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.
Soon, the reply tool will be enabled by default for new users (see this). Should we change the big 'Ask a question' button to one directing users to the new 'add topic' button, or similar? ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
As my comment seems to have been unclear, I'll clarify. The reply tool will be automatically enabled on all Wikipedias soon. This will hopefully mean in almost no malformed comments. The big blue Ask a question button uses the source editor. I am asking we should do about this, to support the reply tool (which adds a "new section" button instead). I would support modifying the button so that it (somehow) explains how to use the Reply Tool etc. upon being clicked. Qwerfjkltalk 19:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm happy with Ask a question! ─ The Aafī(talk) 17:17, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Is the question about the "Ask a Question" button related to the Reply tool somehow? If not, "Ask a Question" is far more user friendly than "Start a New Topic". Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 17:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I also like Ask a Question. The accompanying text should be enhanced by adding: You will be automatically notified when someone responds to your question, unless you click the unsubscribe button after saving your question. Please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~).TimTempleton(talk)(cont) 17:28, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@Pyrrho the Skeptic @TheAafi My point is that the Reply Tool will be enabled by default for new users. Should we therefore encourage its use instead of source editing? Also @Timtempleton, I think it automatically signs posts yay! ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Yes! Because it will encourage users to actually answer follow-up questions from hosts which will help everyone immensely, as well as cut down on new user error, of course. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 17:36, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
As long as it gets new users to leave a signature for when they ask questions and post follow-up comments I'm all for it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I like "Ask a question", also would be good with a signature added as outlined above. Rubbish computerPing me or leave a message on my talk page 19:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I think it should stay as Ask a question because to new users, it's purpose is immediately obvious compared to "Start a New Topic". I've actually been using the new reply tool myself and not only does it automatically sign if I forget but it also allows me to easily change the formatting with a press of a button. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 19:27, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
The problem is that the Reply Tool gives an option to 'add a topic', and the current button directs the user to the source editor with a prefilled form. ― Qwerfjkltalk 19:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf My point is that there's no reason to have both. ― Qwerfjkltalk 19:58, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
While I don't disagree with you, I feel that keeping the Ask a Question button would be a good idea as it gives users the correct format and tells them what to do to ask. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 20:06, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf I presume the reply tool gives the correct format, and all the preload gives (of relevance) is: PLEASE ADD A SHORT SUBJECT HEADING in the separate Subject/headline field above. Then, WRITE YOUR QUESTION BELOW THIS LINE. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Yes that is true. Another reason why I'd prefer the Ask a Question button is because it's a big button in the middle of the screen, so users don't have to go searching for the option to ask a question. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 20:15, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf What I would prefer would be a notice directing users how to use the Reply Tool, upon clicking the button. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:22, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
The reply tool is clearly superior to the source editor for newcomers—that's the whole reason it was designed—so I definitely support using it here as soon as we're able. From a quick skim of the above, there appears to be some confusion—we don't have to change the text of the button, just what clicking on it does. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 20:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I think the big, friendly Ask a Question button should definitely remain - at least for now. But we should always be open to reviewing how it works. For quite some time it has not been very user-friendly, so let's be open to seeing how new changes will impact on the new editor experience at the Teahouse, as well as that of the more experienced users. But let's also not rush to change things unnecessarily. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:21, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
I think Ask a Question has been very useful for starting new topics; it's the follow-up comments that new users don't remember to sign as there's no preload source editor-wise that allows them to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:02, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
This conversation really needs some explanation. Apparently there is a new "Reply" tool, but no indication of what it is, what it does, how it might help. At the top is a link to a Village Pump stream that goes on for pages and pages without ever (as far as I could see) giving that explanation - perhaps I missed it among the volume there. I got a notification that Qwerfjkl tagged me on this conversation, but I can't see where, so not sure what I am being asked. I will try replying to the original question then - putting myself in the shoes of a new user, if I went to the Teahouse because I had a basic question, and I was faced with a "Reply" or "Add a Topic" option instead of "Ask a Question", it would just leave me confused. Surely a "reply" tool is for the person answering the question, not for the person asking it?--Gronk Oz (talk) 02:04, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Ditto to this. I got tagged on this, but did not see or why, until I see now there is something called "hidden ping", which is annoying. Confused about what "Reply tool" is and why it would change the way users ask questions. To answer this question: "Should we change the big 'Ask a question' button" -- NO. It should remain a big "Ask a question" button. It is clearly working the way it is, since we get lots of questions at the Teahouse. RudolfRed (talk) 23:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
I was completely neglected from the pings.
I believe this is the Discussion Tools beta feature being officially rolled out, which appends a [ reply ] link at the end of (signed) comments, and handles pinging, indenting, and signing correctly without user customisation. From what I understand, it is going to become the default for everyone, including IP editors. I think what Qwerfjkl might be asking is if the button's target should change to something else; that is, not bring users to a source editor page (which can be confusing for the uninitiated who don't read invisible comments), but direct them to the bottom of the page, and act as if a user had clicked the Add topic link at the top of the page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
I certainly agree that the source editor is intimidating for a new user. So if the "Ask a Question" button defaulted to the Visual Editor that would be better. As for directing user to the bottom of the page and starting a new topic - isn't that just what the button already does? It does for me, anyhow.--Gronk Oz (talk) 04:16, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
@Gronk Oz While the button start a new topic at the bottom of the oage, the reply tool is probably more user-friendly. The Reply Tool in visual mode ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:46, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
[I]sn't that just what the button already does? @Gronk Oz: It brings the user to a separate page that uses source editor that is divorced from all other discussions on the page (like using the New topic link at the top of the page back in the day). If you're remaining on the page after clicking the button, you might have different preferences than me (perhaps you enabled the Discussion Tools beta) because I'm being brought to the source editor. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:07, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
@Tenryuu: Yes, that's just what I see. You said that the "Reply" was better because it would "direct them to the bottom of the page, and act as if a user had clicked the Add topic link at the top of the page" - and I can't see how that is different from the current "Ask a question" button. Qwerfjkl says the "reply" is "probably more user friendly" but I'm not sure why - is it just because it doesn't use the source editor? I can't help thinking this whole discussion would make more sense if we had some sort of explanation of what the "reply" tool is/ will be - especially for the person initially asking the question. From the comments here, it sounds like the only difference for the user is the easier editor... right?--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
@Gronk Oz: I was misspoken on that part; that was me running Convenient Discussions; now that I've disabled it I see that the link doesn't exist at the top. The beta feature has more info here.That's pretty much it. It's a relatively new interface that doesn't force the user onto a separate page with source editor and auto-signs for them at the end. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:39, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
If you want those tabs, you need to add the __NEWSECTIONLINK__ to the page (can be hidden in a transcluded header). Help:Magic words#Behavior switches has information.
Unfortunately, there's no way to turn the Reply tool on automagically for everyone arriving at the page. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
I would YSupport using the reply tool from the Ask a question button. ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
I think it makes sense to link the "Ask a question" button to the New Discussion Tool(not the Reply Tool), once the Discussion Tools can safely be assumed to be available. The current "Ask a question" form appears to have three features to help inexperienced editors: it has an edit notice with some advice, it has a comment reminding the user to use a section title, and it adds the user's signature and instructs the user to do so when replying. The New Discussion Tool shows edit notices; the New Discussion Tool warns the user to use a section title; and the New Discussion Tool adds the user's signature, and the Reply Tool will add it when replying. The Discussion Tools have a cleaner interface than the "Ask a question" form (whose preloaded markup might be confusing – "what is subst:trim? what does it all mean?"). The one thing that the New Discussion Tool seems to me to be missing is the big, eye-catching button to open it. —2d37 (talk) 07:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Hosts! I'm writing to follow up on my post above from earlier this month about the proposal to expand the trial of Growth features. At VPR, Community members decided to proceed with increasing the share of new accounts getting the features to 25%. An important part of the Growth features is the "mentorship module" (see accompanying image), in which the new accounts are each assigned a mentor from a list of experienced editors who have signed up to take part. For now, we'll only be scaling the mentorship part up to 5% of new accounts, because we need more mentors in order to go further.
Presentation of the "mentorship module" on the newcomer homepage.
I'm writing now because many of you are excellent mentors for newcomers, and it would be a big help if you were to sign up and your names to the list (we're looking for about 10 more mentors). We consider this to be a relatively lightweight commitment -- rather than an ongoing committed mentorship relationship, the work here is mostly about answering one-off questions from newcomers who are stuck on things like adding images, adding references, or writing a new article. Once you're on the list, you'll start getting new accounts assigned to you automatically, which means that questions will start appearing on your User Talk page, which you can just answer right there. You might expect to receive about 5 questions per week.
You can read more details about the features on the project page, and about community experiences with mentorship on the talk page. To try out the features yourself, you can follow these instructions. Please let me know if you have any questions! MMiller (WMF) (talk) 00:07, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. Added myself. Sounds like a great idea. Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 00:21, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! I've been wondering where once signs up for this. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:08, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Archival bot down
Hello! SO it seems that the bot that regularly archives the Teahouse is down because of the new Wikimedia update. So while we wait for it to come back up should we manually archive older posts or should we just wait for the bot to come back up? I would assume that this has happened before however I haven't had this happen so I'm unsure if it's appropriate to manually archive older posts according to how often posts are archived. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:37, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Manual archival is entirely appropriate, it just is tedious to do. You would probably not look at the post dates like the bot does, but simply move a good chunk from the top to the archive.
Also FYI, Muninnbot relies on Lowercase_sigmabot_III making certain edits with certain summaries to work, so if we do manual archiving the notifications will not be sent for those threads. Having a page of manageable length is important, but having notifications has value too, so if you go for manual archiving try to leave as much as your reasonably can, until the promised "fix in progress" (see User_talk:Σ#Lowercase_sigmabot_III_seems_down) actually comes through. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:34, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Lowercase_sigmabot_III is back online - X201 (talk) 13:52, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Blaze The Wolf, There was a discussion on the thread "Soccer Team Notability" from 3 days ago that was archived before resolution. Can it be made active again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinw33 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
@Kevinw33: I'd just make a new question and link to the archived one in the opening post so that others can have context. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Tenryuu 🐲, Ok I will try... I'm not very good at any of this. Kevinw33 (talk) 16:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
How Does One Start A Wiki Page?
(and the like).
If I were a previously unknown IP number or user ID and wanted to troll WP:Teahouse (which incidentally never seems to be referred to as an "article"), I'd probably post a question such as this. (After all, "I Wanna Be An Administrator!!!" might be a bit too obvious.) And I'd look forward to being told about ignoramuses planning to erect houses and how Wikipedia doesn't have pages but instead has articles -- irrespective, regardless, or yes even irregardless of the quality of the advice (indeed, the house-building analogy is a good one) but merely to have the minor satisfaction of seeing some unwaged slave trot it out for the eleventy-thousandth time.
I used to put some effort into distinguishing between questions posted by trolls and those posted by idiots, but recently I've given up. Either way, the questioner is sure to be a waste of time. So instead, when dealing with one or the other, I'm as succinct as basic courtesy allows.
BTW, what's currently the "featured article" is James A. Doonan. Now, if https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_A._Doonan is not a web page then I don't know what is. -- Hoary (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Very true, Maproom. -- Hoary (talk) 22:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
@Hoary I do understand your cynicism to some of the posts we see here. But a polite Teahouse response to one person - even a troll - is seen by numerous other new users, who may well learn from that response, and from the politeness we try to offer the other user. That is a valuable thing to demonstrate, as not everyone here is a troll or an idiot. I do tend to be bemused by how many trolls can't help themselves by posting here. I might answer them politely here, but then I investigate and often find a very good rationale to block them. I suspect you do too. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Yes, Nick: half hidden behind my administrative mop 'n' bucket, I too store the administrative taser that we're not supposed to mention, and have on occasion used it on users who've previously received time-wasting responses to their Teahouse witterings. And it's very true that not all are trolls or idiots. (Trolls and idiots aside, many do "have conflicts of interest". This is often a euphemism for "treat WP as a PR outlet"; but when it isn't, I can on occasion approve.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:35, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
A very practical solution could be to create a template response/copy paste that is extreme friendly/welcoming while minimizing the effort. I want to emphasize the point, that even responding to trolls can still be beneficial to everyone else. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:06, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
You have 8 edits and this account was registered yesterday. Hosts should have a few orders of magnitude more edits than that and have been around for a few orders of magnitude longer. —A little blue Boriv^_^vJéské Couriano 11:50, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
If you have a question about editing Wikipedia you can simply just ask it without becoming a host. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:54, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
Well, unless I misunderstood something, the Teahouse logo is fine - it links to the description page for its image.
