Jump to content

Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikipedia (4)

Add links
From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

This is a proposal for closing and/or deleting a wiki hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation. It is subject to the current closing projects policy.

The proposal for closing w:simple: is rejected and the project will be kept open.

  • A Language Committee member provided the following comment:
    "Speedy" closure of this nonsense proposal. This request will not result in a closure of the wiki. There is no "absence of content since the wiki's creation" as would be required for a "type 1" proposal. --MF-W 20:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Type: 1 (routine proposal)
  • Proposed outcome: closure
  • Proposed action regarding the content: move to Incubator
  • Notice on the project: none provided
  • Informed Group(s):

In the Simple English Wiki I keep seeing vandalism and it stays there for months and no one fixes it. I request that the Simple English Wiki project be closed because it is not being managed properly. Kerim Demirkaynak (talk) 09:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kerim Demirkaynak: have you notified the community about this yet? We'll deal with the other nuances with this after you've notified the community. --SHB2000 (t • c) 09:53, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...and for the record, I too oppose per EPIC. I certainly wouldn't support creating a simple project today, but it exists in decent shape. Vandalism/spam alone isn't a reason to propose closing a wiki. --SHB2000 (t • c) 11:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't think they ever did. I left a topic on Simple Talk letting them know this thread exists, however. Derpdart56 (talk) 02:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Just going to kick this off, I see no reason to close the project; what was said in the last request still applies. Most wikis have to deal with vandalism every now and then; it is not an issue only for simplewiki, nor is it a reason to close a project. They have a healthy and active community and over 250.000 articles, and the vandalism/spam issues aren't so crucial that local admins cannot deal with it - I've found that most of it can be handled in a matter of time when reported to local administrators. In the closing note on the last request, it was said that "Requests to close this project that are based on "inactivity" or "vandalism" will probably also be closed speedily, unless things change pretty radically at Simple English Wikipedia". Has the situation changed "radically" since then? No. Then this can IMO be speedy closed. EPIC (talk) 10:09, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Addition: I too agree with SHB2000 that I probably would not have supported creating this project today (and it also wouldn't meet today's standard for new projects), but I think the wiki along with its community has evolved so much to the point where I think it is many years too late to even consider closing it. EPIC (talk) 11:20, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose vandalism is not a reason to close a project Atlantic306 (talk) 18:40, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per the nomination at Proposals for closing projects/Closure of Simple English Wikipedia (3). Simple English Wikipedia continues to be a duplicative, underresourced content fork of English Wikipedia that has never gained meaningful traction. This proposal isn't developed enough to go anywhere, but that's a shame. Sdkb talk 14:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sdkb ultimately, as you said, there was consensus against closing simple, which you disagree with, but you agree that nothing has really changed since then and that this proposal is bad. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:07, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I think the simple Wikipedia has some worth, but the problems it does possess are apparent. Still, it's no reason to close the wiki. --87.116.165.163 15:21, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Simple English Wikipedia should not be closed at all, besides it not a vaild reason Theblackmidi72 (talk) 05:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if you are so concerned about vandalism (which I am too) then go to Special:RecentChanges and revert some vandalism. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 20:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose closure. Vandalism is not a valid reason for closure. This should be handled as a request for comment for attention regarding vandalism on simplewiki. As the wiki has substantial valid content, there is no reason to close the Simple English Wikipedia. Eyesnore (talk) 22:30, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose for many reasons: vandalism is not a reason, proposer didn't fulfill notification requirements and the community is large enough to not warrant a closure. ToadetteEdit (talk) 16:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @ToadetteEdit And how about the language code this project uses? