Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 22

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

←

Archive 20

Header formatting

Is it just me, or did Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header get really big? It looks like it likely has something to do with a series of changes by @TheDJ: a few days ago. GMG ^talk 15:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

It looks like TheDJ & DESiegel have been editing it today. But it does look much bigger than usual. And for me the "Welcome" is aligned left, but "to the Teahouse" is aligned centrally, so they're not next to each other. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

TheDJ made a series of edits, which were not discussed here, which among other changes, removed the Teahouse logo. I reverted to the last version that included the logo, although tempted to revert farther back. I also notice that changes a bit further back removed the rotation host images. That may be a good idea, but zi think it would have been ncie to discuss it here first, or at least announce it here afterwards. I have not reverted those changes. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

At least for the time being, I've reverted to the last version that didn't mess up the height of the banner. In this previous version the banner displays at about 3in in height on my monitor. On the version that was live previously it displayed more like 8in in height. Maybe this is different for others using differt OS/browser settings? GMG ^talk 15:44, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
GreenMeansGo, the version you reverted back to is broken for me — it causes the buttons to display below the header itself. The last version by TheDJ looks okay to me (and includes the logo), whereas the reversion by DESiegel back to the last version by me seems to have caused some error, probably because of subsequent revisions at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header/styles.css or something, so just reverting the banner itself won't necessarily fix things. I'm going to revert it to the version that displays properly for me, but I hope that TheDJ can come by soon and explain what they've been up to and fix any issues. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey, I mean, whatever works. I'm like the third least technically advanced user on the project. I leave it to those more competent to figure out what the actual issue is. GMG ^talk 19:00, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb that version omits the logo, which is a deal breaker for me without discussion. I have therefore reverted to a version before any of the edits by TheDJ, adn I ask that those edits not be reapplied without discussion here first. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

DESiegel, as I mentioned above, it did not omit the logo (or rotating host list) for me, and from the fact that it stood for almost two weeks, I'm guessing it didn't for most others either. Your edit "reverting" this morning is the first one that seems to have caused an issue. Can you check logged out/on another browser to make sure the issue you're encountering is not due to some custom setting you have enabled?

As I mentioned, you cannot just revert to a previous version of the template itself when there have been subsequent changes at the CSS style sheet. The current display of the version you reverted to has the four white buttons displaying below the bottom of the box, which is a major issue. Is that how it displays for others? Does this version display properly to others? We need to figure out what the core issue is so that we can get it working right for everyone, but in the immediate term, we need to figure out what the stable version is for the majority of users. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Just noting incidentally that we should probably remove John from Idegon from the list of hosts as they are indefinitely blocked for NPA. GMG ^talk 19:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

The then CSS syhould be reverted as well, Sdkb. Version 971022973 does not display the logo to me, I am using firefox 78.0.1. I have been meaning to mention the loss of the hot images since I noticed it, i think after the edit of 20 July. I think the stable version is actually version 948985879 from 3 April 2020‎ -- perhaps we should revert to that, and revert to the matching css as well. Then we can discuss what changes are desirable and work for all, with a properly sandboxed version. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 22:35, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Not sure whats going on but reverted the below formatting for obvious reasons...sandbox??? --Moxy 🍁 23:36, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

GreenMeansGo, oh I was just trying to make the thing usable on mobile devices. Because ppl don't care about mobile users. Who needs a huge ass logo on a tiny screen ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 07:23, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Again, I'm not the tech guy. But this does seem to be displaying very differently to different people. Maybe we should consider calling in some of our heavy-hitters tech-wise and see if they can help sort things out? GMG ^talk 10:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia is read by all kinds of people who use all kinds of devices. I believe the software is set up to display things like images according to the device being used and the preferences of the user reading the page. There’s probably a default setting for unregistered accounts as well. So, before any tweaking is done that might create MOS:ACCESS problems, it probably should be sufficiently discussed (possibly even at WP:VPT) and then only done if there’s a consensus to do so. — Marchjuly (talk) 11:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

More references, or better references

Often I see an editor write at the Teahouse about how they've been told their draft needs more references. They've learned this, reasonably enough, from a template that declines the draft for lack of notability, with the words "Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these [notability] criteria should be added." But the template isn't asking for more references, it's asking (as we here all know) for better references.

Inexperienced editors waste a lot of time through this misunderstanding. We might argue that we don't care if they waste their time, all we care about is improving Wikipedia. But it's cruel to misinform people like that. I would like to see the template rewritten. At the very least, the word "additional" should be removed. Maproom (talk) 08:56, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

That makes a great deal of sense to me. Should the isue be raised at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation, Maproom The tempaltes are technically part of AfC I suppose, although there is significant overlap between those whom work on AfC and those who provide answers at the TH. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 19:26, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Both suggestions make sense to me. I suspect many of us rarely stop to consider whether the wording of standard templates could actually be improved. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:31, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Maproom, I think you're referring to {{Template:AFC submission/comments}}? The wording there doesn't seem terrible to me (it explains notability beyond just the quoted phrase), but we could probably tweak it a bit to help address the problem you identify. Do you have any specific suggestions for the wording? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

How about — in place of "additional references meeting these criteria should be added", put "references meeting these criteria should be provided". Maproom (talk) 11:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposal: "Attention needed"

More like an idea, I was thinking perhaps, we could mark posts that need attention, as is done at WP:ITNC (331dot is a regular both here and there). I was thinking,

Only when a post or comment has gone unanswered for more than, say, 24 hours, the section header could be modified. Some options:
- (Attention needed)Header
- (Attention needed:Unanswered)Header
- (Attention needed:Followup)Header
- (Attention needed:[Insert topic area])Header (Topic areas which might need special treatment, for example, "Image copyright", "Lua modules", "Sister projects", "US laws", etc.)
They should be removed when it has been taken care of, by one who takes care of it, so that no post gets archived with the modified header.

I can see it would have upsides in preventing posts needing attention from being archived unanswered. It would also make it easier to locate posts that need attention when one doesn't have the time to read through the whole page. On the flip side, as with other ideas before, it might serve to highlight select posts possibly preventing at least some other posts that could benefit from better answers from getting one. Another obvious downside would be the additional clerking work needed.