Having the host images link to another page (the user page of the host) does break attribution though, good catch. I would think your quick fix is sufficient. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:40, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
It didn't, I had fixed that. The logo has now been re-licensed on request, and I have removed the link again. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:54, 19 November 2021 (UTC)
Header break?
Seems like there are two templates at the top of the Teahouse, User:HBC Archive Indexrelease/Optout and Template:User/config, that have broken. Any know if there's a fix? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:47, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Thanks! Completely forgot about Miszabot and Indexerbot... —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:50, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK Training Opportunity
UK-based Teahouse Hosts might be interested in an up-coming Train the Trainers course being run online by Wikimedia UK in January. Successful applicants will be provided with the skills and resources necessary to deliver a standard ‘Introduction to Wikipedia’ session, as might be given at any online editathon or workshop event.
I don't think anything in Wikipedia causes characters to display as emojis. I'm aware that some software does, and it can be hard to get round it. What software are you using? Maproom (talk) 22:39, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
About Muninnbot notifications - designers and/or feedback wanted
It is not surprising. I "designed" it in a hurry after being tired of coding the bot. Designing interfaces for others has never been part of my job, I am not talented at it, and never had much of an inclination to learn. I did not realize myself that it sucked, but I was not surprised when I learnt it either.
Why the rant? Three reasons:
People are too polite. Maybe you knew that the template sucked, but you did not want to tell me because I might get sad or angry. Well, you can tell me. I feel about my design skill the same as about my Assyrian mythology knowledge: it is non-existent so I will not take offense if you think it is lacking, but I am not proud of ignorance either, and I am eager to learn.
Maybe someone here can do a better job than me at this template thing. That is very likely. If there are ten page watchers who could all cobble together a working template, the chance that my design is the best is about one in ten. That probability goes down drastically if one of those ten ever did design real stuff.
Maybe someone thinks I "own" the template. Bot operation is a fairly special area where the bot operator is more or less master of the ship (within the bounds of the bot approval request). Allow me to repeat myself from back when the bot was created: the notifications are sent on behalf of the Teahouse, and therefore I consider that the template is not part of the bot operation, anymore than the appearance of the Teahouse page. It could (and should) be edited by others under the same principles (meaning: don’t screw it up and don’t edit war, but the bot maintainer’s opinion is worth as much as anyone else’s).
I changed the template to include feedback from here and there (thanks to both, for the feedback, and for demonstrating point #1). It certainly is not perfect yet, possibly it even worsened in some aspects. Here’s how to make the template suck less:
@Tigraan:What exactly bothers you about the template? It doesn't look terrible to me. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:53, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Wording change looks good, neutral on the color change. Enterprisey (talk!) 06:25, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
@Tigraan: The only bit of feedback that I would have is that I think the message goes into too much detail on the archival and delivery process, it's probably a bit overwhelming given the target audience. I don't think its necessary to link to the archiving help page, the bot information page or lowercase sigma bot. I would replace the entire second section with something like:
"This message was delivered by Muninnbot, on behalf of the Teahouse hosts. To opt out of these notifications you can add {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} to the top of this page."
I don't know if others here would agree with this suggestion or not. 192.76.8.80 (talk) 20:31, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I would think the explanation of archival is necessary, and would be mildly in favor of keeping it. On the other hand, the explanation of Muninnbot vs. lowercase sigmabot III etc. might well be unnecessary - I added it because someone was confused, but it might have been over-correcting. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:15, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Created another template response for YFA
{{subst:THYFA}} for advice against creating a new article from scratch. I might customize it occasionally for specific queries, but generally have found myself repeating same advice over and over for newly ambitious editors here. Bold editing welcome as usual ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:44, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
@Shushugah: I've removed the line, "I remember from when I started how much I wanted to "make my mark" by adding a new article to Wikipedia; but now I know that generally people who improve existing articles often add far more value to Wikipedia than those who try to create new ones before they're properly equipped to." from the template since the issue with it is that not everyone here wanted to make a new article when they joined Wikipedia. I myself actually didn't want to create a new article when I joined Wikipedia mainly because I hear that it's kinda hard. I've still only actually created one article (Splatoon 3), and that was only because some people on the Wikipedia Discord server encouraged me to do so. If I were to create another new article it would most likely be related to a video game since that's my main area of interest. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
@Shushugah: I removed all instances of the first person. Welcome to the Teahouse! could potentially be removed as the same kind of question is sometimes seen on the Help Desk, but that's something to decide for a later date. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:51, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
I used to say Welcome to the Teahouse for both, but that's confused people at HelpDesk etc...the fancy solution would be dynamic interpolation based on which page it's transcluded on I suppose :P with a sane default ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 16:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
@Tenryuu added a dynamic welcome to XYZ variable, so it can be used in HelpDesk and also created {{subst:HDYFA}} convenience redirect! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:14, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
I changed it so it will only work on the Teahouse/Help Desk, so it should work on other pages e.g. Help talk:Your first article. ― Qwerfjkltalk 17:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
I boldly created {{subst:WikiDonation}} where we can substitute a standard fundraiser response to IP addresses, with instruction how to create an account. It's auto-signed with the transcluder's signature. Please feel free to edit it to make it even more kind/thorough/helpful at Template:WikiDonation. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:55, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
For example calling below the demo section {{subst:WikiDonation}} produces:
Demo
Welcome to the Teahouse. You are going to want to create an account, go into your preferences, navigate to the Banners tab, and uncheck Fundraising. Wikimedia Foundation does not track the identity of IP addresses, so it doesn't know your age, income level or whether you donated in the past. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:27, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for doing this, Shushugah. If you want the signature to display you're going to need the template to be substituted, which you should mention in the template's documentation. Do you want to mention this over at the Help Desk as well? It also gets hit pretty hard with that question around this time. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
@Tenryuu added documentation and mentioned on Help Desk! Would be good to expand/get more eyes on actual text of the greeting. I suppose adding a comment how to reproduce the template substitute inside the respond would be good, otherwise people will think it's a copy/paste manually without being able to update the text of the template itself. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Great idea of template! I made it auto-subst so that transclusions are corrected by the bot, so I do not think there is a need to explain heavily substitution vs. transclusion etc. more than on any other subst-only template.
@Shushugah and Tigraan: I went to the main page while logged out and HOLY CRAP THAT IS A HUGE BANNER. Seriously, I'd say that banner took up about half of my screen. It says this: "To all our readers in the U.S.,
Please don't scroll past this. This Thursday, for the 1st time recently, we humbly ask you to defend Wikipedia's independence. 98% of our readers don't give; they simply look the other way. If you are an exceptional reader who has already donated, we sincerely thank you. If you donate just $2.75, or whatever you can this Thursday, Wikipedia could keep thriving for years. We ask you, humbly: please don't scroll away. If Wikipedia has given you $2.75 worth of knowledge this year, take a minute to donate. Show the world that access to reliable, neutral information matters to you. Thank you." If you ignore it, when you go back to the main page, the banner is still huge (although slightly smaller) and says this, "Hi reader. This is the 2nd time we’ve interrupted your reading recently, but 98% of our readers don't give. Many think they’ll give later, but then forget. This Thursday we ask you to protect Wikipedia. All we ask is $2.75, or what you can afford, to secure our future. We ask you, humbly: Please don't scroll away. If you are one of our rare donors, we warmly thank you." and every time you reload the number increases to 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. I can see why IP readers are bothered by this. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:58, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
I see no banner in a private browser window and/or different browser. Possibly the banner is IP-geolocated and I do not see it?
From this mailing list exchange it seems the WMF position (or at least the position of a lot of people who work or have worked at the WMF in positions to decide those things) is that there is no real budget target (or if there is it is about $1b/year) and there will always be stuff we can spend on if we raise enough funding. Well, that sure explains the obnoxious banners. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:34, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Yes, I think it checks your IP. I don't get the banner either, so maybe it's just in the US they show it, or perhaps it's displayed everywhere except in Europe. Either way, knowing it's there (and reading the messages from the WMF over at Meta) is almost enough to make me stop editing in December. --bonadeacontributionstalk 10:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
No. I still see it. I went private and got a huge blue begging banner here in the UK. I find the tone unwarranted (it’s not as if we’re about to cease trading). Think I might put a similar message on my Userpage: “Hello - if you think I’ve given you £2.73 worth of information or help this year, here’s a link to my personal PayPal account. Please give generously (because most people don’t.)”. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:48, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Bah, so much for that theory. (I suddenly wondered if I'd see it on sv.wiki, but I didn't.) --bonadeacontributionstalk 19:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
@Tigraan and Shushugah: Do either of you have links to all the donation questions asked at the Teahouse and Help Desk? I'm planning on showing the WMF just how bad it really is. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:17, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf not that much truthfully. I searched for a unique phrase in the template that was consistent throughout the edits, which you can find here. Only used 11x so far, and even if used 100x, it pales compared to the millions of views these template banners get. I'm not thrilled with how it's handled, but would prefer not to invest more energy into it. How/what the funding is used for bothers me more. Or the lack of tooling for certain tedious tasks, like notifying mobile users bothers me far more; all the more considering how much money WMF has. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:30, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
@Shushugah: THanks! I'll make sure to mention your concerns in my post as well. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:32, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
One thing I'd like to know is whether the users affected by WP:THEYCANTHEARYOU see the banner. (In other words, people who are logged out, and who access WP through the iOS or Android app, or mobile web.) Anybody who can see the banner, who feels like checking? --bonadeacontributionstalk 19:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
@Bonadea: I'll test it out when I get home. My guess is no because the banner is probably only on the web browser version of Wikipedia. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:00, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Prior to the banners being temporarily pulled, I went incognito on my mobile and had four (yes FOUR) blue appeal screens to wade through before seeing any normal content. I wouldn't mind if this were Oxfam appeal for a natural disaster emergency fund, but come one. Let's hope for better things next week. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
So far I am not seeing any new banners while logged out, however I will check Wikipedia logged out whenever I can to see if I can catch a glimpse of these "endowment" banners and see if they're any better. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:15, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
@Tigraan, Shushugah, and Blaze Wolf: Following up my observation above: the banners are now back. Seemingly with more agreeable wording, though on my mobile they still occupy three and a half screens-full before I get to seeing any content. NM Demo (talk) 17:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC) (alt-account for User:Nick Moyes)
@Nick Moyes: Nope, they're still bad. In fact, they now say this, "Hi. This is the 3rd time we’ve interrupted your reading recently, but 98% of our readers don't give. Many think they’ll give later, but then forget. This Monday we ask you to protect Wikipedia’s future with a donation to the Wikimedia Endowment. All we ask is $2.75, or what you can afford. We ask you, humbly: Please don't scroll away. If you are one of our rare donors, we warmly thank you." They're still begging you for money they don't need. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:59, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Folks, we are not going to convince the WMF of a moral necessity to dial back fundraising, let alone stop fundraising altogether. And there is no credible threat of the community leaving en masse (at least yet). (If you want to make a petition or something, that should probably go on WP:VPI.)
The only realistic argument where the Teahouse voice could be heard is that banners are ineffective - either directly because they are ugly, or indirectly because their ugliness pushes Teahouse hosts to say donating is not needed and/or journalists to write nasty articles. Unless we want to add journalist contacts to {{wikiDonation}} or something there is not much to be done except hold the fort until the end of the year. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
How about an infobox with WMF financials on the main page
Now the fundraising banners are back (although less so) I wonder whether we should have a temporary infobox on the main page, summarising the WMF's latest financial statements. The statements were released last week, showing $240 million in assets (excluding the $100+ million endowment), an increase of about $50 million over the previous year. What do you think? I started a talk page section here: Talk:Main_Page#How_about_a_temporary_box_with_WMF_financial_information_this_month
People who would see this would no longer think that Wikipedia is in desperate financial trouble! --AndreasJN466 19:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Enlisting an editor to help review article requests
Good day. This is Jeremy Juhasz from the public relations firm Cookerly on behalf of our client Deluxe Corporation. Would someone be so kind to provide guidance on locating an active editor who would be willing to review an edit request for the Deluxe Corporation article. Specifically, I proposed some additional changes to the article's History section here, and it's been several weeks since an editor's replied. I've tried reaching out on other related subject talk pages (i.e companies, business) and location-based talk pages (i.e. Minnesota where the company is headquartered). I've also tried to reach out to several editors directly who reviewed prior requests to the article. There has been no response despite these efforts. Now, I'm unsure where to turn. Thanks in advance for any help and/or advice! JeremyJuhasz (talk) 21:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
@JeremyJuhasz:, the request appears to have been answered by PK650 on December 13. Here are his edits implementing your request. Is there something else you're referring to? Alyo(chat·edits) 21:22, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
@JeremyJuhasz: If you need to post at the Teahouse in future, please could I ask you to ensure you ask your questions at the main forum page? i.e. WP:TEAHOUSE. What you've done by mistake today is post on the Talk Page which is purely about how those of us who run the Teahouse actually manage it. Questions are asked and answered elsewhere. Many thanks, NM Demo (talk) 21:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
@Alyo: Thank you for pointing it out. I never received an alert or notification that the request was taken care of. Many thanks. JeremyJuhasz (talk) 21:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
@NM Demo: My apologies. Absolutely will in the future. Thank you. JeremyJuhasz (talk) 21:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
@JeremyJuhasz: No worries. For future reference it's a good idea to add discussions you want to follow to your watchlist (see Help:Watchlist) as you'll be notified whenever anyone adds to the discussion. Have a good one! Alyo(chat·edits) 05:18, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Visual Editor with WP:TWA ?