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:34, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Liuxinyu970226, I do not care about the current language code, but by far simplewiki can't use any ISO language codes as they are reserved for other languages. Per ISO 639:s sim and smp, the ISO 639-3 codes I would expect to host projects in Simple English, are reserved for Mende (Papua New Guinea) and Samaritan languages respectively. In the event a new Wikipedia in these language would ever be created in the near future, a database move would be required; it can also confuse the site matrix. To conclude, Simple English isn't a real language, nor can it be defined a constructed language; as far as I know, simplewiki was created as an enwiki for English learners. ToadetteEdit (talk) 11:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What does that have to do with this closure request? --SHB2000 (t • c) 12:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think they might implicate that a potentially wrong code makes a project invalid, but that's not the case because code 'simple' is not even part of ISO639-3 and there are also possibilities to move projects to new code languages, see ie. Requests for comment/Rename no.wikipedia to nb.wikipedia. But that's not either in scope of this request nor a rational action to take on. A09|(pogovor) 13:52, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Comment We have reached the FOURTH REQUEST to close this project already? Goddamn people really hate the simple English wiki. Kirkukturk3 (talk) 12:41, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support After getting curious and trying to see what's wrong with it and there are too many duplicates of the same topics, Nationalism and vandalism existing in large numbers.
There are low numbers of administrators that can handle of all of this, I suggest closing or trying to increase the number of administrators that are knowledgeable on the topics that get commonly vandalised. Kirkukturk3 (talk) 13:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As already pointed out neither lack of articles/overall short articles nor rate of vandalism are valid arguments for closure of this project. On the second hand, many currently established Wikimedia Foundation projects are experiencing admin/functionaries shortage and this problem is not unique to simplewiki only. A09|(pogovor) 13:48, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is I barely even looked far on the wiki to find vandalism and errors I just searched up a controversial topic and found tons of vandalism.
As I stated it should have more administrators that focus on these topics, I didn't claim its unique to simple wiki only.
(I'm also not completely supporting the closure topic either, I just want it to be administrated better). Kirkukturk3 (talk) 14:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not supporting the closure, don't list your vote as support please.
Rather than everyone wasting time complaining about vandalism on simplewiki here, maybe they could actually start cleaning it up.
Vandalism and an admin shortage are the case for most wikis, frankly. The projects you mainly contribute to happen to not as much. The way to solve an admin shortage (which honestly there isn't that much of on simple anyways) is to get users who want to and are able to be admins. The way to solve a vandalism problem is to get users who want to and are able to be counter-vandalism patrollers. @Kirkukturk3 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 11:03, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand but nationalists go to simple wiki just to state their ideas and sometimes make duplicate pages which is confusing and simple wiki needs admins that can remove this mess. Also I never stated that it's unique to simple wiki, my is point is that due to it also being in English, people have the tendency to vandalise pages. Kirkukturk3 (talk) 11:17, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well if a threat of vandalism would be a valid reason for project closures I think no Wikipedia or any other project would thrive ever. Fortunately this is not the case. A09|(pogovor) 15:23, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose Rationale does not present any valid reason to close simplewiki. I have addressed some potential arguments pro closure above this comment, please see them as well. Simplewiki is neither a small community with no content growth since its inception nor are vandalism/content shallowness a valid argument for closure of this project. The presumed wrong language code argument is nonsensical to me and is addressed above.--A09|(pogovor) 13:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Vandalism should not be a valid reason to close down a project, especially one of this size. If the project lacks enough help to perform administrative tasks, then some active contributors should be nominated for adminship. Considering the reasoning provided, closing the entire project seems like an extreme action to take. Ternera (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per all above. I am a Simple English Wikipedian–person who changes the articles of Simple English Wikipedia. Vandalism is not why we should close this project. The number of Simple English Wikipedians is very big. The number of articles is getting up and up. So it is not a good idea to close it. We can pick some users to become admins. Those admins can look after the project. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 15:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have used very simple English to write the comment above. I hope it sounds easier than most other comments above or below. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 15:50, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also want simple versions of other languages. But the Incubator does not support any language without a valid ISO code. I can host such versions in Incubator Plus, but they will remain there forever. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 15:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty obvious oppose, mostly per the reasons given by Vermont on the last request for closure. Vandalism is handled well, and project closure has the opposite effect of wp:deny - vandals are given victory. MrMeAndMrMeLet's talk 19:06, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