On balance, I think, used conservatively (at any one time, there should be at most 3-4 posts, most of the time, not even one) it could be a net positive. Thoughts? Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:32, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

- Usedtobecool is it possible to prevent archiving of sections that contain only a single post or timestamp, or would that require a completely seperate archive bot just for the Teahouse and Help desk? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:40, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

- - Dodger67, yes, I think a new bot would be needed, either separate or as exceptions and features to the existing one. It would only solve half the problem though. That would take care of posts like Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#Not sure where to post and Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#Revision of the translation of the Piero Formica page from it.Wikipedia to en.Wikipedia, but we have more common occurrences like those of Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#Confront a group of users acting in bad faith, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#How to warn a disruptive editor?, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#Re-Francis E. Waive, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#Spelling - UK vs US, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#why Gobind Ballabh pant institute of technology, Okhla New Delhi is getting rejected ?, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#Deletion of wikipedia entry and Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1069#Linking Photos, especially since new users don't always ping correctly. That's a lot more than I expected to find when I clicked on that archive hoping to dig a few examples (probably an exception though). I answered Confront a group of users acting in bad faith a few days ago at the OP's talk page. Interested hosts might like to take on some of the rest of them as necessary. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:47, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

I think the basic idea is sound, but i am a bit concerned over implementing it via changing the section headers. That is because io think this might screw up the bot-handled notification to posters thsat the threads they started have been archived, which I think is of significant value to many relatively new editors who post at the Teahouse. This is keyed off the section header, as I understand it.

Could this perhaps be handled with a template, similar to {{help me}}? Of course that depends on a category, and individual sections can't be put into a category. We could create a subpage Wikipedia:Teahouse /Threads needing attention that would hold a list of section links, added by a bot when a section has no replies after 24 hours, say, and removed when a thread is archived or responded to. That would still require a new or modified bot. What would people think of that idea? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:17, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the bot doc, there should be no problem as long as the section headers are restored before the thread is archived. Undoing the modification itself is trivial. BTW, it seems the bot also misses in case of other modifications, such as headers shortened by hosts, as well as all sections created without using the "new section" button, including posts which had headers added by the hosts. I didn't know. Tigraan, any corrections, or other thoughts on this?

I think we should first try and find a solution that does not require us to make a bot request. One such alternative, a variation on your subpage idea could be a pinned post right here on this talk page, set to be manually updated a few times a day. It would seem my original proposal would require widespread commitment to ensure headers on posts about to be archived always get restored, and other options would appear more cumbersome. Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

I would not support changing a heading text. My first thought is to ask what is normally the cause of a question going unanswered? I assume it's not blindness on our part, but simply that each of us is unsure how to answer it and hopes somebody else will instead? If so, hosts could easily add some templated text after 24 hours along these lines to keep the thread alive for longer:-

Host message: @Usedtobecool: I'm sorry your question appears to be going unanswered after all this time. I can't help you myself but, because questions normally get archived after 48 hours of inactivity, please then feel free to repeat or rephrase your question if you still require advice from someone here. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Looking at [Muninnbot's] doc, there should be no problem as long as the section headers are restored before the thread is archived. Correct (with the caveat that the section header should be restored exactly, i.e. no additional space/capitalization). I am not a big fan of the proposal (if nobody got around answering the question, will the header change really help?) but its impact on Muninnbot's operation should not be a consideration - worse-case scenario, some small proportion of notifications will miss (<10% of threads go unanswered right now). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:39, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Teahouse ping list

Not being aware of any objections to the idea, I have started to build a list of editors willing to be pinged to the Teahouse by area of expertise. I am building it at User:Usedtobecool/Tea. The intention is to reach out to all editors and get explicit approval from each of them before it is moved to WP space, I reckon as a subpage to the Teahouse.

It is mostly for must-haves like copyright, technical issues, codes, etc. but I have also gone ahead and added a few would-be-nices such as OTRS and AFC. I seek assistance from Teahouse regulars in all aspects of what the page says or should say, so we can reach a more-or-less consensus version by the time it is a big/useful enough list for it to be ready to be moved to project space. Almost all of it is off the top of my head, so most appreciated would be recommendations on who else to reach out to, or whomever in the list don't belong.

TIA! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:35, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Funnily enough, I thought your suggestion related to subject areas like video games, sports or art - rather than Wikipedia topic areas!. Stupid me. But if you did want the former, I'm happy to be pinged on natural sciences- and geography-related topics, and be a stand-in on mobile phone use, if needs be. I have a strong view on Adoption/Mentorship, and would only want us to be advocating WP:AAU to established new editors who genuinely look set to be here for the long haul, with varied editing interests, and feel we should never be recommending it to complete novices at the Teahouse, as it only sets both sides up for disappointment. But I'm happy to be pinged to discuss further, if required. BTW: Not all the names listed are Hosts here - so I assume you either have, or will, check with each of them? Nick Moyes (talk) 18:31, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, I am just giving it a start. WPMED is one of the ones from the types you say you thought it was going to be about. I am thinking it should only include areas where questions get archived unanswered; I've added the ones I've noticed, from memory, other hosts should add topics they've noticed gone unanswered, also. I don't get your mention of WP:UAA, typo maybe? And, yes, I intend to seek approval from everyone, including known hosts before the page gets moved out of userspace (so far I have you (from your comment here), Whatamidoing[/(WMF)] and Iridescent.) Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:33, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Thanks. Yes a careless typo, which Ive just corrected to WP:AAU. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:26, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Rollback request

If there's someone watching this page who has WP:ROLLBACK privileges, can you you roll back this edit. It poster not only edited their own post, but they unintentionally removed posts by others. It was a mistake, but a manual revert is hard at the TH because of all the edit conflicts. FWIW, the person seems to be trying to make a claim for an WP:AUTOBIO article by proposing it here at the TH. Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly, here's the user's intention posted. I have told them about COI, GNG, RS, and COPYVIO. Sadly I can't revert it. Gerald WL ✉ 08:18, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Marchjuly, all Rollback does is undo the latest edit on a given page including all consecutive preceding edits that were by the same user. It's useful for mass reverting one problematic editor really fast (one click undoes multiple consecutive edits and the action is processed server side, unlike TWINKLE which fetches and processes pages client side). On a given single page, TWINKLE is more powerful as it can undo edits from the middle of the history as long as the section hasn't been modified by someone else in the meantime. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:05, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, but I was able to go back and manually restore the removed questions, etc. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:28, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: My apologies - I blanked the content as not being relevant here without appreciating you had been attempting to engage with whoever posted the autobiography. Thanks to Marchjuly for restoring it. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:47, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, no problemo for that-o. Thy is fine. Gerald WL ✉ 10:58, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I only restored the original non-English post and subsequent responses as well as the two unrelated threads that the OP deleted by mistake. I didn't restore the English-translated content that the OP added later since it wasn't clear how to do that without making a different type of mess. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:19, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Page very long !?