As far as I've ever known, The Wikipedia Adventure can only be undertaken using WP:Source Editor. Today I was emailed by a Wikimedia UK staff member asking me to try it out by choosing Visual Editor as part of a training course. They're not back in the office until January, and I'm keen to find out now if I've missed something obvious all these years. Ideas anyone? (Pinging User:Ocaasi, who I believe developed it). NM Demo (talk) 22:35, 20 December 2021 (UTC) (alt-account for User:Nick Moyes)
@Nick Moyes: Actually, Ocaasi is no longer able to develop TWA as they just don't have the time from what they told me here. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 23:47, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze Wolf Thanks. I was aware of your interaction, and I’m not seeking development of TWA - just confirmation that it’s only do-able with Source Editor (per the notice at the start). Nick Moyes (talk) 07:27, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Any reason you couldn’t just try and see what happens, or as kids say "fuck around and find out"? I know, that internet meme has a different context, but that sentence is such a good description of the experimental method... TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 10:38, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: My guess would be it is as it appears to break even with the new Wikitext editor. I'm planning on fixing some things, however I need to actually find the code that makes it work to do so first. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
@Tigraan I did have a f**k around from my alt-account, and the automatic messaging doesn’t kick in with the next prompt if VE is used. A follow-up dummy edit in source editor seems to get it going again.
@Blaze Wolf if you’ve got the skills to work with the script, my first simple fix would be to thicken/darken the border of the prompt box and/or add a background tone so that it stands out more - especially letting the little pointer be seen more clearly. I’m willing to work on tweaking the wording, but don’t have any coding skills at all that I can offer.
As an aside: I’m also benefiting from appreciating what a brand new user sees on an account with only the default settings in place. I’m especially surprised that WP:VE is hidden from view unless they know how to fiddle with their Preferences. Cheers Nick Moyes (talk) 20:23, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze Wolf: I'd be interested to know if anyone (you?) has thought to go through the last couple of years' feedback and prioritise the key suggestions and bugs people have found and reported. I've just had a nightmare trying to complete Mission 7 (adding wikilinks) and simply couldn't see the article text because of the immovable instructions stuck right in the middle, and which is impossible to minimise or drag elsewhere. My thinking would be that collating these suggestions would then allow someone with the necessary skills to join in and help you/me/others here resolve them. Fixing the actual wording used is a simple task of editing the .js files, but fixing the rest is beyond me. What do you think? NM Demo (talk) 21:27, 22 December 2021 (UTC) (alt-account of User:Nick Moyes)
@Nick Moyes: Actually I have considered doing that once I find the code/script for TWA. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:24, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: I’m especially surprised that WP:VE is hidden from view unless they know how to fiddle with their Preferences. I believe VisualEditor is still in beta. ― Qwerfjkltalk 21:55, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Taking a quick look at my preferences, I can confirm that it is still considered to be in beta. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:51, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Just a reminder to be nice
Please refrain from making pedantic statements like "Wikipedia has articles, not pages" or other unhelpful comments that do nothing but embarrass newcomers. In general, just remember to be as nice as possible, even if you really, really don't want to. That's all! Pyrrho the Skeptic (talk) 23:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
@Pyrrho the Skeptic: Mentioning that Wikipedia has articles and not just pages isn't unhelpful, and kindly do not cast aspersions on editors who point out the difference. Pages can include articles, along with promotional pieces and company profiles. Articles limit the scope of what the pages on Wikipedia should be. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:55, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
I think this is a good reminder in general. I've seen comments from newcomers where their intentions are perfectly clear, but they may have used slightly incorrect vernacular, and that is what other experienced editors hone in on. It's fine to disambiguate Wikipedia vernacular for newcomers, but keep in mind that they're trying their best, and we should correct them as nicely as possible. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲talk 00:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Agreed; generally I don't find it to be a meaningful distinction except when people talk about their 'own page' in a myspace sense, which is more true for User space, but certainly not true for Article space. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:17, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
@Pyrrho the Skeptic and Tenryuu: Maybe emphasizing the difference between "encyclopedia articles" vs. "autobiographies"/"promotional pieces" would be a more beneficial distinction for those who don't understand what Wikipedia is for. GoingBatty (talk) 01:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: That would be helpful; I think it might also help to not embolden words for emphasis, as some people could construe that to be patronising. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:26, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
@Tenryuu: Apologies if my suggestion came off as patronizing, as that was not my intent. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:31, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the remainder. Very important to be kind to one another. PASTOR11 (talk) 15:12, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Phht, really. I understand that we got a whole honken lot of unnotable stuff, promotional stuff, and unusable stuff and all, every single day. Still... it is mainly for the admins and new page patrollers and draft-article approvers and so on to worry about that. Yes sure if a person wants to add material that doesn't fit, we need to tell her, but mainly we're supposed to be welcoming.
So now here for instance, Wikipedia talk:Teahouse#Translating a Wikipedia article just today we have an editor asking if they can translate articles, which YES PLEASE as people really facile in English and another language aren't a dime a dozen. And I mean the first reply was perfectly accurate and all, not complaining exactly, just the tone is not as enthusiastically welcoming as I'd . I mean the first thing the replyer says is to make sure the article is notable or else "your article will be deleted" sooner or later, the second is to slap a link to a RULE PAGE LINK which that page is long and complicated and doesn't directly deal with the guy's needs question right off, and the third is to tell the guy to attribute but doesn't say how. My take was YES PLEASE THIS IS GREAT. We want to be really encouraging here, this is a teahouse. The point is to draw new people into our dysfunctional little family here, not be the border patrol. Herostratus (talk) 23:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
@Herostratus: The link you provided above doesn't work any longer, but the discussion you're referring to can now be found at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Translating a Wikipedia article. I understand your point and think the reply you gave was quite good. I do think, on the other hand, that it is important to point out things like WP:N and WP:RS though and don't necessarily agree with you with respect to an article being on another language Wikipedia being a very strong indicator of Wikipedia notability. Ideally such a thing would always be the case, but not every non-English language Wikipedia is a vigorous in "enforcing" its notability and reliable source guidelines, which is why there are articles created here that do sometimes end up getting deleted per WP:OTHERLANGS and WP:MACHINE. So, it's important for those wanting to do this kind of things to understand that WP:TRANSLATEd articles are ultimately going to be assessed in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Perhaps there are more encouraging and less-boilerplate ways to try and express this point to editors asking these types of questions, but I do think it's important to get this point across. It's also important to assess whether they are capable of actually understanding the source language (including the sources cited) and whether they can do at least a self-assessment of its notability and the reliability of its sources. That obviously wasn't the case here, but I think it should be queried in cases when it's not as clear. Even though replies to questions like this might sometimes seem a tad bit robotic and thus not very encouraging, they are probably going to be less of a shock to the questioner than having their translated article ending up at AFD shortly after it has been created, especially if the creator had previously been told "no problem, go ahead" by a Teahouse host. There is, at least in my opinion, a little bit more to this (particuarly for a new editor without much experience creating articles) than just attributing the source article on the translated article's talk page, and I think this needs to be pointed out in some way. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:13, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
Is talkback recommended for IPs?
I'm an infrequent responder, but when I do respond and it's to an IP (especially a newbie), I try to leave them a {{talkback}} message with a section link (e.g., here), as anons don't get pings, and may not remember where they left their question. Imho, this should be part of the advice for responders, if it isn't already. Mathglot (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I've only recently started leaving tb messages after learning that pinging an IP doesn't work. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Archived in 2 or 3 days
Hello! I have a question about the Teahouse's archiving specifically. Is the Teahouse archived after 2 days or 3? The Teahouse Talkback Template says 2 days, however the Teahouse itself says 3 days (Munninbot is vague and says "a few days"). So which is it? 2 or 3? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
@Blaze Wolf: The User:MiszaBot/config template is set to archive after 48 hours of inactivity, and the bot runs daily, so in practice threads some threads will be archived a little after 2 full days while some will be archived a little before 3 full days. GoingBatty (talk) 15:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Alright. So are you saying it depends? And if so should we update the talkback template to say 3 days to match the Teahouse or should we make both of them vague like Munninbot? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
In the long-term it's probably better to make it less definite, as there have been times the archiving time has changed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Alright sounds good. Mind if I make those changes? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
@Blaze Wolf: Note that {{Teahouse talkback}} says "old questions are archived after 2 days of inactivity", while the Teahouse says "Completed questions are archived within 3 days." They're both correct, but they're looking at either end of the range. I won't object if someone changes the wording on the Teahouse to state "Old questions are archived after 2 days of inactivity." GoingBatty (talk) 16:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Maybe it should be changed to say "2-3 days"? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
There is no harm in a little ambiguity - the purpose of saying two (or three) days is to help users understand why the heck their post has disappeared. Knowing it gets archived sooner should alleviate any frustration or confusion. I'd be happy with the lower end of the scale, but keeping it to "2-3 days" covers all eventualities, and changes to the archiving settings. And if it's still there a week later, because there have been ongoing edits to the thread, that's a benefit, eh? Nick Moyes (talk) 19:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
I think I"ll go with "2-3 days" then since there is the chance of variation from what I'm being told. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
I have changed the main Teahouse header to reflect this. Qwerfjkl has added an edit request to the talkback page to make this change. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
...so I wonder if this is just an oversight? or, if both are needed, shouldn't they both be coded pretty much the same? and should they be mentioned on each other's documentation in the See also sections? and so on, and so on. Any help would be greatly appreciated! P.I. Ellsworth - ed.put'r there 00:51, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
They're the same template technically. It's just that {{Teahouse talkback}} is sort of a Semi-redirect to the actual template. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 01:05, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
To editor Blaze Wolf: yes, I see it now. It's a little strange, but then, who am I to judge? If it were me, I'd encode the template with the subpage's code and turn the subpage into a page that gives guidance, as one would expect a project (WP) page to do. But again, that's just me. P.I. Ellsworth - ed.put'r there 01:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
@Paine Ellsworth: There was actually a discussion sort of related to that at the top of the Template's talk page ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 01:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
A few questions about the "Meet your hosts" page
I've taken a close look at the Meet your hosts page at the teahouse and noticed a number of things that I am confused about and or think could have an argument made to be changed.
Badges
I saw the badges that are listed in every host's introductory sections, and noticed the "Badges" section, supposedly showing the badges that they earned. I didn't know what badges were, so I clicked on the one badge that it appeared everyone else had. I was confused on why it existed, so I went to the badges page to see the other badges you could get. I get to the page to see that it was "retained for historical reference." I see that no one, past people who have been in the teahouse for a long time, have any badges besides the first one that everyone else has. I would assume that everyone who becomes a host just adds it because they see everyone has it and don't realize what it even is. If no one is actually trying to get badges, the badges say that they're historical on their page, and no one actually does anything with them anymore, why are they still displayed? You could keep them there, for some historical reference, or they could be removed all-together off of the page.
"Active" hosts
Above the list of hosts, it claims that the list below is a "List of active Hosts". Looking through a few of them, you can find people who haven't edited the teahouse, let alone wikipedia at all, for multiple years. Should it not be common practice to go down the list every once and a while and remove some inactive hosts? I know that wikiprojects do this, adding them to a list of inactive members. Maybe the teahouse could do something similar.
Featured Editors
This is less of a critique, and more of a question. Whenever you're on a page in the teahouse, the header shows the profile and name of a "featured editor" randomly selected from Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host/Featured. After reading the page, I'm not sure I can see why the people on the page are featured. The page states that it is for editors who are the most active on the teahouse page, but I'm not sure that's how it's been used for a while. The last few edits have just been adding themselves to the list, and I don't know where it was decided that they should do that. The page gets edited about once a year and I'm thinking that it could be marked as historical, or should be revived and cleaned up.