  • Oppose. As a person living in a country which mother language is not English, this helped me a lot during my school and high school years, when my English skills were poorer.
I think that this project would also help many other students all around the world, mainly young people.

Some say that there is vandalism in this wiki, but for sure closing it is not the way to fix it. Suude (talk) 20:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - The articles posted on Simple English Wikipedia are especially useful for readers with a basic to moderate level of understanding of English. Although there are issues such as vandalism, a lot of it can be countered in a short period of time. With that, I think the Simple English Wikipedia is still worthy of keeping. I also do not believe that vandalism alone can merit the closure of the Simple English Wikipedia. SG5536B (talk) 11:15, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose The community is very active (1,585 active editors in the past month) and beloved. Vandalism is reverted quickly, so that's not a valid reason either. We have 262,099 articles, which means we would throw all of this work in the bin. We have already discussed this three times, why do you all hate us so much? Frankly, it's kinda insulting at this point. Also, the fact that the proposer didn't even think about notifying us rubs me the wrong way, you know. It hurts. Claims vandalism has been going on for months (which happens everywhere by the way, even on enwiki), but never reverted or helped with anything. Consensus is clear, there is nothing left to discuss, end of the story. (not literally of course) ✩ Dream Indigo ✩ 13:46, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hello, this is now the fourth such proposal. I won't enter into details such as that Simple English is not a language, doesn't have an official languge code, etc. They have been dealt with beforehand. Let me perrhaps re-state what has been said before: Any Wikipedia has the problem of vandalism, it comes with the fact that pretty much anyone can change any page, with very few exceptions. Every wikpedia of a certain size is therefore interesting to vandals.In SEWP, vandalism that is detected, gets reverted. Let me also say, that at Simple English Wikipedia, we do have oversighters, and 'oversightable material' is handled in a timely manner. I think in Enwp that's called suppression. It concerns the more delicateparts of vandalism, such as personal information, or attacks against other editors. Recently, the team of overrsighters was enlarged, and right now, they are spread aceross the globe (no, vandals don't sleep either). So, the problematic kind of vandalism can be handled (and usually is handled) in a timely manner. Let me point to something else, still: If SEWP is closed with the rationale above, this allows to close all of the smaller Wikis, as they don't have the sheer number of editors, who watch everything, all the time. Very often, they are run by a small nuber of enthusiasts. So, to wrap it up: close as kept, for invalid rationale-Eptalon (talk) 19:52, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The simplewiki community is one of the friendliest I've ever seen. It would be a shame to close the project just because of 'vandalism,' which happens on literally every wiki. - XXBlackburnXx (talk) 21:23, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's now being flooded with ChatGPT content which isn't any simpler than the regular Wikipedia. Many of the other pages are just the first one or two sentences of the regular Wikipedia versions. It doesn't adhere to its own standards at all, and is therefore useless. 68.65.169.131 02:27, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So, in other words, the wiki has a problem, but instead of fixing you come here to say "let's destroy it" Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 04:31, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What about all the ChatGPT content on English Wikipedia and other wikis? Should we close them too? Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 07:11, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Comment I think this could probably fall under the Snowball clause. I count 4 supports/1 neutral/19 opposes, and as well many of the opposes are strong and most of the supports have nothing to do with the rational given above. Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 04:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We don't do snowball closures on Meta-Wiki outside of SRGP. --SHB2000 (t • c) 08:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay. Out of curiosity, when do these proposals end? @SHB2000 Me Da Wikipedian (talk) 23:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Generally, that's up to LangCom to decide when there is clear consensus – which shouldn't be too long given how this proposal is headed. --SHB2000 (t • c) 23:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose per the concerns above, and I don't see any good reason to close this just because of vandalism and spam that may not be dealt with quickly. Codename Noreste 🤔 Talk 01:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am a contributor to English Wikipedia, moreso then Simple English Wikipedia, but I have still interacted with the community of the Simple English community - and they are very nice people. There is no reason to close a Wikipedia with a reasonable number of articles just because you are a impatient little man who can't just wait a second for the Admins to do their job without suddenly proposing to delete the entire Wiki! Wheatley2 (talk) 08:37, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Many people find the project useful and read the articles. You can see, for example, a number of Reddit posts where one person mentions Simple English Wikipedia and many other people discover it for the first time and react positively to it. There are many English language learners who found it useful in the previous closure requests. No doubt some people don't see the value in the project, but that doesn't mean the hard work of many contributors over 20 years should be thrown away. And I agree with Eptalon that vandalism is an insufficient reason for closure if it's not overwhelming the project, plus the previous request said requests for this reason would be "speedily closed". VirusDontKill (talk) 00:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for a plethora of reasons;
1. Vandalism isn't a valid reason to delete a Wikipedia, Yes vandalism is an issue but tell me what Project doesn't suffer with vandalism and trolls!,
2. "there are too many duplicates of the same topics" - Again not a valid reason to delete, it's a reason to join and help expand this Wikipedia,
3. As for "duplicative, underresourced content fork of English Wikipedia" - If it were a duplicate/fork of English Wikipedia it would be copypastes of the English Wikipedia articles without any change which isn't the case (because everything's simplified and if it's not it gets speedy deleted, lack of admins has always been an issue as has the lack of article protections so underresourced I would agree with but "duplicate/fork" absolutely not.
In short, this project is serving a clear and useful purpose and if it's deleted we're basically telling those with disabilities, those who are learning English/speak English as a second language and children that they don't matter. Simple Wiki has its flaws but again what project doesn't. (also yes I supported the closure years ago however since then I have a better understanding of Simple and it's purpose). In short I oppose the closure of Simple Wiki. –Davey2010Talk 15:59, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Simple_English_Wikipedia_(4)&oldid=27333639"