give you space to engage with the fundraising campaign.

We will also be hosting a community call, details are on the collaboration page, to which you can bring your questions and suggestions.

Generally, before and during the campaign, you can contact us:

Thanks you and regards, Julia JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 07:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image request template should go on articles

We have no problem putting cleanup templates, most notably {{citation needed}}, on articles.

Yet we relegate {{Image requested}} to talk pages.

Our readers are often likely to be able to supply images - of objects in their household, places where they live or visit, or whatever.

We should have a template, linking to a page which explains copyright and Wikimedia Commons, which can be used on articles, or indeed on sections of articles. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was tried before and ultimately rejected in 2008. Mach61 (talk) 19:43, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mistakes can and should be rectified. Sixteen-year-old mistakes, doubly so. Further, that conversation appears to be about image placeholders, not cleanup templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. On the page itself one would get much more attention. Hyperbolick (talk) 07:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Libel trial against Wikipedia

I am asking about Irismeister vs. Wikipedia admins. How did that trial end? On ro.wiki there are rumors that he won the trial (perhaps in Israel), but on Google I could not find any information about that.

I think I know more: he advocated a class action trial, led by a group called Wikipedia Watch. AFAIK, that trial went nowhere, and the website of that group no longer exists. tgeorgescu (talk) 12:50, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Wikipedia controversies#September 2005 might be informative re: Wikipedia Watch. I don't know how Irismeister might have been involved in that and have never heard of the suit, but judging from the 125kB of conspiracy theory-style lists of grievances formerly posted on their now-deleted user page, I'm guessing no competent lawyer would take the case. Just speculating, though. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ivanvector: Here an IP said that Irismeister has won the trial. Nobody has contradicted that claim on ro.wiki. The IP claims that Irismeister is from Israel and writes modern Hebrew—somehow as a defense against Irismeister's patent antisemitism. tgeorgescu (talk) 13:10, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm running that through a translator which could be adding its own quirks, but the style of that rant is very similar to the former userpage. Around 2005 Irismeister, under what is apparently their real name, emailed several admins warning that they had already filed claims against Wikipedia with the FTC, there's an old mailing list thread archived on the 'net about it. It's not likely they actually did, they were known for throwing around legalese threats to get their way evidently before WP:NLT was policy; instead there was an Arbcom case in which Irismeister was specifically banned from making legal threats. Their response was threatening to sue for libel, which got them blocked, then they socked with a variety of IPs to restore the threats. The IP that posted on rowiki is a known proxy and now globally blocked. I'm just guessing again but I'd say that the claim of having won a suit in Israel, embedded as it is in a bunch of other ranting about pseudoscience, is just completely made up. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ivanvector: Agree. Winning a lawsuit against en.wiki admins would be big news, and it could still be found through Google, even if it happened before 2008.
And, yup, the admins ridiculed his threats as following: FTC is a federal government body which regulates commerce. Since Wikipedia does not do commerce, it does not fall under the purview of the FTC. So there was nothing which FTC could do with his complaints, except dismiss them out of hand. And, indeed, the FTC is not competent to do anything else with his complaints, since what is commerce and what is not commerce is strictly defined by federal law. tgeorgescu (talk) 19:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Jakob Lodewijk ten Kate

There's two people by this name, and I fear they're getting combined rather badly in links and such. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 08:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden Could you add a note to the article talk page explaining this, and telling us how they differ? Dutch wikipedia also seems to have just the one article. Thanks. PamD 09:13, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, cracked it: there's painter Jan Jacob Lodewijk ten Kate (1850-1929) and writer Jan Jakob Lodewijk ten Kate (1819-1889), according to Wikidata. And nl.wiki has articles on them both, without so much as a helpful hatnote directing to the other one. PamD 09:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Jacob_Lodewijk_ten_Kate_(1850-1929) and https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Jakob_Lodewijk_ten_Kate (can't remember how to elegantly link to nl.wiki). PamD 09:19, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PamD: You do it by adding a colon between the opening brackets and the interwiki prefix, like "[[:nl:Jan Jakob Lodewijk ten Kate]]". Graham87 (talk) 08:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Graham87Ah, thanks: I forgot that first colon. Will add it to my list of "useful stuff" in my sandbox. PamD 09:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have in en.wiki a redirect from Jacob to Jakob. PamD 09:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And nl.wiki confirms that they were father and son. PamD 09:29, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I've now added a note on the son, with 2 sources, to the "Family" section, retargeted the redirect from "... Jacob..." to point there, and added a hatnote. An article on the son would be better, but this should help for now. PamD 09:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Making my first article

Just wanted to see what you think about this article.