These are just my thoughts and opinions, and I'm just trying to make the teahouse a better place. If you think I've made any mistakes in what I've said, please let me know. Thanks, ― Levi_OPTalk 18:36, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Levi_OP: badges, and the status of "host", are pretty much meaningless. I had never even heard of "featured editors". I have no idea whether I am, or ever have been, any of those things, and I don't see it as mattering. I edit with the aim of improving Wikipedia, and I answer questions at the Teahouse with the aim of helping others to improve it. Maproom (talk) 22:29, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Levi_OP. You make a number of interesting points - thank you. Expanding on User:Maproom's reply to you, I'll try to address them in turn and from my perspective as someone who has tried to help out here and tidy things a bit over the last three or four years.
Badges: I've long felt these were redundant, and I suspect most others here do, too. One of them is added automatically via a template to every new user signing up as a host via the template. I've simply not found the time to address that, though agree with you in it being worthwhile marking them as historic and cleaning them out of the Host_landing page, as they only serve to confuse anyone who stares too deeply into that particular backwater of the Teahouse.
Active Hosts: Since mid-2019 I've kept an eye (via watchlist) on the list of people who have self-signed up as Hosts because it does, on very rare occasions, get misused. You're no doubt aware that anyone can add themselves if they meet the basic 'host expectations', and it's only a tiny number of inexperienced people who do for WP:HATCOLLECTING reasons, no doubt. It's also only rarely that we'd remove someone unless they clearly have absolutely no experience in editing whatsoever, as it's often the first way that a fairly new user can feel they're starting to playing a more involved role in the Wikipedia Project (at least, that's my view of it). If I can find the time, I try to leave each new sign-up a welcome message which you'll have noticed also says we might remove them if they don't participate. To that end I also maintain an Excel spreadsheet of every name on the Host list, when they joined up, when they last edited here, and their total TH contributions. Then, every 6-9 months or so I go through, adding new host sign-ups, and checking the list for users who have added their names, but haven't actually contributed since that time, and remove those newer names, plus anyone who has gone and got themselves blocked for any reason. I recognise it may look as if there are a number of users still on the list who have not been active here recently, but many are editors selected to be retained because they were heavily involved in the founding of the Teahouse, or who have made significant and prolonged contributions in the past, even if they're not very active at the Teahouse right now. I recognise it may be timely to review those names again, and ask them if they wish to remain there, and to do a further trim of names who've never edited since signing up. I'll endeavour to get around to in the coming months if I can. But, as Maproom says, our key focus is on helping people, rather than putting in a lot of work that few people are likely to notice - even if you quite rightly have.
Featured Hosts The rationale for selecting the changing usernames and images for this feature in the Teahouse Header is explained on its page, but I recognise the names have not been reviewed for a couple of years, so this is probably well worth doing again - especially as one of our long-standing and formerly very active hosts here (DESiegel) has not been active on Wikipedia for the last 12 months. I should point out that I did mark the 'Featured Guest' item as 'historical' quite some while back. We also had a discussion fairly recently about whether or not to remove the randomly changing images and names from the Teahouse header, but agreed to keep it as it helped make the Teahouse forum a bit more personal and different from all the others here- something that has been at the heart of the Teahouse philosophy since its creation. It's important to appreciate that nothing in the TH Header actually calls these 30 selected usernames 'Featured'. So, bearing in mind it isn't labelled as such, nor identify any user as actually being "Featured" for some spurious reason, I don't feel it needs to be removed or marked as historic - though it could benefit from being updated. Only two active editors have added their own names in two years, though one asked to be removed shortly afterwards, if I remember correctly.
If you look back through the archives here, you'll see we've had quite a few discussions over the last couple of years about the best ways to keep things clear and up-to-date, and which were the priority issues to address. There's still more that could be done, and I hope I've answered your questions as fully as I can. Thanks for raising them. NM Demo (talk) 23:17, 23 December 2021 (UTC) (alt-account of User:Nick Moyes)
@NM Demo: So what I'm hearing is I can add myself as a featured host? ––FormalDudetalk 10:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
@FormalDude: Well, to avoid a free-for-all, I'd prefer that people don't just attempt to add themselves on odd occasions, because it'll make more work trying to sort things out all the time if it starts to attract 'hat collectors'. There are certainly hosts listed here who appear to have been more active at the Teahouse than yourself recently, but also many who have been less so. I'll try and find a few hours next year to sit down and go through it all, and refresh some faces that people see, as well as ensuring a good mix of genders, ethnicities and so forth. Cheers, NM Demo (talk) 21:14, 29 December 2021 (UTC) (this is an alt-account of Nick Moyes)
Thanks! Appreciate your work here. ––FormalDudetalk 02:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
@NM Demo: I was able to remove the badges from the host page. I also marked Wikipedia:Teahouse/Badge/Host as historical. Hopefully this helps save you some work. If not feel free to revert me. ––FormalDudetalk 02:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
@GoingBatty Hmmm. Not sure. Whilst I've just removed an 'adopter' template from someone, I feel much less bothered about someone putting or leaving a host template on their userpage when they're no longer listed here. If it bothered you, rather than edit their userpage directly, a message on their TP might be more pleasant.
However, I shalln't be doing it myself - the task of poring over Excel and Xtools and determining if which are stale entries (or which might be next time around) has already taken many hours, and I'm not 1/2 way through. However, I've been pinging most editors to alert them to removal, so I will add a request from hereon in to remove the template if they don't plan on returning to help out once more. Struck this as I've just tried it and it's too much extra work to check every one as I go, as not everyone uses them. The lists can be matched up by someone once the job's done, and they can leave a polite message for the user if they wish to. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
FormalDude, you are a featured host in my book no matter what. I appreciate your insightful responses and willingness to help. --ARoseWolf 16:00, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! ––FormalDudetalk 16:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
can a navbox be added to page
Hi. I notice there are no navboxes on the main page for Teahouse. is there any way to add one? Or is that not technically possible, due to its role as a page for active discussions? Just wanted to clarify. thanks. ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 20:33, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
@Sm8900 Yes, there is a way to add one, assuming there is an agreed need for it. I'm not sure what you think that would be, but you certainly would need to invest some effort in fixing it up first! It's not been used for many years because most elements in it are now redundant, and it had no practical use. See Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host navigation. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:55, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
@Sm8900: If I can see how it could be used then I do support bringing it back after fixing it. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
hi all. thanks for your replies. I will give that some thought. cheers!! ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 14:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
No problem! If a benefit to adding it is seen then I wouldn't mind assisting you in fixing it. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:00, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
I should also quite like to be involved, too, once you've cleaned out the worst of the dead wood there, and identified sensible grounds to deploy it again. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:52, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Inexperienced editors answering questions
This has probably been discussed many times before, and I don't want to sound like some grumpy old dude who's just looking for things to complain about. I've noticed that once again there seem to be some relatively new and inexperienced editors creeping in and answering questions lately which might not be the best thing. These answers are well-meaning and made in good faith, but they seem to be redundant or superficial at best. I've got no problem with similar answers being given by different editors (especially when it's likely due to an edit conflict), but essentially repeating answers added hours earlier or trying to add templates as examples in Teahouse answers might not be as helpful as they're intended to be. I completely get it when some new editor asks a question, gets a friendly response that's helpful and then wants to return the favor by helping someone else. That's a good thing, in principle, and I'm not really looking to discourage it. However, when I see an editor who forgot their password after a few days and has asked questions like this or this (which I'm totally sure were asked in good faith) responding to Teahouse questions, I start to wonder whether that's really such a good thing.
This is just a thought, but I'm wondering if maybe there's a way to create a friendly sort of WP:UW template which thanks someone (IPs included) for trying to help out at the Teahouse, but politely asks them to refrain from doing so until they've been come more experienced or familiar with editing and relevant policies and guidelines. I'm not suggesting we use this template for editors as a form of punishment (e.g. for incorrect or incomplete answers), but only for those new or newish editors who might be really enthusiastic about helping others, but might not be knowlegeable enough to properly do so just quite yet. This template would not be for one-timers, but only for those editors who seem to have taken up residency (so to speak) at the Teahouse (i.e. answering multiple questions in a given period of time). Maybe these editors could be offered the chance to participate in sort of a "Teahouse host training" program (like they have for Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Clerk training) where more experienced hosts can help mentor or train them at becoming better at answering questions. The template I mentioned above could also be part invitation with links to a signup page (like WP:SPI/CN#Trainee/clerking interest and discussion) where they can request further guidance on how to become a host if that's what they really want to do. It might also be a way for more experienced hosts to better monitor the progress of these editors as they answer Teahouse questions. Maybe by adding a little more structure to the process of becoming a host, we can improve the overall quality of hosts? -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC); [Note: Post edited by Marchjuly to change "experienced" to "inexperienced" in second sentence as pointed out below. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)]
Marchjuly, in my opinion, the Teahouse ought to be a place where the use of templates and other types of canned responses is kept to a minimum. You are using one specific editor as an example and have taken the time to analyze the problems with their participation in answering questions at the Teahouse. In such cases, my suggestion is to take that personalized feedback to the editor's talk page. I have done that myself in several cases and I am aware that other experienced Teahouse hosts have as well. Personalized interactions are usually more effective than templates, in my experience. Obviously, when editors and administrators are warning or blocking spammers or vandals, templates are necessary for efficiency. But for good faith newbies trying too hard to gain a good reputation, I believe in taking a few minutes to craft a tailored response. Cullen328 (talk) 05:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree with you about personalized messages being better than templates and have followed that approach in the past. FWIW, I really wasn't trying to single any one particular editor out although that's unfortunately what I ended up doing. Those were just the edits I noticed at that particular time, but I've noticed other ones recently as well. Anyway, I guess the first part of my post was what ended up being unintentionally emphasized, but it's the second part about the possiblilty of creating a "training program" for those wanting to be regular contributors at the Teahouse. I'm not sure that something as formal as WP:RFR is necessary or even workable, but perhaps something like WP:MENTOR for prospective Teahouse hosts might be helpful for new editors who want to be regulars. Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host lounge/Expectations and Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host_start are nice, but perhaps there's a more formal way for experienced hosts to mentor prospective hosts. Maybe we can create a list of Teahouse hosts interested in mentoring prospective hosts, and then prospective hosts can then pick people from this list. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
A training program for Teahouse Hosts is an interesting idea, but one I'm not sure would work. The Teahouse is, by its very nature, a training forum for new editors -some who have been around more than others and may think they can help out, and give it a go. As you say, we do have our Teahouse guidelines for them to sign up to, and not all competent new editors do sign up, yet still help out. Providing their activities here are not overly disruptive - and providing we are prepared to steer them towards more friendly ways of engaging if they're not coming across in a friendly or welcoming manner - then I'm fairly happy to see newer editors engage with others and learn. Yes, it can be a bit tiresome when the rare editor makes themselves overly present for a time and doesn't really help the genuine newcomers. That's when a quiet word on their talk page, or an intervention beneath their latest post might help them.
Although I came into the Teahouse at Cullen's invitation, and already fairly experienced, others have come here whilst still learning the basics - perhaps through seeing a Teahouse welcome invitation. We always say anyone is welcome to answer a question here, though not sign themselves up as a Host unless they've achieved a minimum of edits (still an area worth discussing/agreeing on). So I tend to tolerate a few sharper responses if these new, possibly younger-aged editors, are likely to be encouraged to engage and to stick around and contribute both now and in future years, and become the hosts of tomorrow. I think that a little extra effort on our part, or perhaps the odd gentle public reminder to someone to interact more helpfully, is a small price to pay for helping new editors feel a real part of this Project.
@Marchjuly Two things as an aside for you: a) I think you meant 'inexperienced' in your 2nd sentence, and b) your self-description as 'dude' threw me. Probably because of your gentle, careful and considered responses you always give people here, I had somehow (and based on no other evidence) come to assume you were female. So I'm now adjusting my perception of who I imagine when I see your username. Hope you won't feel weirded out by my saying that -Just thought I throw that in for a bit of fun. I often think there's an essay there about how we (or maybe it's just me?) draw conclusions about people based on usernames, their spellings, and what we see in their writing here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:36, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, that was an error on my part. My mind was telling my hands to type "inexperienced", but they obviously weren't listening. Thank you for catching that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: I suppose the header should read Inexperienced editors askinganswering questions?
Yes that was quite a silly mistake on my part. Thanks for catching it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
Regarding what to do when a well-meaning but out-of-their-depth newbie answers questions, I agree with Cullen328 - talk to them on the talk page with a personalized message. We are not (yet) so overrun by that problem that it needs a Twinkle shortcut, and we have not yet met one instance when an editor did not desist after being warned.