Am I the only one who thinks that the page needs to be archived more frequently!? It has become very long to scroll down...CommanderWaterford (talk) 22:02, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

I believe that there would be a reluctance to reduce the archive bot's criterion below its current value of 48 hours. Did you notice the section #Archive problem immediately above this, which pointed out that there had been a problem with the archiving? --David Biddulph (talk) 01:50, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

No, it's not too long in my opinion. Leaving a post up for 48 hours before archiving seems quite reasonable. You could try selecting "Auto-number headings" from Preferences>Appearance so that each post has a number corresponding to the Table of Contents. I find seeing the matching number is extremely useful, although do then remember to exclude the number when you paste in the question heading into the Teahouse Talkback message that you are leaving for questioners. (On that point: I've only just spotted that the Teahouse Talkback message was still saying 3 days, so I've updated it to say 2.) Nick Moyes (talk) 10:04, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay Chu3785 (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Host requests from new users

Do we know why we're getting all these requests from new users to become hosts at (the defunct page) WT:Teahouse/Host lounge? Is there something off-wiki that's got them all fired up? --ColinFine (talk) 13:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

Suddenly wondering if this might be about Sushant Singh Rajput. The number of people who have come asking to get the article changed makes me wonder if somebody's been circulating the idea that if they can get to be a Teahouse Host they will somehow be able to change the article. Or is it just that every time somebody comes and asks, it's a Teahouse Host that tells them to go to Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput, so if they can be a Host they can give a different answer? --ColinFine (talk) 13:23, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine, maybe, I can have a look. I've added a notice to the top of the page regarding different venues for applying. Ed talk! 13:44, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine and Ed6767: I don't actually think there's anything unusual going on- just a non-statistically significant blip in misguided requests by people wanting to add themselves to the Host list. There is a bit of chatter over on twitter about how biased wikipedia is in reporting a recent riot in one Asian country, plus moans about fund raising requests, but there's no overlap in any of the last 8 users' edits see Analysis Tool results). Two editors each made two edit requests, having been automatically directed to the Host Lounge page whilst attempting to add themselves to the list of hosts, and two have been indeffed. I have just tried to 'Become a Host' as a new editor as an new user, and was automatically referred to WT:Teahouse/Host lounge to make an edit request. I remember asking about this a couple of years ago and, to be frank, quickly came to appreciate that is the best place for them to be sent, rather than to WT:TH, where these occasional requests will simply fill out the page unnecessarily with pointless chatter. There are over 140 people watching the Hosts lounge page, including myself, who respond pretty quickly to these futile edit requests. I would certainly not advocate directing them anywhere else, to be honest, as we can deal with them there quite easily. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:05, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Why is this on my watchlist? Gjjixzho (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Only you can answer that, Gjjixzho. It is easy to click the start icon to add any page to your watchlist. Click it again, and it is removed. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:23, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

No, I've never viewed this page... Gjjixzho (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gjjixzho: Both article pages and their associated talk pages are included in the 'watch this' action. So edits on talk pages will also show up. I'm guessing you chose to 'watch' the Teahouse page at some point in the past. (Do please try to indent your replies if you can.) Nick Moyes (talk) 12:28, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

@Gjjixzho: You edited at the Teahouse on 8 occasions yesterday. Presumably your preferences are to add pages you edit to your watchlist (which is, I think, the deafult preference). For each page on your watchlist, it automatically includes the corresponding talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Gjjixzho (talk) 12:36, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Updating the featured hosts

Hello Teahouse hosts,
I was wondering if we should update the featured hosts at the Teahouse because many of those editors are no longer active here and we have a few new ones here. Any thoughts? Interstellarity (talk) 18:39, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity, I think the host-list that's rotated at the Teahouse header should not feature inactive editors. Otherwise, I do not care. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:03, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit Request Wizard

Hi Teahouse hosts, I've noticed, through my time of helping other editors, that many editors will struggle with making edit requests. I created an edit request wizard to try to help with making COI or paid editing requests. Could you try pointing users to this when suggesting that they make an edit request? Thanks, Sam-2727 (talk) 16:31, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

@Sam-2727: I like the idea of making things easier for newcomers. I agree with all your statements. We have a few different wizards to help with article creation and file uploads. I even think that we have new editors that struggle to ask questions at the Teahouse. Maybe you can create a wizard that will help newcomers ask better questions here. That's one way I think the Teahouse could be better. Interstellarity (talk) 18:43, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Sam-2727, this looks quite good; thanks for creating it! Regarding adoption, I think the way to get it more widely used, in addition to the Teahouse here, would be to embed it in pages like WP:COI and WP:PSCOI. Because some people might not look fondly on big changes to the former without some discussion, I'd put this out at the Village Pump to build up some consensus and get feedback on anything that might need to be touched up. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 02:26, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Interstellarity and Sdkb, thanks for the kind words. I'll bring it up on the village pump tomorrow. Interstellarity, I don't think a wizard for asking questions would be very effective, because it would just add more steps to a user wanting to ask a question. But you are welcome to try. Sam-2727 (talk) 04:19, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Sam-2727, I'll go with your reasoning here. Another option would be to update the edit notice above to help with answering the questions. If you think it should be updated, I'll open up another discussion on how we can update it to better help new editors. Interstellarity (talk) 13:15, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Sam-2727: This is a nice idea, but I think it needs more work. I tried using it to declare paid editing, but ended up with this faulty declaration in the completely the wrong namespace, and with no prompt for me to add the article name to indicate what page or pages I am being paid to edit. The edit request template doesn't advise me to add in the precise text I am proposing, nor is it clear where that text should be added. I am concerned to see that you added this a week or so ago into the guidance at Wikipedia:Edit requests. Could you link to the discussion where this was thoroughly tested and its implementation agreed, as, to me, it feels premature to offer this to users in an unfinished state, even if the idea is actually a good one? Nick Moyes (talk) 08:35, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

@Sam-2727: I fixed the location where the COI declaration appears (via those edits).

