Wikipedia talk:How to write Simple English pages

down in Ohio swag like

I recently created a article on Facebook 47.16.99.72 (talk) 21:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I do. 799987scarlett (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How should a simple encyclopedia work?

It seems to me that the project page focuses on writing pages in simple English, rather than writing pages for the simple English Wikipedia. If that is the page's sole purpose, I suggest it would be better called: How to write pages in Simple English. It could then link to guidelines for writing simpler pages. GrounderUK (talk) 16:27, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can all agree that our goal is to have an encyclopedia written in simpler English. I am not one of those people who think we should have only a simple encyclopedia. But what we have now is neither and, given that, my question is: how do we fix that? My preference is for making existing content simpler, but that's just me.

When editing, I pay most attention to the Lead Section and the first paragraph above all. It is from here that the reader can be prepared for what is to follow. It is a guideline that the subject should be established here as notable; I would go further and suggest that there should be some idea given of how notable it is. (There are proper nouns that would not appear at all in a selective encyclopedia, but some would appear in the least encyclopaedic of dictionaries; citations from such tertiary sources would be a guideline I think I would support.)

If the subject is not a proper noun, it is likely to fit into some broad category of knowledge. Some sorts of "expert" have published primary sources on the subject and (for the subject to be notable) these sources have been referenced somehow in secondary sources. So this broader subject should be identified early on: both generally (is it physics or linguistics) and more particularly (is it syntax or phonetics). I think of this as the container/contains model: what is the subject in and what is in the subject. Again, I think this should be clear in the first paragraph or two. A good choice of Categories supports this.

Less simple words can be explained when they are needed but I think we should think about inheritance here. The necessary words may also be needed for the broader subject and we would like the parent and the child to share their use of words, if that is what the experts do. Or there may be controversy, lack of mutual understanding, entrenched positions... so we should note that and perhaps agree about the extent to which we can agree here! Another approach would be to refer to a shared glossary, where all the less simple words could be organised, with links to Wiktionary where it can do the job. --GrounderUK (talk) 14:50, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Link for AECMA Simplified English

The article currently contains:

> For writing special to science or trade, do as asked by the process of AECMA Simplified English

The target of the link is Simplified English.

Would a better target link be the (standard) English-language Wikipedia page Simplified Technical English? That seems more useful, but I don't know your conventions for inter-wiki links.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Espertus (talk • contribs) 19:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Psychology and Purpose

Bigger picture... i want to finish what i started when i was supposed to start it. Now what~~~~ 2600:1700:C180:5F30:782F:8634:8830:F54F (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Every day, Simple English changes, and does not have only one-word list"

I have a good understanding of the English language, it's my only language, and this sentence... "Every day, Simple English changes, and does not have only one-word list" is so confusing, that I genuinely don't understand what it could be trying to mean. Please fix it. I can't because I don't know what it means. 169.244.131.100 (talk) 17:21, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello your feeling is little similar to mine. I want you assist me in this regard if you are guided with the needed solution to continue in your editing in Wikipedia. I am in the situation where my knowledge is only mean of communication and possibly it is due to my language disorder if I am not able to explain difference between difficulty and disorder. Shaing and donating is my nature where I apply my human protocol not an Internet protocol. I perhaps can give my good to Wikipedia following one which is my strength. I spent almost 3/4 of my life without Internet and that is why I can not prove my English is taught by me as my 4th language. It is simple English that might me proving wrong or my simple human being ? I have no idea as I give ideas infinitely for solutions and definitely not for confusion. I don't know reader of this reply is human or robot but being "giving selflessly" a reason I wrote it without expecting a solution. 1.I give. 2. I do not sell. two simple to understand English sentences. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 04:08, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Focus on explanation

I think what is missing the guidleine is the fact that writer should focus on explanation. Sometimes, in a scientific conctext, it may be important to use a word, because only that word has the very specific meaning that is neeed. It is ipmortant to focus on explanining well. In physics there's no use givbing a formula, which allows to calculate the exact value of a force or effect; people will not use the formula before they understand what it is for. Btw: this is exactly the same in an article published in a scientific paper (except perhaps that the audience is different). I therefore think we should add something along these lines to the guideline. Comments? Eptalon (talk) 13:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am talking this only. My each word written can be analysed to find it. I do not write to mislead or to misinform. I need a clearity on what I did and what I should I do further in Wikipedia. I alone can do nothing good for my world but I can do everything good for your world. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 09:37, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Being available and being understandable

This curiousity of mine is closely related to the reason of my being a Wikipedian for last many years ago. I realized information is available to gain knowledge by reading them on it. It was my will and commitment to learn that I started reading in web as that time we had cyber cafe only not a mobile phone even. If you find my words at least 30 % understandable after reading then it is actually zero when I started but gradually improver upto 30% while reading only. Every single ounce improvement that I might have got in improving English is just because of reading and writing practices resulting in speaking eventually. I belive in start and learn with whatever ability anyone has or no ability at all as it doesn't stop a learner. If I had left reading Wikipedia articles when I started after finding myself unable to understand then definitely I would have missed a lot in life. You mentioned about children mostly in their "helping hand" now is not guranteed to learn on the basis of thier ability but at thier will and determination to start reading with decipline and a strong belief of succeeding they are god written learners and creaters as well. I hounor and feel pride of Wikipedia for being in my life and I'm glad to write for it using their taught education only for future learner. What if a child willing willing to read on Wikipedia but is hesitating to step further doubting his reading ability ? I don't think he or she will start without a strong will power and spirit of learning and I don't trust that anyone around that child will encourage him or her to start with no expectation and to see the progress in language while reading along. That is the matter of concern.Many people know everything about language but they don't realize the need at all. This might seems be a straight forward expressing of thought but I felt it in children and youth who will be responsible to perform tomorrow what we dream today thinking them as our succeeders for future. This subject should be taken as an awareness and awakingness in their mind who have whole universe of knowledge as their free and round the clock available library in their hand.

Thank for sharing. I'll adopt simple English while posting and learning along. Sandeep Manikpuri (talk) 03:19, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Skills

HWhether you are brand new to privacy terminology or you are an expert who just wants a refresher, you might find our Glossary of Key Terms helpful. 154.80.37.97 (talk) 22:56, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grammer

i do a lot of grammer mistakes, will my topic be accepted or will be edited first? Ahmed El-khedr (talk) 15:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ahmed El-khedr Before publishing your article, i will recommend you to work on your grammar and create a draft in your sandbox. DIV IN E 15:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't refuse pages based on bad grammar. If the subject is interesting and belongs here, I am sure fixing grammar will be done quickly. Eptalon (talk) 07:05, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Punctuation in section 2

I find the following sentence: "Every day, Simple English changes, and does not have only one-word list."

I think that the hyphen should be removed, so that it reads "Every day, Simple English changes, and does not have only one word list." 174.229.210.21 (talk) 07:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]