Regarding the training program and associated questions... I already feel a bit uncomfortable about the "host" status, currently defined by who has a rotating picture in the header (and I said so back when the header was (re)created). In some aspects of Wikipedia life, to become X you have to follow a certain process, say for instance X = admin or template editor. In other aspects, you become X by doing stuff that Xs do, such as SPI clerking (yes there is the training, but AFAIK it is not mandatory; once you start clerking you are a clerk as long as you don’t do stupid stuff and if you do you get escalating warnings until you stop). Teahouse hosting is a weird area where there is no gating process, yet there still is some official list of qualified people, and it is not clear whether you can write yourself into the list or if you will get your edit reverted with a terse edit summary.
I fell unsure about a training for being a Teahouse host. SPI is an area where knowledge of the appropriate policies / procedures is 80% of the job. Teahouse hosting is 80% about temperament - always be gentle (even in the face of apparently dumb or malicious questions) and refrain from answering if you are not sure of the answer. That is not something easy to train.
We could gate the process a bit. I feel WP:ORCP is a better template though. Here would be my proposal - possibly I should write it up as an essay Wikipedia:So you want to be a Teahouse host if you people think it looks decent.
The only requirement to get on the Teahouse host lists is to go through a "test" (and thereafter be somewhat active to stay on the list)
The "test" consists in five or ten actual questions. (We would take those from the archive, and mix a bit of different stuff - one about image copyright, one about a content dispute question where you need to look up the user’s contributions, etc.)
You answer them as if they were real (so, you can skip some)
You post your answers in draft space / on the Teahouse talk page / somewhere (but not to the persons that actually asked them). Current Teahouse hosts will give you feedback about your answers that you are supposed to acknowledge.
Once you acknowledge the feedback, you pass the test. That is the crucial part. Even if all your answers were widely incorrect, if you still want to be a host, we trust that you will correct yourself.
The point of the "test" is that we do not fail the candidate (whoever "we" is). Most likely, unqualified candidates will realize themselves that answering Teahouse questions is boring or too hard (if they decide to skip four out of five), or that they know less than they think they know (if the feedback shows many incorrect answers). It is not likely that they would give incorrect answers, acknowledge the feedback correcting them, and still give the same kind of incorrect answers to newbies next; and if someone does that, they will be much easier to drag to ANI to get a ban from the Teahouse. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 17:07, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
I actually really like that idea. I also think that instead of having rotating images of who is a Teahouse host, it's just a link to the list of who is a host. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree with most of this except for a partial block from the Teahouse: what if the (problem) user has a question to ask? I'd suggest giving them personalised messages as suggested, and giving them a temporary block on the grounds of WP:CIR if the behaviour persists. I think that would persuade such users to think clearly about the question being asked, and even consult archives for past answers that can be worked off of. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:59, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
I meant a ban from answering questions on the Teahouse as a (very specific) topic ban; it would not be enforced with a block. A page block would indeed prevent them from asking questions and is not desirable - such a hypothetical user would precisely benefit from asking questions. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 14:06, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree with what Tenryuu said. In theory they could just ask their questions at the Help Desk, however giving a temp CIR block is probably better. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 23:47, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
A few sample questions to answer isn't a bad idea, could even call it a self-assesment, so there's not a need for someone to formally review and approve. Egregious answers would lead to an experienced editor discussing on their talk page.
Personally, I've never formally applied as a host but as AfC process directs people to teahouse, it is a regular stop for me to see if an editor has left concerns here rather than AfC Help, my talk page or the article. And if I can help someone, I do. Slywriter (talk) 23:52, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
@Slywriter It's perhaps a failure of our messaging to those new users who submit drafts that they often come first to the Teahouse. It is meant to direct them to AfC Help for declined drafts, and to the Teahouse for anything else. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
May I correct an important misconception made above by more than one user? It was stated that host status is currently defined by who has a rotating picture in the headerThis is absolutely not correct. Host are simply defined by those editors who have chosen to add their own names to the Host list via the big 'Become a Host' button on the Teahouse header, and nothing else. Yes, they've agreed to meet our Host Expectations, but it is not a WP:PERM; it's a simple self-selecting process. Quite a few enthusiastic new editors do add their names but never contribute here in any meaningful way. It's rare that we would remove a name immediately from the list, and much rarer still to block anyone from contributing, though it has happened on odd occasions when clear WP:CIR is lacking (One IP was specifically blocked about 4 years ago for giving bad answers all the time, if I recollect correctly). But it's no big issue. Their names are removed in due course - usually after 6 months or so of no contributions having been made here. The rotating header images are intended simply to show around 30 of the most currently active host names that any user might reasonably encounter, and thus to present a different and more personable impression of the Teahouse forum (a 'friendly face' if you will), and one that they don't experience outside of this venue. (Admittedly, these are a little out of date right now, and I have been working on updating them in recent weeks)
I really would not want to add extra hurdles to contributing at the Teahouse, other than perhaps formally agreeing to a minimum number of mainspace edits anyone ought to have they may need. And that would simply be to stop the tiny handful of enthusiastic new editors who want to sign themselves up but have only spent their time making hundreds of minor edits to their or other people's user pages. I don't see sufficient of a problem to require any extra solution or change at this time, and certainly not by having to asses user's answers to a test before letting them add their names as a host. It was rightfully suggested that 80% of a good host's skills lie in their ability to engage with other users. A self-test might be fine (see my draft idea for a self-test at ORFA here), but not one requiring existing host assessment or approval, which then becomes a sort of proxy-Permission. I think keeping things informal, and offering a gentle steer to enthusiastic new helpers here is the best way. In extremis, we can always discuss and reach consensus to remove a host or block them from contributing should things ever get out of hand. Nick Moyes (talk) 02:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes:Host[s] are simply defined by those editors who have chosen to add their own names to the Host list via the big 'Become a Host' button on the Teahouse header [and not by the rotating pictures] Sorry, I did not explain clearly what I meant. What you describe is indeed how the Official Teahouse List is created. What I describe is how new editors perceive it. (Now, there might be a reasonable argument that finding the host list is the test to become a host.) TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 14:06, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Speaking as a new member who had been enjoying answering help questions at the Teahouse, I'd like to say not all new Editors provide inaccurate answers. I've been very careful to answer only those questions where I know the answer or at least in one case a viable suggestion I've seen used throughout Wikipedia (like here & here). While we may be new to Wikipedia, that does not mean we are without skills & knowledge brought from our other life experiences. It should also be noted that many experienced Editors give inaccurate or incorrect answers, in good faith but still incorrect. Just scan through the Teahoouse page to find a few examples. So it seems unfair to blanket lump new Editors into a problematic pile based purely on time being a member. I say "had been enjoying" helping people here as I've now stopped, due to being told that "it would be better for you to be asking questions rather than answering them" on my talk page. I assume inspired by this conversation on the Teahouse Talk page. I'd totally have understood such a comment if I'd given incorrect answers & was biting off more than I could chew but considering the small selection of answers I'd given to questions were correct, this seems rather unjustified & definitely leaves a sour taste in one's mouth. Perhaps it wasn't intended to be as cutting as it seems but I feel I need to express how it made me feel. If answering questions at the Teahouse is an exclusive club, then you definitely need to specify "hosts" only. Handing out blanket warnings, even if they aren't the horrendously impersonal Templates so beloved by some at Wikipedia, to people answering questions even though they've been giving correct answers is not a good solution in my opinion. Just wanted to leave the thoughts of someone new on the receiving end of this topic. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 12:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@LooksGreatInATurtleNeck Thank you for that insight, and I'm sorry if you were given the impression that your input was not welcome at the Teahouse - it most certainly is. I think @Blaze Wolf actually knows that we do welcome new users contributing to help others but, perhaps because they had themselves made one or two easy mistakes when they started, I think they were trying to offer an insight to you to assist you - not to stop you. It seems that didn't quite go as intended, as their follow-up response indicated they also appreciated.
We certainly don't expect only those who feel they have enough experience to sign themselves up as 'hosts' to assist here. Anyone can help out, though our 'host expectations' do show that we expect those who add their names to our host list do have a certain minimum level of editing experience and (more importantly) a willingness to engage in a friendly, helpful manner.
As I hope you've seen from some of my replies in both this and past threads on this page, I feel the Teahouse is the perfect platform for new users to both learn and to bring and share their experiences with others. In my mind, I imagine that the Teahouse helps new editors ready themselves for further involvement in other parts of the project where tolerance is often in even less supply, and experience is assumed. Anything that puts them off from that means we're not doing our job here as effectively as we could.
TBH: I'm still learning after 10 years and 50,000+ edits here, so experience really is a relative thing. The one thing I am 100% lacking in is the new user experience - so that is something that you and others can most usefully bring, especially if you can share it with other more confused new users. If I happen to tell a new user that X happens then they do Y, and you can come back to say that in your experience (also as a new user), that Z happens, then I would find that just as helpful to know as the other person.