Two more things that pop out from my (very limited) testing of the COI disclosure part:

The COI declaration template does not preload if you try to put it on a non-empty page (admittedly the most common case is probably people without a userpage). I believe you should do type=comment (instead of create) per mw:Extension:InputBox#Box_types
I would assume there is a way to bring the declaration to the current user's page by default. Either by replacing the "Username" default of the input box by the current user (but I could find no Magic word for it) or by redirecting the output of the box to the current user's page (same thing, not sure how to do it).

I do believe there is a bit more development needed, and above all a bit of testing, but the idea looks great to me and the existing pages are already a good start. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:55, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Tigraan, Nick Moyes, Tigraan, I've been offering it to users via OTRS who have found it helpful (I tested it myself as well), but I think they used the COI part and not the paid part. I'm going to test it over the next few days and get back to this. Sam-2727 (talk) 03:19, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

I've completed testing. See User:Sam-2727/ERW Test Cases for the checks I completed. Tigraan I changed to comment as you suggest. I could not find any way to change to the username without the use of a Lua module (which I think it would be possible to do). However, I am very inexperienced in Lua so would not be able to do this. Perhaps if someone felt encouraged to make such a module later on, they could. I did add an "automatic speedy deletion and warning" to all of the templates so if a user tries to add the request to a talk page of a non-existent article or a userpage for a user that doesn't exist, the page will automatically be tagged for speedy deletion and the user will be warned to put the exact page title next time. Sam-2727 (talk) 16:08, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

The current implementation of the PAID declaration is an if-switch that tests if the last user editing the page is the same as the page name, and if not generates Wikipedia:Edit_Request_Wizard/Paid/WrongPage and a speedy deletion tag. I am not a fan because I feel this has the potential to create lots of collateral damage (I suspect many newbies will not be able to follow the instruction to "click undo in the page history"). Notice also that even if the user has correctly entered their own username, the switch will flick if someone else later edits their userpage (which should be rare, but not impossible either, we see new editors ask for modification of their userpage sometimes).

I realize you did what you could with the tools you had and to be honest it is fairly clever, but it does not change the fact that this is a fragile workaround. I asked at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Inputbox_directing_to_editing_user's_page? if someone has a better idea. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 08:36, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Tigraan, thanks for bringing that up at the technical village pump, leading to the simple solution of Special:MyPage. I have now brought this up at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Adding_the_Edit_Request_Wizard_to_various_information_and_policy_pages, in hopes of formal inclusion. Sam-2727 (talk) 20:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

mobile device editing experts?

Recently we've had a brand new editor who was editing solely via their mobile device and had never edited on a desktop. Their inexperience editing combined with other editors' unfamiliarity with mobile editing caused friction that maybe could have been prevented if this person had been able to get some help from people who are expert at mobile device editing. I'm wondering if we need some subpage of teahouse to direct new mobile users to? Or maybe a bot that could mark new sections opened via mobile edit so if appropriate a teahouse helper could add a group notification to a request to ping helpers expert in mobile editing. I suspect more and more brand new users are going to be editing right from the start primarily on their phones, and apparently it's not helpful to keep asking them to learn how to indent on talk pages because depending on whether they're using the mobile site, the app, or the desktop site, there may or may not be a way for them to even try to figure out how to do that. —valereee (talk) 12:39, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328 would be the closest we have to a mobile editing (&& new users) expert. Nick Moyes dabbles too, if I am not mistaken. I think Whatamidoing (WMF) (WAID, IIRC, you are happy to be pinged when I reckon you might have something to add to, but not sure if you would rather I pinged your volunteer account) knows some technical stuff about editors (the interface, not that they don't the people).

I have long wished we could maintain one Wikipedia:List of editors willing to be pinged to the Teahouse by subject, like the Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/List of reviewers by subject. I don't remember if I have ever said it aloud though. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:22, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Valereee: Whilst I do quite a lot of editing via a tiny iPhone5 mobile screen, I only ever use it in its Desktop view for actual editing. I would only use Mobile view for general reading of content, not editing. (And, as an aside to WAID, and as I said yesterday I have just had to disable the 2017 wikitext editor as it fails to function in desktop view on my phone with Safari) So I might not be the best person to offer advice. But if you were to give a user name we might be able to take a look at their edits and offer help. I accept that this is going to be a growing problem of new users working in a different way than established users do, and that we do need to address this. (Nice idea from Usedtobecool). Nick Moyes (talk) 10:38, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, the user I was referring to was Pasdecomplot (whom I'm not pinging because the conflict we had was enough to convince them I was operating in bad faith) but I was more just thinking for the future. I knew they were struggling, I eventually realized it had something to do with trying to edit on mobile without ever having learned to edit on a desktop, but now I think the issues were also complicated by the limitations of the interface. I just would like to not have this kind of frustration happen to other brand-new editors, and llike I said, I suspect we will have more and more new editors coming in for help who are from the get-go editing via mobile. And of course they won't even realize it might be important to tell people at teahouse what platform they're using. I think most of us just assume people coming into the teahouse are editing via desktop, or at least I've generally made that assumption. So we'll be giving them instructions that may not even work for them. —valereee (talk) 10:57, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Valereee: OK, I will add them to my watchlist and endeavour to engage if I see problems when they return to editing. We have already had some constructive interaction with them here. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes a iPhone5 is a bit old.. can run nothing newer than iOS 10, so that doesn't exactly fall inside the group of systems that gets active testing I'm guessing. I might grab an old iPhone to check. did you also have SyntaxHighlighting enabled perhaps ? Because that is a hell in of itself on touch devices. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

@TheDJ: Actually, mine's is a 5S running iOS 12.4.8, but I'm a happy bunny using it.Nick Moyes (talk) 16:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, I think that's a good idea, as long as we maintain it. I wonder if it's possible to set it up like the 'recently active admins' list so that we could check it for someone who is currently editing? Or maybe do it like the @TFA coordinators thingie, so people can add themselves/remove themselves from a list to be pinged? —valereee (talk) 11:02, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Valereee, probably the one where people can add and remove themselves. It's easy enough to check from the list who's edited lately. Maintaining an active editors' list would interfere with people's ability to add themselves I fear, which I think is more important. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:04, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, if you make that list, then please put work-me on the list for anything about editing software, and volunteer-me for anything about medicine-related articles. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