Draft:Lobotomy (Geometry Dash) Pemcil (talk) 05:39, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • A fan wiki is user-generated, so it's not reliable.
  • The last sentence has no citation. Where is the information coming from?
🌺 Cremastra (talk) 14:30, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pemcil The lead sentence should give some context, so that if someone finds the article by clicking "random article" they know what it is about. Put yourself into the position of someone who has never heard of "Geometry Dash", and whose world doesn't revolve around videogames, and see what you can make of it. The word "game" needs to be in there. PamD 14:39, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add that writing about video games is very popular and we have an entire wikiproject devoted to it: WP:WikiProject Video games. Asking your question on that project's talk page will probably get you some excellent feedback about what makes a good video game article. RoySmith (talk) 16:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legalism (Chinese philosophy)

Not sure it is really something to be concerned about, but I just wanted to note that on Weeklypedia - an automatically generated list of the most-edited articles - Legalism (Chinese philosophy) usually shows up on a weekly basis, with hundreds of edits made usually by one or two authors. Not an edit war, but it is just interesting that one person making cumulatively thousands of edits a month ... MollyRealized (talk) 18:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that these are all mobile edits, and that the cumulative effect of the edits is meaningful makes me pretty confident this is just one persons weird way of doing a full rewrite and nothing fishy is going on. Mach61 (talk) 18:53, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It almost certainly breaks the record for the highest number of edits by a single user to one article, though, with 18,964, at the time of writing. The previous record I knew about was at [[List of United States political families, with 9,714. I think I'll notify the user involved, FourLights, on their talk page. Graham87 (talk) 08:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most of my work is not done on my phone, and there is no second person there would be an edit war with, he attempted to reformat the references which I need to review now with reorganization near complete. My subject is technically dead, it just took my a long time to put it together into understanding. It begs the question of how to deal with a dead subject, I am not an expert wikipedia writer, but if anyone has ideas I have and can acquire sources and can take action. Also - the page currently present represents a new constructions. Previously the page was simply occupied by it's figures - which I had also wrote. However, it was suggested to move information to figures pages. Han Feizi is also under construction, I can rewrite the section Morality of Han Fei I wrote into something better. Neither page is the quality I would like. Regardless of what information needs to be offloaded, I would have to engage in new reading.FourLights (talk) 12:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A clue to why there are so many edits to Legalism (Chinese philosophy) can be seen in the history of this page. FourLights took nine edits to make the statement above. One might think that it's a weird way of working, but it's that editor's way, and it doesn't cause disruption, only minor annoyance to the people with the page on their watchlists. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seeking more participation at an RfC

Hi, I'm trying to get more participation at an RfC that I started.

That RfC being: Genocides in history (1946 to 1999): Request for Comment: 1948 Palestinian expulsion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genocides_in_history_(1946_to_1999)#Request_for_Comment:_1948_Palestinian_expulsion

I have read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment#Publicizing_an_RfC which led me here, but I'm still wondering if there is somewhere else I could go in order to better publicize this RfC. Any advice on this would be appreciated. Note that there are special considerations regarding potential canvassing violations in the publicizing of this RfC due to the sensitive, contentious and polarizing nature of the content.

One of the reasons I am looking to get more input on this RfC is that I am concerned there may be editors participating there who are voting on ideological grounds. (There has been an issue with canvassing involving one of the editors who participated in the pre-RfC discussion and one of the editors who participated in the RfC itself [1]) Whether or not canvassing has occured in this particular RfC - which there is no evidence that it has - more participation can only be a good thing, especially considering the significance of the content.

Additionally, though there have been multiple editors who have voted in the RfC there has been very little discussion.

Greater participation in these closely related discussions would also help significantly:

Genocides in history (1946 to 1999) - "Scope of this article": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Genocides_in_history_(1946_to_1999)#Scope_of_this_article

List of genocides - "How do we cover debate and uncertainty": https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_genocides&diff=next&oldid=1199226548#How_do_we_cover_debate_and_uncertainty

- IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 11:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

O Iran Problem

Can someone please go to the O Iran page and add a translation to English? Thank you. Faith15 21:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a link to an English translation of the lyrics at the bottom of the article. Dhtwiki (talk) 07:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And the source doesn't seem to give any information that could help ascertain the copyright status of the translation. It is quite possible that the original lyrics are public domain but that the translation (which was presumably done later) is copyrighted under a non-free licence. We can't include content that may not be under a free licence. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking that the link would be enough and the translation wouldn't be copied over, regardless of copyright status. Dhtwiki (talk) 21:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So here's the problem. I don't actually have access to the translation page. And I don't have access to Google Translate. Faith15 21:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting input in categorization discussion

Hello. There is a discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 January 27#Category:Assassinated politicians by method regarding categorization of ways by which politicians were assassinated. Your input is welcome. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 23:36, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)&oldid=1200144987"