The Teahouse really can be a great learning experience, and thanks for bringing your perspective to this talk page. Do please stick around and help when you're able. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:19, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello Nick Moyes! Thanks for your thoughtful, thorough & kind reply. I did not mean to throw Blaze Wolf under the bus, I did glean from their follow up response that they weren't intending to sound as harsh as they came across in the first. It's easy for new members at Wikipedia to get "stung" as a lot of Editors seem to treat working here as a "full contact sport" rather than a collaborative librarial endeavor. :) After this happens a few times there's a tendency to see hostility where perhaps it is not intended. I fear a lot of new Editors are lost in the first initial attempts to work here. Helping at the Teahouse is not only rewarding in just helping someone else but also frequently educational to the person answering, especially for new users. For instance, when I helped the member with the {{clear left}} Template, I in turn learned about the handy <nowiki> tags that can be used to prevent code from executing in text (like a code quote block on "normal" forums). Useful when wanting to mention such code but not wanting it to function in the reply. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: Yes that is true. I did not intend to stop them from answering questions. I was simply meaning to advise them to be careful, however due to a poor choice of wording it appears I came off as asking them to stop. I was simply trying to tell them to be careful when answering questions since I didn't want the same thing that happened to me a few months (feels a lot longer) back where I was answering questions even if I wasn't completely sure on the answer, so I ended up giving many wrong answers. @LooksGreatInATurtleNeck: When I saw your reply I felt bad because I had never meant for you to stop answering questions and I always try to be welcoming and helpful to new users and I try not to scare them off, however in this case I failed to do so and I am truly sorry for doing so and I hope to help you out in the future. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Hello Blaze Wolf! Thank you for clarifying. See my above response about already having been "stung" a few times by others here which I think may have added to me being hurt by your initial Talk page comment. Indeed one of the reasons I'd turned to responding at the Teahouse was that I wanted to help others & contribute while avoiding anything contentious. :) I certainly appreciate you pointing out the valid dangers of over reaching too soon in replying to questions at the Teahouse. My previous interactions here had already made me aware not to bite off more than I could chew, thus I was extra careful to only answer questions I was certain of. Again, thanks for taking the time to reply here, it certainly has made feel better about the interaction. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@LooksGreatInATurtleNeck: No problem! Honestly, one of my biggest fears on Wikipedia is phrasing something poorly and scaring a new user away from Wikipedia, so I always try and avoid doing so and if it appears I have done so I try and correct it as soon as I can. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:14, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
I very much agree with LooksGreatInATurtleNeck that no obstacle should be put in the way of those who want to contribute answers at the Teahouse. Anyone can give an imperfect answer but the place is sufficiently well-attended that better answers will soon appear. I started contributing here (and at the Help Desk and Reference Desk of Science) many months ago because I found it a great way to learn about Wikipedia. I never added my name to the list of hosts because I didn't want to feel obliged to reply. I only found out much later that the host name shown is chosen by a bot and may be someone who isn't in fact active that day. I'd rather that the bot simply checked out who had given answers most frequently over the past (say) week and rotated their names. The bot could count edits that didn't start a new section = question but have added something. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:03, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks to everyone for those replies, above. Just to correct another very minor misconception that Mike has alluded to: long ago there was indeed a bot which was able to select the most active hosts every week and display their names in the header. Unfortunately, its creator, J T Morgan (who was instrumental in setting up the Teahouse in c 2012) informed me that their bot had to be deactivated because it was causing certain issues elsewhere, and that the root cause could not be found. So, that task is now done manually (currently by me) at intervals, based upon an intentionally slanted interpretation (to positively highlight any minority user groups I can recognise), based upon the most active editors over the last 50,000 edits at the Teahouse. However some of the most active respondents here have not signed themselves up on the host list, nor is there any obligation on them so to do. Thus, as at 2nd January (according to my Excel spreadsheet) @Hoary, @Fuhghettaboutit, @Blaze Wolf and @Michael D. Turnbull have been the 4th, 5th, 9th and 13th most active editors here, but are not self-signed up to the host list, so wouldn't be added to the random header pic until they do. And just for interest, @David notMD has been the most active recently with 2,829 edits here, and in 30th position, @Kaleeb18, with 214 edits. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Apologies, Nick, for calling you a bot! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Interesting that I'm the 9th most active editor on the Teahouse. If I were to sign up to to the host list, I wouldn't really want my name to be added the header pic until I can get the artist who made my previous Discord pfp (not my current one which I simply just found on the internet and don't know who the actual artist is) to release the pic into the public domain (or possibly the same license that all text on Wikipedia is licensed under if that would be allowed) so I can have a pic that represents me instead of the default. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:43, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Interestingly the image currently at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Hosts is Hoary, however they aren't listed as a host. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:47, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes that’s cool info. I have no idea what this conversation is about, but I did not expect to be that high lol. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 16:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@Blaze Wolf After a bit of investigation, I see that another user (who was previously very active here), stepped away and unilaterally added Hoary's name without me spotting it. So, they appear as a host on the TH Header, but don't appear on the actual Host list because they were never added there! @Hoary is it stay, or is it go? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:55, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Well, this is just my little comment. I’ve read up on this somewhat lengthy conversation and thought that I should have a say as I became a TH host recently. I like Tigraan’s ideas of passing a test first. I don’t think we should have a template “warning” new editors answering a question because that could come off bad similar to the situation with Blaze Wolf and Looksgreatinaturtleneck. We should just keep it as personalized talk page messages. I think the main thing in answering a question at the TH is coming across nice, because I remember when I asked one of my first questions at the TH I almost stopped editing Wikipedia entirely, very glad I didn’t, because I felt like everyone was mad at me. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 18:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Just my two cents worth, I don't answer very often unless I really know the answer and most of the time I end up in an edit conflict with another host or editor responding anyway so I end up deleting my response. I don't care if anyone knows I am even here. That's not the point and though I love wearing hats I have no use for digital ones. It was suggested for me to become a host here so I did. Editor retention is an issue on Wikipedia and a large number of potential editors leave because they feel Wikipedia editors talk about community and talk about civility but their actions speak louder. I came to the Teahouse to not only learn from others but to also offer policy based answers to questions whether asked by your common garden variety troll or an experienced editor. I have resolved to assume good faith to the inth degree and remain civil at all times even through the harshest of provocations. I believe that is how we will retain editors and how we will build the community as the framework for improving the encyclopedia. I am very glad Kaleeb stuck around after being bitten hard, it wouldn't be the same without you, but how many Kaleeb's don't (rhetorical)? The proposed tests will show who has the knowledge to be a host, which is very important, but being patient and civil in tone and words comes from somewhere other than knowledge. I think we have amazing hosts here that deserve a lot of credit and many more that are not hosts but should be. --ARoseWolf 20:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@ARoseWolf: you put that very well. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 20:33, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@ARoseWolf: - You have my vote for President, with that platform. In my mind, the TeaHouse in particular needs to be a welcoming, non-threatening place where a brand new user can ask their embarrassingly basic question without feeling judged or getting deluged with policy links. I still recall how valuable that attitude was for me, in my early days. And I reckon the same approach can extend to the question of who can answer: if somebody makes a couple of errors then a polite, constructive word on their Talk page will be most effective. Best if it is personal, rather than a template - the situation isn't so common that the workload would be excessive.--Gronk Oz (talk) 12:11, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
@Gronk Oz, we think a lot alike in this regard. --ARoseWolf 14:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Nick Moyes, since you ask: I never would have added my name to the list of hosts, and was surprised when somebody else added it. I'm neither happy nor greatly upset that it's there. I try to help people and hope that my responses are, in general, constructive and helpful. But I think I'm a lot more testy than hosts are expected to be. ARoseWolf resolves to "remain civil at all times even through the harshest of provocations"; simply, I don't. I resolve to think twice before abandoning civility, but that's about as far as it goes. -- Hoary (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
@Hoary, I appreciate you and your viewpoints. We may disagree on this point but that's okay. I war with myself over my own principles and its a daily choice for me to live by them. Ultimately I do but I don't share your experiences nor do I see everything exactly through your eyes. I celebrate our differences and our commonalities. It makes us unique. --ARoseWolf 14:04, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Another Announcement: Reply Tool roll-out imminent
In case anyone's not yet tried the really useful Reply Tool, this announcement at WP:VPT indicates it will be rolled out to all logged-in and logged-out users from 7th February. It will not be available to mobile users, and is an opt-out features; everyone will see it, but they can choose to disable it.
(Addendum: Please note that my post about the new Homepage Tab (immediately above this one) has been updated. It is currently offered by default to 1 in 4 new user accounts - not all users, as I initially stated. But it seems set for a higher roll-out soon.) Nick Moyes (talk) 21:55, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
I thought this had already rolled out lol. I've been using it since I discovered it because of how useful it is. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 22:28, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
Yes, I got caught out the other week when I forgot, and told someone at the Teahouse to "just click the 'Reply' button and you don't have to type your signature." Someone jumped on me and said "What 'Reply' button?" Oops! I'm keeping a running list of all the settings I notice that differ from what the new user sees over at one of my training accounts (User:NM Demo) if you're interested. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: Might check that out later. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 01:53, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
That's so helpful, Nick Moyes. With your permission I will point to this account experienced editors who want to see a quick list of how to enable these functions so they can see them. Thanks! --ARoseWolf 14:26, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Ooh that's actually a really nice looking userbox! I would suggest changing "Member" to host though. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 00:30, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Well done, Copperwidth. I remember making my first one and was quite chuffed, too. I should perhaps point out that we don't actually have 'members' here - just users, visitors, helpers, editors and, of course, hosts - so perhaps it would have been better to have kept it in your sandbox and deploying it from there, rather than putting it into Template space where others may edit it. I worry a bit that it might mislead people if they see it and try to use it. What do you think? Nick Moyes (talk) 00:31, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Copperwidth: Nice! How about a parameter that would allow people to choose whether they want to say "helper at" or "host at" the Teahouse? GoingBatty (talk) 00:43, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Copperwidth, nice job at making the userbox. It's interesting that we didn't have that userbox until now, and that is greatly appreciated! Severestorm28 00:50, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you nick for the cake and tea!
Copperwidth (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:03, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Copperwidth: You're very welcome, but don't get too hung about playing around behind the scenes. You've only seem to have made 17 mainspace edits out of 164 since you started. It's important to get the balance right, though you seem to be getting the hang of things OK. BTW: I've added yours to our list of available templates (see above). I reckon the green could be toned down a bit if you wanted to, or made to match the Teahouse more. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:23, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
We all go through a userbox phase at least once. Panini!🥪 01:35, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Levi OP: That's interesting, but makes sense that I haven't heard of that since usually people make their userboxes in a user subpage. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 01:57, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and moved it since no one has objected. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:36, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Copperwidth: I've had an idea that I'd like to put to you. We don't nowadays have a single userbox that non-hosts can deploy. All the ones we do have are for experienced editors who have already signed themselves up as a Host. So how about making yours into one for those who are not? Something along the lines of "This user enjoys helping out at the Teahouse" or, better still: "This user likes visiting the Teahouse" - which covers both users who ask questions and newish helpers. What do you think? Nick Moyes (talk) 09:05, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Just a note - I was gonna move the template and change the name as I stated above, but will hold off until what the userbox actually says is solidified. I agree with everything that Nick said and think that doing something like "This user is a frequent Teahouse visitor" would be good. ― Levi_OPTalk 14:37, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
If it needs to be moved later on that shouldn't cause too many issues. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 14:42, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Copperwidth: I love the userbox, well done. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 20:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
I usually also just say that if they want a custom signature to ask you since you made mine and a few others. So you're basically just my go to guy for when people ask how to make a signature custom. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:19, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Same here. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 14:43, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Reply Tool: rollout slightly delayed
The rollout of the Reply Tool as an 'opt-out- feature to every single desktop user on English Wikipedia was initially intended for 7th February 2022. However, after discussions at WP:VPP, its rollout has been held back for a short while so that as many users as possible can be made aware of this feature, and for brief explanatory notes to be provided on Help pages and for users of other help fora to be made aware of it.
This new section about the new Reply Tool has been added to Help:Talk pages.
Any suggestions for other pages where a link to it is needed would be most welcome. Thanks Nick Moyes (talk) 23:38, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Interesting. I found (by accident) today that it has already been activated on Commons on their Talk Pages, so anyone who wants to see how it works can use it there. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:25, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
@Michael D. Turnbull It's on most Wikis already. I've been using it for months here on en-wiki as it has been available as a beta feature for anyone who chooses to activate it via their Preferences. In fact, I'm replying to you with it right now. (no signature needed - it's done automatically, plus a live WISYWYG preview box beneath where I'm typing so I can see if any of my links have been typed incorrectly.!) Nick Moyes (talk) 13:48, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Question, what does WISYWYG mean? I do indeed use that though to preview things. I'm so glad that I can use the reply tool now. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
Oh lol I was like hmm this reply tool seems interesting but Ive been using it since day one lol. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 20:32, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Problems with Facebook
Every now and then the Help Desk and Teahouse get questions about Facebook, and the usual answer is to tell people to go to Facebook's equivalent of a help desk. I have had little or no response to any questions I asked here. That's my experience, but I wonder how many people are not finding help by asking Facebook for help. I had a problem with a new account there a year or so ago and tried every possible way to get them to resolve the problem, including snail mail, and nothing was done. To be specific, I have several Facebook friends with more than one account and I saw nothing wrong with doing that, except they blocked me from doing anything until I followed a very specific procedure involving a cell phone which I was unable to complete. It ended with an email from Facebook saying that because I took too long to respond there would be no appeal of their decision. I can't even tell you how many ways I tried to get them to help me within the time I had. People can post the link I provided and hope for results, but I would say no one on any Help Desks here should be giving people any kind of hope that Facebook cares or will do anything. To give people some kind of hope, perhaps they should refer people to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing and hope someone there has an idea.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 00:05, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
@Vchimpanzee If someone comes to the Teahouse and says they have a problem with Facebook, none of us are ever likely to advise doing anything other than attempting to deal with Facebook via its Help pages - no matter how futile that would be (or simply to Google the issue and see what innumerable 3rd-party discussion fora about Facebook might turns up). Unless you can provide a link to a specific example of a really helpful answer at Reference desk/Computing about dealing with Facebook, I certainly wouldn't ever point anyone there to get resolution. It's clear to me that they feel the same way. This post is really rather off-topic for the Teahouse, but I am sorry to learn you've had serious issues with another platform. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:03, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Should I advise people coming here seeking help with Facebook to disable their Facebook account instead and abandon using the website because they don't give a fuck? —A little blue Boriv^_^vJéské Couriano 01:14, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Not necessarily. While that would probably be a good choice, some people don't want to get rid of their Facebook account. The best choice would probably be to just tell users to complain to Facebook about, while also noting some users haven't had a good experience with that. Regardless, Wikipedia cannot help people with Facebook whatsoever. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 01:20, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Whether or not Facebook's technical support team is reliable is beyond our scope. There are forums (which can be found with a Google search) where asking that is better suited. Allowing these questions on the reference desk is likely to change the reference desk from one that asks coding and other computer-related questions to banal tech support issues. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
I was thinking the reference desk people might know about these forums. One of them pointed me to a Microsoft forum that has been quite helpful. Before COVID I didn't even think of going to Google, And you can read the rest if you want. but once I had faster Internet I should have realized that was an option for a lot of things. There was a time at home when I wouldn't use Google so that I wouldn't go to any unfamiliar sites that might cause problems, and going to any new site meant waiting and waiting and waiting, if I got there at all. When I couldn't go to libraries for several months, I had to get over the idea I couldn't use Google, which came naturally to me if I wasn't at home.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Recommendation to all Hosts: Activate your Homepage tab!
Because every 25% of newly created accounts now see an additional Homepage Tab next to their User page and Talk tabs, please ensure you activate and familiarise yourself with this brand new feature. It's designed to help new account users find things to work on; to see their impact on pages they've edited, and even seek help from a 'mentor' if they need it.
Hosts need to be aware that they can now point brand new users to this feature if anyone is seeking ideas on how to start contributing. It therefore behoves us to use and understand it ourselves.
Older accounts can enable the Homepage feature if they wish. All Teahouse hosts are recommended to do this by visiting Special:Preferences. At the bottom of the main User profile tab go to the 'Newcomer homepage' section. Enable Display newcomer homepage and Save.