I also do most of my editing on my phone, but never in mobile mode. Imnsho, mobile mode, like VE, is almost malware. But I'm an old fogey who actually likes writing in wikitext. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Dodger67: Bring back DOS and batch files, or let's all try and edit on an Amstrad PCW, I say! ...ah, those were the days. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:39, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes people sometimes ask about my IT credentials - I own an original DOS 2 user manual, though my first experience was with CP/M. I often catch myself trying to use wikimarkup in Word... Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:52, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@Dodger67: LOL. I can relate to that. I did my Amateur Radio Examination in 1974 based on valve theory, because I found PNP/NPN transistor circuit diagrams too confusing AND I lived in a shoe box in middle of t'road! Nick Moyes (talk) 12:01, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Got my ham license in the early 90's, valve theory had then just recently been removed from the syllabus here in ZS-land. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:07, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

If you are bringing back DOS, then I want WordPerfect with its "Show codes" and macros, not MS Office. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Nope, I'll take the much more configuarable WordStar. I still have some shareware utilities I wrote for dealing with wordstar files. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 20:12, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

In my first IT job we still had punchcard machines, and I actually used them, this was a long while before Wikipedia was started. By contrast my only mobile phone edit may well be my last. Though I have done tablet edits using desktop view. I suspect that the problem we have with a stable editing community despite a growing readership is closely related to the mobile being optimised for reading rather than editing. If that is ever fixed this place, and everywhere else that supports newbies, will be busy. Ϣere SpielChequers 21:58, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

@DESiegel: Yep, I used WordStar for some years, too. (I've probably got the main files illegally copied onto a floppy somewhere in a drawer at home) I've often wondered whether the WordStar development team simply got reemployed by mediawiki - the approach to editing style is so <turnonitalics>very<turnoffitalics> similar! Nick Moyes (talk) 16:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Although I am an advocate for editing by smartphone using the "desktop" site, I am not really an "expert" because I have not thoroughly investigated all the options. For example, I am an Android guy and have never edited with an iPhone. I don't have either the motivation or the time to keep trying the mobile site or the apps or any of the tricks other people use. My position is that the desktop site works just fine on current generation Android devices, and that the "desktop" name is an impediment to the promotion of smartphone editing because it falsely implies that there is something incorrect or dangerous about using that site on a phone. Nothing could be further from the truth. I've written many articles including Good articles on my phone. I help new users on my phone. I became an administrator three years ago on my phone and regularly block spammers, trolls and vandals on my phone. At this point, I do 99% of my Wikipedia editing on my phone, and use my desktop computer only when doing some advanced work with images where the big screen is helpful. I am always willing to offer help with mobile editing, and I wrote an essay, User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:59, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
There are multiple comments at that essay from other mobile editors, FWIW. —valereee (talk) 18:49, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
"Small screen" and "Large screen" might be better descriptors, although some readers prefer the 'small screen' design on their laptops.

There are major changes to the appearance of pages coming, so the non-editing differences may be less in the future. mw:Desktop improvements is the main page for that project. There will continue to be a distinction in terms of editing environments. In particular, the mobile visual editor (which is less awful than it used to be, honest!) is still going to be limited. You can make links and do simple text formatting, but not insert new tables, galleries, etc. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:14, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Whatamidoing (WMF), will people be able to thread replies easily in the mobile editor? Because that's going to cause ongoing frustration on talk pages until it's fixed. —valereee (talk) 14:00, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
No. Or, at least, no changes to that known problem will happen soon. It is on the list, just for "later" instead of "you know, several years ago would have been nice..." Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:52, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
(I've heard that the mobile site's talk pages already auto-sign comments (as of last year), but I've never tried it myself.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:54, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
I sit at a desktop computer all day so when I'm at home I'll lounge around with an iPad, even though working on a touchscreen is so much more inefficient. Rarely edit on my phone. Mostly I prefer editing in desktop site with "classic"/"2010" textarea editor, but have tried out mobile-source, mobile-visual, desktop-NWE, and iOS-app a fair bit. [Reasons for preferring classic include: (a) inconsistent handling of edit summaries and minor-edit checkbox across other modes, (b) availability of CharInsert, (c) iOS hates pinned/floating page elements and scrolls weirdly (d) localstorage is often not big enough to recover from a tab reload, but resend-form-data gives more reliable recovery to last "show preview".] I tend to be very erratic in checking Echo notifications: am happy to be pinged, but please don't think badly of me if I don't show up in a timely fashion! — Pelagic ( messages ) – (18:23 Tue 08, AEST) 08:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Wording of header

The Teahouse header says: "Welcome to the Teahouse! A friendly place where you can ask questions and get help with using and editing Wikipedia".

I wonder whether some editors may be reading this as allowing questions in general, and not just those relating to using and editing Wikipedia. Might it be wise to reword it slightly, along the lines of "A friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia"? --David Biddulph (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Good point, David Biddulph. I would agree that the very small tweak you propose makes eminent sense, and with no 'down side'. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:07, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

If the wording changed, but the br tag stayed in the same place, the first line would still read the same. Is the formatting also proposed to be changed? Regards, Zindor (talk) 23:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

@Zindor: I don't see why we'd need to change the break position in the sentence. Do you? It would simply read: "A friendly place where you can ask questions (break) to get help using and editing Wikipedia" Do you see something wrong in that? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:40, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm hoping we don't either, i was just curious as it occurred to me that people only reading the first line would also be asking out-of-scope questions. For what it's worth i also support the word change. Zindor (talk) 23:57, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

I support as well; implementing the change.