There is a summary of this new feature at WP:Growth Team features#Newcomer homepage, and fuller information on the MediaWiki website at mw:Growth/Personalized first day/Newcomer homepage. 'Mentors' are automatically assigned to new users, based on a list that mentors need to actively sign up to. I'm not linking to that here, as I feel any genuinely experienced editor or host ought to be able to work that out for themselves. Be aware that the feature is still being worked on, so functionality may well change.
Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:47, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
I do enjoy being assigned a mentor (ARoseWolf) to bother. Mostly irrelevant question, if I signup as a mentor, do I lose mine?Slywriter (talk) 14:57, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
@Slywriter: Nope. I've signed up as a mentor and I still have my mentor as Ipigott ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Slywriter, it is impossible to bother me (lol). And no, you wont lose me if you sign up as a mentor. I still have my mentor. We are a community and we help each other to build the best encyclopedia possible. I use the Homepage to look for edits to be made still. --ARoseWolf 15:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
I just activated this, and immediately noticed a problem with the Homepage - does anybody here know where to report it? It concerns the "Your impact" section, which purports to show "Views since you edited (last 60 days)". I was surprised to see that a page I edited last night already showed 3212 views, so I checked - in the last 30 days it has only had 1621 views. So it looks like it is displaying views over the last 60 days, not since I edited it.--Gronk Oz (talk) 20:33, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing this, Gronk Oz. I'm going to report this to the engineers on our team. Could you tell me which article exactly you're talking about? And for any problems in the future, please tag me and Trizek (WMF) so that we can investigate. Thank you! -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 01:36, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Good question, there used to be a link where you could suggest improvements, however I'm not seeing it anymore. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:40, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
@MMiller (WMF):@Trizek (WMF): Thanks for the contact details. I don't remember what article it was before, but it is still happening with the top article on the "Your impact" list. For me at the moment, that is Leukemia inhibitory factor and it shows 27 edits. In fact there have not been any edits since mine last night. 27 edits ago was way back on 01:58, 28 May 2016. So it is not reflecting the count since my last edit, nor the last 60 days. The subsequent entries on that list all say 0, which is probably correct.--Gronk Oz (talk) 03:01, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Gronk Oz -- thanks for the additional details. We're looking into this and double-checking that things are working as expected. I just looked at my own edits and saw exactly the numbers I expected based on my edit history. Just a couple things I want to clarify:
Because the feature counts pageviews since you first edited the article, it's possible that you first edited an article a long time ago, maybe even years ago. If that happened, it would be counting all the pageviews from the last 60 days.
And this just may be a typo on your part -- it's meant to show pageviews since you edited, not edits, since you edited. MMiller (WMF) (talk) 22:32, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@MMiller (WMF):@Trizek (WMF): It wasn't a typo - I really am that stupid. The figures I initially gave were correct, but ignore the figures for Leukemia inhibitory factor because they were edits, not views, as you pointed out. Looking at it now, it looks like it might be correct: the top article is TRAIL which I edited 2 days ago and it displays 60 views since then, vs 1,121 views in the past 30 days.--Gronk Oz (talk) 22:49, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure why it has to be mandatory for hosts to do that? Many new editors use VisualEditor, and if anyone asks about problems with that feature, those of us who don't use that feature will hopefully know enough to leave such questions to those who are familiar with it. How is this fundamentally different? I'm perfectly happy to remove myself from the host list if activating that feature becomes mandatory, and especially if we will be expected to tell new editors to use it. As a new editor I would have disliked it a lot. --bonadeacontributionstalk 21:36, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm not sure it's mandatory - but I just enabled it and it looks promising. You can ignore the page if you don't want to use it. This is like when Windows came out and those of us batch file coders and command line editors pooh-poohed it, and now I haven't seen the c: prompt (or wanted to) in a long time. Let's give it a chance. TimTempleton(talk)(cont) 22:28, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
I haven't said or thought or implied that this is a bad feature, and it's already been rolled out so we don't need to give it a chance – that decision has been taken. Like any other feature it will be helpful to some, but not all, people, and obviously those who think it could improve their experience should activate it. My question was based on the fact that I don't quite understand why it would be important for Teahouse hosts to activate this one specific feature, unless we think that the vast majority of questions from now on will be related to it. Again, the Visual Editor seems like a parallel case. It is good to be aware that it exists and to read up on how it works, otherwise we couldn't decide if we wanted to activate it or not. But as long as we know what it is, that's going to be sufficient to understand which Teahouse questions are about that topic, and leave them for other people to answer. --bonadeacontributionstalk 07:02, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
@Bonadea Nothing here is mandatory - except agreeing to meet our host expectations - and who am I to suggest you must do something? No, I simply ask/advise/suggest/ensure/recommend all hosts to activate and look at something that every new visitor to the Teahouse is going to have access to from now on. As Donald Rumsfeld might have said, I just wanted to ensure it was either a known known or a known unknown, and not an unknown unknown. It seemed sensible to ensure every host is aware of it, that's all; it's a new feature many of us probably weren't seeing, and which might be relevant to the answers we give people when they ask what they can help with. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:33, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
Nick Moyes, excellent note, and very much appreciated!!! I myself was totally unaware of this new feature. It's not exactly ideal for me to be totally unaware of something like this, if I want to help others!! I appreciate your advisory! I guess it is good for me to hang out here every so often. you just never know what us new editors might pick up now and then! lol! thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 02:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
I have noticed a small issue with it. Some of the suggested edits it suggests aren't really that accurate. For example, one of the suggested edits I got was to copy edit the article List of Nintendo DS and 3DS flash cartridges. Upon looking at the article, it needs more than just a copy edit. I needs more refs, has some unreliable refs, and is written like an ad. This was also defined as an "easy" task. I would not want a newcomer to see this, thinking it was an easy task, and finding it to be incredibly difficult, leading them to believe that even easy tasks on Wikipedia are incredibly difficult. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 22:55, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, Nick Moyes, for spreading the word about these newcomer features! I'm the product manager for these features at WMF, and along with Trizek (WMF), we are here to listen to your ideas and answer your questions. We're hoping to expose these features to all newcomers on this wiki (right now only 25% get them), and so we want them to be as strong as possible. Some of the Teahouse hosts have already weighed in and helped out in this process, and we appreciate it (I last posted here in September).
As you work with newcomers, we do hope you recommend they try their homepage for easy edits, but it's worth underscoring what Nick Moyes said: only 25% of the newcomers have the feature right now, so most newcomers won't be able to see it. You can, however, encourage them to turn it on, using Nick's instructions above. We're planning an RfC soon to bring the feature to all newcomers, and I'll return here to let you all know when it's up, so that you can weigh in. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 01:36, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Something to be aware of
If you activate the homepage, you are automatically assigned a mentor. From what I can tell, you cannot opt out of this.
The mentor will be able to watchlist your edits (or something that amounts to watchlisting). They also get a shitload of statistics about your activity.
At the moment there doesn't seem to be any kind of vetting of mentors; it's just a matter of signing up for it.
I'm sure there has been a cost-benefit analysis, or whatever new buzzword they use, about the risk of new editors getting wikistalked and harassed. And of course there is plenty of scope for harassers to target their favourite victims without having access to all that info. But it's a good idea to be aware of what it is you are agreeing to, when you activate the homepage function. Presumably there is a quick and easy way to remove yourself from the mentee role, though I have failed to find it so far. And the point is that you are never asked whether it is OK to assign a mentor in the first place.
Potential comments:
The risk of any one specific mentee getting paired with an abusive mentor is insignificant.
That is obviously true, and if the minimal risk doesn't deter an experienced user from activating the function, good for them.
Reporting abusers is relatively easy, and it's likely that admins will be quick to act in this situation.
Yes to both these things – but reporting is not necessarily easy unless you are already an experienced user, especially when you get the impression that this abuser is officially sanctioned by The Wikipedia.
My personal view is that it is not a valid argument in favour of making harassment easier in the first place.
I don't question anybody's decision to join the homepage setup, but as somebody who has been systematically harassed for years, I'm simply not going to flip that switch for myself. --bonadeacontributionstalk 08:29, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
"The mentor will be able to watchlist your edits (or something that amounts to watchlisting)" could you explain how a mentor is able to do this? I'm merely able to see their contributions in the mentor dashboard. I can't watchlist their edits. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 13:53, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Watchlisting editors is a new one on me. I couldn't watchlist specific editors before and I can't now. I can watchlist their user/talk page but anyone can. I can review their contributions but, again, anyone can. The only statistics I have on mentees is when they registered, how many questions they have asked on my talk page, how many total edits made, how many reverts, how many blocks. Most all of that you can find out anyway. I have rarely written a mentee without them first asking a question. I think maybe I've welcomed a few but never just out of the blue written them. I have watchlisted a few but that's mostly because I see they are fighting vandalism or dealing with potential sockpuppets and I watchlist their pages for any retaliation as a courtesy. I don't think there has been any evidence that the mentor program has increased the level of harassment on Wikipedia nor have I seen where any specific mentor has been accused of harassing a mentee. I appreciate the concerns and I understand where they are coming from in good faith (It troubles my heart that anyone has been harassed for years by someone within this community) but there is no evidence to support the conclusion that the mentor program or homepage function is making harassment easier or that it somehow promotes it unknowingly, at least to my knowledge. --ARoseWolf 14:18, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Of course we can't watchlist editors – I explicitly said "something that amounts to watchlisting". It's all in the mentor desktop documentation: is it not true that you get a list that shows you, in one handy table, how many edits your mentees have made, when they were last active, how many reverted edits they have made, etc? Isn't it the case that a mentor can claim any eligible editor (i.e., an editor who has activated the feature) as their mentee? It's nice that you have had positive experiences of being a mentor, but I think that kind of feedback should be directed at the WMF growth team, as it is unrelated to my comments.Most all of that you can find out anyway I think I addressed that exact point. Hinting that my post could be interpreted as not made in good faith is troubling, but I can't really do anything about that. Again, I'm not telling anyone to join or refrain from joining. --bonadeacontributionstalk 15:37, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
"Isn't it the case that a mentor can claim any eligible editor" we can yes. But usually you have no reason to. Technically I could claim RoseWolf as my mentee if I wanted to. But I'm not stupid. Also, it says this about claiming a mentee, "The action will be successful even in cases the user didn't have any mentor set previously. However, it does not enable the homepage for the users: they have to enable it." ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:42, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
That's beside the point, since you and other actual GF editors are not part of the potential problem – you are neither stupid nor a serial harasser. What's the reason for adding the final sentence? I did refer to that fact in the post you are replying to. --bonadeacontributionstalk 16:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
You mean I can find out information similar to when I hover over the username of any editor, hover over 'user', and look at their contributions (which includes when they were last active), but I have to go to the inconvenience of going somewhere else specific to get that information? Really not seeing the issue. BastunĖġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:50, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Bonadea, I could likewise say your concerns over potential harassment from this function should be directed at the WMF growth team but I happen to believe you should be able to ask them at any relevant venue which includes this one. My comments were in direct response to your statements and I find it troubling that you could look at what I said and think that they hint you said anything in bad faith when I expressly said the opposite but, like you have stated, I can't do anything about your perception. I can assure you though that my comments were made in good faith in response to your good faith concerns and I encourage you to raise your concerns at every available venue because the last thing I want is someone being harassed using a function or tool meant to encourage editor retention, growth and development. --ARoseWolf 16:36, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
I am not... ffs, I give up. I'm very pleased that you have had a positive experience. --bonadeacontributionstalk 16:51, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
My only intention with my first post above was to mention some things about how the new homepage tab functions, because I was surprised when I read up on that. You know, information sharing, like we are supposed to be doing in Wikipedia. If the information is incorrect, that should be addressed, but arguing about the validity of my perception isn't particularly useful. If other editors don't see it as a potential problem for them, then all is well, and they are not hurt by having a little more info about what happens when they activate the homepage. If they should agree with me, then they might decide not to activate it. --bonadeacontributionstalk 17:20, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Hello @Bonadea -- thank you for bringing up this point about potential harassment through the mentor features. I think it is a valid concern, and I'm glad you're thinking about it. We on the Growth team have thought and worried along similar lines as we built the Special:ClaimMentee feature and the Special:MentorDashboard feature, and we even discussed the potential for harassment with the foundation's Trust and Safety team.
Firstly, you're right that it is possible for mentors to closely follow their mentees' edits through Recent Changes (which is sort of like watchlisting a mentee's edits). On the mentor dashboard, you can "star" a mentee, meaning that they will always appear in the list on that page. And then in Recent Changes, you can use filters called "Your starred mentees" and "Your unstarred mentees" to show the edits of those mentees -- it would be like visiting the Contributions pages of your various mentees, but with all that info from multiple mentees in the one feed.