Anyone who comes along asking an intelligent research question can be directed to the WP:Reference desk. Wikipedia's overall question structure is still a mess, though, which might be why people come here asking reference desk questions. The ostensible portal page, Wikipedia:Questions lists out the million different attempts at creating a question forum for Wikipedia, showcasing our inability to consolidate (see also: Help:Getting started) and overwhelming anyone just looking for a good place to go for help. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:53, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

I just want to remind everyone that, whilst we, as hosts, know how things work around here, new users certainly do not. It's terribly important that we respond in a friendly and helpful manner to all questions, no matter if they're off-topic. I've recently had to ask one new host to avoid curt responses, or pointing newcomers to WP:ANI as a first option. Keeping our helpful, welcoming manner is key to maintaining the Teahouse's reputation and for editor retention. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:49, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Template for moving questions

Hello,

Having spent some time at the Teahouse over the past few weeks/months, I have noticed that a lot of questions are not asked in their own section, or duplicated in another section, (on the current version Bish had to move one and I had to move two). Therefore I have created templates for these. If you need to move a question, use {{question moved}}, which produces the following:

Question moved from another section to its own.

If you want to sign it, use {{question moved|1=~~~~}}. That looks like this:

Question moved from another section to its own. Giraffer ^munch 16:52, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

There is also a question merged template ({{question merged}}). {{question merged}} Parameter 1 gives the option to link to a specific section and parameter 2 gives the option to sign. For example, {{question merged|1=[[WP:TH#Question|2=~~~~}} gives:

Question merged from WP:TH#Question section to this one. Giraffer ^munch 17:55, 20 September 2020 (UTC) .

Hopefully this is helpful and saves time. Thanks! Giraffer ^munch 17:55, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Giraffer. Although I normally just edit the original post and insert a new heading, this is a nice idea that some might well wish to use. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:58, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Edit notice: uppercase header?

I have boldly converted the header of the edit notice to lowercase, because it seemed to be shouting at me. Feel free to revert if you liked it better the other way. Enterprisey (talk!) 00:20, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Replacing John From Idegon in featured hosts

John from Idegon (talk · contribs) has been blocked indefinitely. Even if he were to be unblocked (again), his history of personal attacks does not exactly fit very well with the welcoming nature of the teahouse. His featured page is at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host/Featured/25, the content of which should probably be replaced with a new featured host. Ed talk! 06:25, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

The latest thread of their UTP provides some context. I see a nonzero chance that the block will be appealed and lifted once they cool down, but I agree that Teahouse hosts should have a cooler temper than the average editor. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 07:45, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Problem with invitation template

Moved from Wikipedia:Teahouse § Problem with invitation template

– Seems more relevant to consider this matter here. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:17, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Since nearly two years[1]], the Template:Teahouse invitation, when used on user talk pages, reads like "Teahouse invitation, you are invited to join other new editors[...]" instead of "Username, you are invited to join other new editors[...]". See here for some 500 examples. This gives a rather strange first impression. Fram (talk) 12:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Fram! This discussion would be better placed at WT:TEA or Template talk:Teahouse invitation, especially the former, since that is the page many users who know and watch over the Teahouse but don't necessarily scroll through this page day to day watch. It appears to me, or maybe I'm just guessing, that this template was deprecated in favour of WP:Teahouse/Invitation which seems to be the same template except without the issue you point out. The talk page of that page has discussions 7 years old, which if they had been completed, might have answered the question you raise. For some strange reason, it seems nobody followed through with regard to the fact that this one was the template that was always likely to be used by everyone. Perhaps it was supposed to be redirected? I recommend moving this to the talk page and waiting for people in the know to answer. On this page, this post is likely to be archived before that has a chance to happen. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:17, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Ignore my speculation above; I only just noticed that I'd missed your first diff. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:33, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps we can use the PAGENAME magic word. That would fix the transcluded cases. Zindor (talk) 18:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) I've fixed the originally reported problem with Special:Diff/983176612, although I do agree that having two templates for the same thing is un-ideal. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Posts by EddieLeVisco

I've just closed the latest post by EddieLeVisco. If another host or someone else wants to undo that, then feel free to do so.There actually do seem to be editors discussing things at Talk:Ed Gold, but apparently they're not doing so fast enough or correctly enough to satisfy the subject of the article. If someone wants to take a shot at trying to poitely explain things to this this person once again, then maybe this time will be the charm. However, this is starting to become a time sink that looks like it's only going to get worse if not nipped in the bud fairly soon. If someone on the otherhand wants to WP:HAT the post or even remove it outright, then that's another option. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Seems sensible. However many times that user posts, the response will be the same- use the talkpage and WP:NODEADLINE. If they keep repeating the same message, maybe we could ask admins for a partial block to stop them posting at the Teahouse. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:10, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I took a shot at it. I hope he reads it. Giraffer ^munch 09:13, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I think enough advice has been given to the user. Time for us to ask them to desist from asking questions directly related to this, and on our end stop 'feeding the troll' so to speak. I'm not keen on us blocking a user from the Teahouse, however at some point it may become a necessary action for this apparent SPA. Regards, Zindor (talk) 13:08, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I think this ~~prima donna~~ person has had enough of failing to fit in to our ways now, and we've certainly had enough of them disparaging or upsetting virtually every single editor who has tried to work with them. It's a classic example of how a person mght want, but not get, control of an article about them. Well done all those who tried to help him. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:06, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: After yet another post by this user, I have now warned them on their talk page that their pushy and disparaging edits have now reached a disruptive level, and that they may be blocked from editing here if they persist posting at WP:TH. I believe this reflects the consensus here, and I advise immediately deleting any further posts they might make without responding, and informing me or another admin so we can instigate a partial block on editing any Teahouse page - or take further action, if necessary. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

It's unfortunate things have contiunued to get worse. I don't see how EddieLeVisco can be allowed to continue to such post such things at the Teahouse. He tried something similar at WP:VPP, but it was quickly squashed. Multiple editors do actually seem to be trying to clean up the Wikipedia article in question and I think if EddieLeVisco would simply try and engage them civily on the article's talk page instead of demanding things from them, then perhaps things would settle down and be straightened out. Same goes for the editors trying to help out by post on EddieLeVisco's user talk page. His WP:BATTLEGROUND approach, however, seems to be making editors have a change of heart and making them no longer want to deal with all the drama being created.

I think this all has to do with a lack of understanding of WP:OWN and WP:NOT that probably goes all the way back to when the article was first created based on what was posted here about some marketing company employee being involved. Right from the start, it sounds like the subject and perhaps those involved in actually creating the article seemed to believe that Wikipedia might be a good way to get some free promotion. My guess is that the subject is probably WP:GNG and WP:NCREATIVE notable which means that it's unlikely that a WP:AFD is going to end up with the article deleted, but at the same time it seems impossible to give the subject the type of article he seems to want. Not an easy thing to resolve, but any more WP:ASPERSIONS or quasi-WP:OUTING at the Teahouse or anywhere else is only going to create more problems that go beyond the scope of the article, and will probably lead to a NOTHERE block. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:24, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Movement Strategy - Prioritisation

Meeting 30/10/2020-31/10/2020

From what i gather, as part of the WMF Movement strategy, projects were asked to have a meeting on 'prioritisation'. That is to say, in the light of the Movement Strategy Recommendations , what specific areas should we be focused on and how can we achieve those goals?

Several Movement Recommendations that i feel are highly relevant:

Improve User Experience
Provide for Safety and Inclusion
Manage Internal Knowledge
Invest in Skills and Leadership Development

I believe the Teahouse should be involved in this process; there's a great wealth of experience here and the Teahouse plays an important role in editor retention. From what i can tell the 'transition' phase starts on the 1st November so time is of the essence here. It seems 'video conferencing' was encouraged for this kind of meeting, but given the hasty nature of this discussion and out of respect for the right to anonymity, i think we should keep this as a text-based discussion.

To paraphrase points already raised by Nick Moyes, there is a need for developer assistance with making virtual environments for new editors more reliable, and mobile and visual editor friendly. Also for making help pages and templates work efficiently.

An idea i'm floating is for editors to have access to online training, perhaps on subjects such as coding or researching. Access to this could be granted in a low-key, low-distribution way, by Teahouse hosts to editors who they have identified as having the potential to benefit from such training. It would help editor retention and help improve en-wiki.

I don't know the extent to which the WMF is prepared to lend assistance, if any. This discussion among ourselves could be beneficial in itself. I've notified the WMF of this meeting at Meta-wiki. Any thoughts and ideas on what we should be prioritizing, how we can achieve our goals, and also how we can future-proof editor support within Wikipedia? Regards, Zindor (talk) 21:49, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Zindor, A lot of the questions on the Teahouse seem to be about how to create articles. Users (such as Hoary) have been redirecting them to The Wikipedia Adventure rather then answering the question on how to do so. The Wikipedia Adventure is a great source! I think Improving User Experience should be the top priority for the Teahouse, as that's what were all about; making Wikipedia more friendly for newcomers. Le Panini (^{Talk to}_me?) 13:04, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

Potentially useful script: section-watchlist

Hi everyone! I'm working on a user script that lets you add sections to your watchlist: User:Enterprisey/section-watchlist. It's still buggy and under heavy development, but it's already pretty helpful and I use it every day. All feedback is welcome. It might be useful here at the Teahouse to follow discussions that you've contributed to. I'm also working on an integration with reply-link so that sections get added to your watchlist when you reply. Happy editing! Enterprisey (talk!) 07:37, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Jesus Christ! Is there anything you can't do? Usedtobecool ☎️ 08:04, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

oh stop it you ^huh? :) Enterprisey (talk!) 09:32, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Enterprisey, is it (or will it (soon) be) possible to unwatch sections without visiting the pages in which they reside? Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:16, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

I would certainly like to add this functionality pretty soon. At the moment I'm a bit more concerned with making the server more robust and able to run for long periods of time, but this feature is certainly one of the next few I'll work on after that. Enterprisey (talk!) 09:06, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Help talk:Introduction § Giving more guidance on finding the right talk page

You are invited to join the discussion at Help talk:Introduction § Giving more guidance on finding the right talk page. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:41, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit conflicts (with yourself)?

Is anyone else experiencing edit conflicts with their own edits? I have the 'Paragraph-based edit conflict' beta tool enabled in Preferences, and quite often finding that I get an edit conflict reported, only to discover that my first attempt to publish my edit worked, but that I appear to be trying to saving a further blank edit over the top of it, which I presume would have overwritten it with an empty edit had I proceeded.

I have reported the issue to www.mediawiki.org see here, and note that a couple of editors on cs-wiki have experienced the same thing. I, too, use Chrome in Windows 10, so it would be helpful to know what browser or OS you're using if you have also encountered this issue.

As an aside, I have suggested that the gadget incorporates the ability to copy any given text block from either column. If you feel the same, feel free to add your support for that idea, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:14, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

I occassionally experience this, although it's happened on all sorts of pages, not just here at the TH. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:04, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

@Sdkb: Yes, I would expect that if there's a problem with the beta gadget, it could occur anywhere. Could you indicate what browser/OS you use, please? Nick Moyes (talk) 01:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm on Chrome (latest beta version)/Windows 10. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:19, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, I tend to experience this with Enterprisey's reply-link.js occasionally. Even now I get "the reply failed" (presumably as an edit conflict). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:20, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

+1 I've experienced both Nick Moyes' and Tenryuu's problems as well. Usually on poor internet. — Yours, Berrely (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • ^Talk∕_Contribs 18:24, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes, Sdkb, and Berrely: Are you using the WP:WikEd gadget? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Nope. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:38, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Nope, me neither. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:47, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Neither me... — Yours, Berrely (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • ^Talk∕_Contribs 13:30, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Well, then. Almost every time this comes up at WP:VPT, that's the answer. If you're not double-clicking the publish button, and you don't have a defective pointing device that sends spurious multiple clicks, I have no idea. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:21, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

@Suffusion of Yellow: Thanks. Whilst the occasional double mouse-click, can't be ruled out, this does seem to be happening quite a lot with this beta gadget. I've now linked to this thread and the image I've inserted at my original post on mediawiki. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:32, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Just popping back to say that I intentionally saved my above reply with a very quick double click and received an edit conflict which, when resolved, updated the signature timestamp. But if there is an issue with over-rapid double-clicking, I'd say that the over-responsiveness of the blue 'Publish' button might therefore need to be addressed, as nobody ever needs to publish the same - or a different - post within 1/4 second of their previous edit. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:11, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Not sure if this Phabricator ticket (T59264) is similar to your problem; otherwise you could probably start one yourself on there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 20:02, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

I've had this issue before, but it such a rare occurrence that I don't have much problem with it. Le Panini ^Talk 18:26, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