There's are a few reasons that we've proceeded as we have, and a few things we've implemented as safeguards:
Firstly, we haven't heard any accounts of harassment from bad-faith mentors across any of the Wikipedias, all of which have this feature. The feature has existed for nearly three years with 55,000 questions asked. Though there may be unreported cases of harassment, we think that harassment through the feature, if it happens at all, is very rare.
Secondly, all the information that the mentor dashboard and Recent Changes displays is already accessible publicly, but as you point out, these features make it easier and faster to find it.
Mentor signup list
Because the mentor signup list is public, mentors can watchlist the signup page to keep an eye on which other users sign up as mentors, and could collectively decide to remove users who give them concern.
Most wikis have chosen to protect their mentor signup pages. Here on English Wikipedia, it's extended confirmed protected. This tends to prevent bad-faith newcomers from polluting the list.
Mentors can only see their own mentor dashboard and see the activity of their own mentees in Recent Changes. I can tell that you know that, but I just wanted to point it out to say that we consciously decided not to make it simple for one mentor to see the list of mentees of another mentor.
With Special:ClaimMentee, the previous mentor gets a notification if someone claims their mentee. So if a bad-faith mentor claimed a mentee away from a good-faith mentor, that good-faith mentor might think, "hey, wait a minute -- why is this person claiming my mentees?" and then investigate. Mentees also get a notification if they are claimed, so they can't be claimed quietly without noticing.
We're currently working on an ability that would allow a user to opt-out of mentorship. If they do this, they will get unassigned from their mentor, so they would no longer show up on the mentor dashboard or in the Recent Changes filter.
@Martin Urbanec (WMF) is the engineer who has been working on all these features. Martin, is there anything that needs to be corrected or that I forgot?
@Bonadea -- I'm sorry to hear that you've experienced harassment. Given your experience, I definitely want to know if you think what's listed above would help, and if you have any other ideas to make mentorship safer. MMiller (WMF) (talk) 23:07, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for this. Having cooled off slightly, I guess I should respond; most of the points you make are things I was aware of (it was reading the conversation on monitoring signups that prompted my post). I'm not part of the target group, and my opinions represent a minority of one person. That being said, I'm pleased to see that you are working on a way to opt out, and I think it is imperative that that ability should be part of this scheme from the start – it is much more important than having a Claim Mentee function. As editors, we have to assume good faith, but tool makers have to assume bad faith and make sure that there are safeguards in place. It's good that EC is required to add one's name to the mentor list, anyway. I'm sure that for most editors who participate, experienced or new, the feature will be a positive or at least a not-negative change. --bonadeacontributionstalk 13:58, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
Format now missing Auto-links?
Missing 3 related topics shown at page bottom: Clickable Headers for associated Wikipedia subject(s)??
I've some wide & various internet issues recently; Trying to rule IN/OUT on my end in event this is new Wikipedia format...
@Jaebond007 Sorry, but I am not at all clear what you are asking. Could you explain more precisely what the issue is, please? Nick Moyes (talk) 14:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
@Jaebond007 @Nick Moyes: I believe you are referring to the related articles, that appears on mobile at the bottom of an article. This only appears in mainspace pages. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:34, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! Worried I still had an "uninvited friend" logging, flogging & @!$! me ;-0 Jaebond007 (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Missing access to archives for main page
Where is the access to the archives for the main page? The code is there, but the links and search functions are not visible. -- Valjean (talk) 16:48, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
@Valjean: Uh.. right below the Table of Contents? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:50, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Duh! For some reason I was looking in the header area, where it's usually located on talk pages. -- Valjean (talk) 16:54, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Tbh I did the exact same thing but scrolled down further and there it was. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 16:55, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
From the WikiProject desk at The Signpost
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The Signpost - Call for interviews
We at The SignpostWikiProject desk are asking for your help.
We are seeking up to several active participants willing to contribute to an interview for possible publishing at the WikiProject Desk in a future issue.
To volunteer, just add your name to the participants list below. We look forward to hearing news and insights about Teahouse.
and more, on to infinity! If you'd like to participate, feel free to add another bullet point and ping me below.🐶 EpicPupper(he/him | talk) 21:39, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
Going forward, each participant receives a wikilink to the interview workspace questions about the project's work, problems and achievements. 🐶 EpicPupper(he/him | talk) 19:12, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm willing to sign up, however I would like to know what I would be asked so that I can be sure I can answer question I'm asked. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:41, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
I’m with Blaze, I’m totally interested though. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 20:24, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
Ok Cool. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 21:16, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
@EpicPupper: I'm a little unclear what's expected of us right noe. There are a number of rows labelled 'Example' under each question. Are you expecting each of us to complete one row per question, and to sign it? Or are you asking at this stage for suggestions for other questions you might want to ask us all? Sorry to be so thick! Nick Moyes (talk) 23:51, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes, Qwerfjkl, ThadeusOfNazereth, FormalDude, Cullen328, Sdkb, Kaleeb18, and Blaze Wolf: Sorry for any potential confusion. I've finalized the questions now at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/WikiProject report; please answer them at your earliest convenience. You do not need to answer all of the questions. For the first question that you answer, please link to your user page; for any later questions, you do not need to link to it. For questions that you choose to answer, you should replace "Example" with your name. You do not need to sign it. Sorry for the straightforwardness! Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper(he/him | talk) 02:36, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
I'm going to be cutting some of the more similar answers for clarity, in order to add a few more questions and to allow even more people to participate I hope I'm not going to offend anyone by doing this. Everyone's answers are appreciated! I've also started lightly copyediting answers and adding links to them.
@Jtmorgan and @Celestina007, would you perhaps like to participate in the interview? It would be interesting to include your perspectives.
For anyone else that's maybe reading this, if you're interested in participating and have a unique viewpoint you'd like to share, please reply here and ping me!
I think that's all I have for now, 🐶 EpicPupper(he/him | talk) 21:38, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
@EpicPupper: Do you mind if I answer the new questions you added? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 21:52, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
@Celestina007: I'm confused as to what you mean by "Extra dash". ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:54, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Oh you're referring to the dash next to the number for our names. Yep I can do that. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:55, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Yes, probably didn’t appear disjointed for desktop users but in mobile format (or for mobile users) it made the entries appear a little disorganized, thanks for sorting that out. Celestina007 (talk) 20:00, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for doing it for me Blaze Wolf. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 20:30, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
Me entering if that's okay. GeraldWL 17:45, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
As you wish. Cullen328 (talk) 22:26, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
As with the others, I don't really care. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 22:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
I have a GoFundMe you can link to. Panini!🥪 23:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Could you link that for me here? Thanks! 🐶 EpicPupper(he/him | talk) 23:23, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Oh! Sorry, that was merely a joke. Panini!•🥪 18:14, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Surprise me. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 23:25, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
I'll let you say whatever you wish. But (if it helps) you're welcome to describe me as a retired museum natural sciences curator who's has been on wiki for 11 years, active at the Teahouse for the last 5 years and proud to have been an admin for the last two. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Nothing special about me, so just use the latter option. Curious to see how I am encapsulated. GeraldWL 04:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Ditto for me. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
You all may have heard about the Growth Team Features in the past on this talk page, so I won't go into it too deep. One of these new features is a mentorship program, where new users have access to an assigned mentor that they can ask questions to specifically. In a way, it's like the Teahouse, only on your talk page and you're the only host. Currently, this feature is given to 2% of new users, but we plan on bumping this percentage up to 10% in the near future. To lessen the load on our current mentors, I'm reaching out here to see if any uninvolved hosts would be interested in signing up as one. The workload is relatively small; I receive four questions monthly on average, all of which were simple questions that aren't anything you already see at the Teahouse. If this does strike you curious, you can sign up here. Thanks! Panini!🥪 15:27, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
@Panini!: I am prepared for the meteor shower of questions. At least I think. – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 09:33, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
@AssumeGoodWraith Please don't take this amiss, but I've noticed how quite a few of your recent replies at the Teahouse have been quite abrupt and to the point. They're not in any way incorrect, but you might like to think about easing in a little warmth and welcome with your initial responses to a mentee's question in order to give them the encouragement they need to continue. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
@Panini!: Are you a WMF employee, or does the growth team include volunteer editors as well? --bonadeacontributionstalk 18:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
Bonadea, I, alongside others (such as Nick Moyes, Blaze Wolf, Xaosflux), help the WMF employees working on this feature by giving ideas, concerns, and support. We discuss future plans of rollout on the growth team talk page. If you're interested, we'd appreciate your input! And, *cough*signupasamentor*cough*. Panini!•🥪 13:18, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
Was my question that unclear? Your choice of pronouns in your initial post strongly implied that you are officially part of the growth team and responsible for making decisions about the mentor scheme rollout, and that is what I asked about. Now you imply that you are not. Never mind, I was just curious. --bonadeacontributionstalk 23:47, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
Easy access to the tearoom in other languages
I have in the past encountered difficulties finding the Tearoom in other languages (also due to the sometimes sensible differences in its name). Would it be possible to use the translation feature for it and other help pages? I think it would really simplify things... Llaaww (talk•contribs) 16:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
(By the way, I mean to do so using WP:ILL#Local Links... I forgot to specify above)
Llaaww (talk•contribs) 16:17, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
@Llaaww Not every Wikipedia has the equivalent of the Teahouse, and certainly not a direct translation of that name. In desktop view, however, you should see a list of links on the bottom of the left hand menu of links, with every language shown where an equivalent forum exists. That should meet your need, does it not? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:52, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: yes, fair enough. However I (and I'm not alone in this) normally edit from a mobile device and from the app. I think using local links might be helpful to many people... Llaaww (💬|📝) 16:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
@Llaaww I replied to you on my mobile, am doing so now, nd often edit from it. I recommend using it on desktop view, as I do, where you get all the esoteric extra functions. TBH: The Teahouse is for new users who are editing in English; why would an inter-language link be especially useful to them, and need to be so prominent? Nick Moyes (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
@Llaaww: I’m with Nick Moyes on this one. I often edit on my IPad and the desktop view of Wikipedia is much better than the mobile view of it, when it comes to editing. ― Kaleeb18TalkCaleb 18:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
Can't we have some sort of banner with links to international Teahouses, or something? Not all people with foreign-language questions know to click on the menu. casualdejekyll 19:50, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
@Casualdejekyll I'm clearly missing something that you and Llaaww seem to see. Surely, people with foreign language questions will be visiting their own language Wikipedias with their questions, not the English one? If they do ask here in English about an issue on their own Wikipedia, we will point them to it, if it exists. Why should we confuse English-speaking readers with a banner linking to the numerous non-English help fora when we are catering for English-speaking editors? Every single article and Wikipedia page that has a non-English equivalent has links to them in the same place. I really see no need for an additional banner for non-English speakers. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:12, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: We do occasionally get non-english editor asking questions here in their native language (for example recently someone asked a question here in Russian, or maybe that was on the help desk, I can't remember) so maybe only a banner with the most common foreign languages? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 02:52, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
That would beg the question of what the most common foreign languages are. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:35, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
@Blaze Wolf Yes, I am not unaware of that fact. I simply don’t see enough non-English visitors to the Teahouse to merit some sort of additional banner to cater for these pretty exceptional occurrences. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:58, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
I agree with Nick Moyes that there's not that many people looking for other language Teahouses. Also, according to Wikidata links, there's 24 languages (including en.wiki) that have a Teahouse, which isn't that many (but is also too many to nicely display anywhere in my opinion). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:13, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
TBH I don't think it would be useful to clutter the Teahouse with banners; rather, using local links we would have clean and user-friendly links in the language bar...
I agree there is no point in creating banners for people who clearly never read them. I've lost count of the number of times someone has asked what the Teahouse is for!--Shantavira|feed me 11:44, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
I agree with @Llaaww:, I think that using local links to connect the teahouses would be useful for many users. 82.54.18.153 (talk) 14:23, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
...which is precisely what we already have here, isn't it? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:25, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
I see that it has been done and would like to thank whoever did it. However, I am sorry for my insisting but I noticed that the links to the Italian (it:Wikipedia:Bar) and Latin (la:Vicipaedia:Taberna) teahouses are missing. I would fix that myself, only I'm not sure where to put them... could someone tell me? Thanks, Llaaww (💬|📝) 11:43, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
Support using the reply tool from the button. ― Qwerfjkltalk 09:02, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
~TNT (she/they • talk) 00:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
talk 10:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
--ARoseWolf 16:00, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! ––FormalDude talk 16:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