For me it's generally a sign that my mouse button is getting worn out and producing two clicks when one is needed. Two weeks ago I fixed it by swapping primary and secondary mouse buttons in Windows config. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:20, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Not for me. I've a brand new mouse and keyboard here. The issue is clearly that the 'Publish' button needs to be made to ignore and not act on a second click (EVER!), because double-clicking is a natural action on many other platforms, such as file selection and opening. But here it seems to just be causing an edit conflict with oneself, and thus is probably wasting a huge amounts of time across a myriad of pages and for a whole bunch of users. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:02, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Probably not the best workaround, but assuming you're not using the 2017 wikitext editor, what about pressing the ↵ Enter key after typing your edit summary (the caret is still inside the edit summary field)? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 17:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Fixing root problems

Nick Moyes and Cullen328, it just got archived, but re Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1087#Why_has_such_a_simple_thing_become_such_a_user-hostile_experience?, the IP has identified a flaw in our instructions. Our response needs to be more than just "here's the page you were looking for"; it needs to be to fix {{No article text}} to add a link to the requested redirects page. I've done so at Template talk:No article text#Protected edit request on 13 December 2020. In some sense, every editor that comes to the Teahouse represents a failure of our instructions to provide enough guidance that they don't need to. We're obviously never going to be able to get to zero since the instructions will never be good enough and people will always be too lazy to be completely served by them, but we should still always be on the lookout for instances where we can address the underlying cause that drove someone to come here so that others won't need to in the future. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb, I am sorry but I do not agree that "every editor that comes to the Teahouse represents a failure of our instructions to provide enough guidance that they don't need to". Often, clearly written instructions are readily available but the new editor was either unable or unwilling to search for that guidance. Other times, new editors ignore provided links to key policies and guidelines, even when they are pointed out to them multiple times. Why did this new editor come to the conclusion that a redirect was needed or that using some sort of "wizard" was required to solve that problem? I have no idea but I fo not think this is a common error. This is an incredibly complicated project, but it also has extensive documentation, help pages and resources such as the help desk and the Teahouse. I see a correlation between aggressive complaints by new editors and an unwillingness to "look around", using the links to ample resources available on the left side and top of every Wikipedia page. I know that not everyone is like me, but I worked hard to develop Wikipedia search skills in my first few months of contributing, so that I did not blunder into problem areas. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:17, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328, yes, often the issue is just that someone didn't read existing instructions, but that's not what happened here. To replicate the experience the IP had, just log out/open an incognito window and go to djfsdjgsdjgnsdkf. Notice that the message that pops up there doesn't say anything about redirects until quite far down in a line about case sensitivity that the IP likely skipped since they weren't trying to do anything related to case sensitivity. It would've been perfectly reasonable for them to think the article wizard was the right way to request a redirect, leading them down that flawed path. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:37, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb, if I had any idea how to open (and then close) an "icognito window", maybe I would try what you have suggested. But I don't know how to do that and have never once had the need to do so in over 11 years of editing Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:03, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Cullen328, it's an easier way to test what WP is like for IPs, since you don't have to log in everywhere again the same way you do if you log out to test something. The name depends on your browser; see Private browsing#Support in popular browsers. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb, that link gives strange instructions about to enter that mode, but nothing about how to exit that editing hell. Maybe you are comfortable with that. I'm not. I'm an ordinary person, not a code monkey. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:19, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Trying to cut through the chatter about ways we can edit in some form of 'Private' browser session as if we were an unregistered IP, I do take Sdkb's point that, when a user types in a name that doesn't exist, there is only guidance on creating an article, not on the possibility of making a WP:REDIRECT. Perhaps this is an issue which should be raised with the good folk over at WP:AFC, too, as the above-mentioned 'draft redirect' could have been handled there, I'd guess? The lead at AFC currently states:

"Writing an encyclopedic article from scratch isn't easy, and we recommend that you first get some experience by adding material to articles that already exist or helping out with other tasks. You should read the page Help:Your first article to avoid classic mistakes and save your hard work from being deleted."

Maybe it should say something like this:

"Writing an encyclopedic article from scratch isn't easy, and we recommend that you first get some experience by adding material to articles that already exist or helping out with other tasks. You should read the page Help:Your first article to avoid classic mistakes and save your hard work from being deleted. In some circumstances, it may be more appropriate to request a simple 'Redirect' to an existing article."

Thoughts? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:14, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I notified WT:AFC yesterday. I'm not sure how many newcomers go through the WikiProject page itself, but it still might be good to improve that landing. There is a lot of low-hanging fruit, such as the fact that we still use the legacy wizard. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:15, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I think I'm going to WP:BE BOLD and make a couple of changes, as outlined above, and we can discuss thereafter, perhaps. I think (rather like the page you linked Cullen to), we point people at stuff and say "read that kiddo" without even considering how 'readable' or comprehensible it actually is to a newcomer. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Are you thinking about creating more nutshells? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 17:05, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: No comprendo, mi amigo. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, whoops, guess I should linked to the template {{Nutshell}}, as I assumed you were thinking of creating more condensed summaries of policy pages. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) (🎁 Wishlist! 🎁) 21:54, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Ah! And there was me thinking of this! (...And since when have I been known to ever condense anything? True story this: I once got top marks in a Plain English course for simplifying some technical text. But it was pointed out, to my shame, that my version was the only one that was longer than the original!) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:21, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

@Sdkb, et al: I have worked this evening to add clarity to WP:AFC - especially the lead paragraphs and the 'Redirect' section. Please take a look and check you think these combined changes are an improvement. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:25, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Host awards

I am a little bit confused with Teahouse awards, on the one hand, the awards page currently says it is "inactive" and only for "historical reference", and the script to give them seems to be broken, but badges and awards are still displayed on a host's profile? Are the badges still given or are they depreceated? — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 18:09, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

@Berrely: No, we haven't used the 'awards' system for quite a number of years (certainly long before I joined in)> But when you sign up as a host one, the process still automatically inserts one in the new host profile. I've not looked into disabling it - maybe someone might care to look into doing that. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:40, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Berrely, They were given out to hosts and users for doing certain things, but are apparently discontinued. The process of becoming a Teahouse host adds the badge while creating a template for you, so you don't have to add it yourself. Le Panini ^Talk 04:38, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

I just signed up as a host and the script gave me one auto yes and that got me thinking, aren't the other badge holders just better script editors and not necessarily merited tea house members RafaelConrade7777 (talk) 18:49, 31 December 2020 (UTC)