Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Feedback Dashboard needs responders

Special:FeedbackDashboard needs kind newbie-helping people to respond to people's concerns. And it needs harsh mop-wielding admins to clear up crap comments. More information at Wikipedia:New editor feedback. —Tom Morris (talk) 15:07, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

J'agree. This summer there was a lot more participation, but it has waned since then. This is a useful way to interact with new users directly. It's also an excellent platform to invite them to The Teahouse! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 15:40, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Interwiki link

Neat, the Teahouse Q&A page has it's first interwiki link to the Urdu language Wikipedia ur:وکیپیڈیا:چائے خانہ/سوالات :-) NtheP (talk) 10:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

• Wahoo! I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 20:02, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Impact, woooooo!!!! - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 22:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Indenting

Is it intentional that all the questions and answers at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions are indented like this? Or would it be OK to fix that? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:08, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

The headings are indented like that with code in {{TH question page}}, but I see the questions right under the headings and not further indented like your post. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:23, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I left another indent above by mistake. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Correct, they are not indented they have a margin for white space. Thanks for letting us know your thoughts, but nothing needs to be fixed. :) heather walls (talk) 04:31, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

If all that white space is really desired, I'll let this matter drop. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:11, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Topicon

Tahdahhh! Template:Teahouse_topicon Osarius - Want a chat? 14:58, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Very cool! Should probably post it here, too. SarahStierch (talk) 16:22, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

+1, excellent! heather walls (talk) 17:18, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Very nice! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:20, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Nice! I made a similar one for a topicon strip, as you can see on my userpage, and I just never got around to making it for general use. Nice job! ^{Brambleberry of RiverClan}_meow 20:47, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

New questions

Are they supposed to go at the top or the bottom? Every other noticeboard and talk pages request that users put all new content at the bottom but at the Teahouse, it seems rather haphazard between users clicking the Ask a Question button or just directly editing the page. Right now, it seems the oldest content is in the middle. Does the button need to be changed to put new content at the end? Livewireo (talk) 19:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

They're supposed to go on the top, which is indeed unlike other places on Wikipedia. I will refrain from commenting further, to avoid waking the drama llama. ;) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:20, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Livewireo, top - it's a deliberate design feature of the Teahouse and has been discussed several times with pros and cons both ways (search the archives for top posting). We normally catch misposted additions and move them to the top, but it doesn't mean some don't get missed. NtheP (talk) 19:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Alright, cool. I haven't perused this board all that much, so I wasn't sure if that was an intentional move, thanks for the quick answers. Livewireo (talk) 19:23, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

This is cool

Thank you for inviting me to the teahouse. I hope to learn a lot of information here. Things have been a bit confusing for me thusfar, but it seems as tho those days are past. --C Coligniero (talk) 06:56, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Please we need the creation of a new map of Azerbaijan that would exclude Nagorno Karabakh republic which is no longer under its control.

The independent country of Nagorno Karabakh is still shown in the current map of Azerbaijan. As the talkpage of Azerbaijan site discusses there should be a new map showing the real territory that goverment of Azerbaijan administers and has a legitimise to exercise its power.

There should be a map like Georgia (country) that currently excludes with a light colour South Ossetia and Abkhazia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_(country) — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 21:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

@IsrArmen: Another user (Findblogging) just made the same request in Talk:Azerbaijan. There is a similarity of interests between you two in your areas, styles and "preferences" (let's better say POVs). I am sure this will attract the attention of a CheckUser. All the best. --E4024 (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

@E4024: As I wrote you on your talkpage is colleague who we collaborate in editing Wikipedia and adding to the articles we are interested especially regarding Armenia. Will the map of Nagorno Karabakh will be issued then? I don't have the knowledge to create it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsrArmen (talk • contribs) 13:04, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

You may not have read the words in the box at the top of this page. It says "This page is for discussing the Teahouse, please direct questions about Wikipedia here." - David Biddulph (talk) 15:18, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Change from NCHQ to here

I must have missed seeing the merge notice at the top of Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/questions, as the first thing I knew was that the page had gone.

Two questions:

Firstly, how do I ask a question at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions? I clicked on "Ask a question" and there was a change in the appearance of the screen but nowhere that I seemed to be able to ask a question.

Secondly, what has happened to the questions and answers that were sitting on Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/questions at the time of the merger? If a questioner is looking for the answer, where can he find it? - David Biddulph (talk) 08:31, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

For point 2: When I saw that the page had gone, I copied the final set of questions and answers into Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/Archive/2012/October, but no one will find them there. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

This all seems to have been finalised rather rapidly, I'm just a teensy bit concerned that discussion may not have been completed, ok comments this end seem to have stropped about a week ago but I've no knowledge of what happended at the other side. NtheP (talk) 08:49, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I notice that the idea of a merger wasn't discussed at Wikipedia talk:New contributors' help page/questions, so I guess that it will have caught a number of contributors by surprise (even more so given that effectively the pages haven't been merged but the content of one has been deleted & replaced by a redirect). Worrying that questions that had been asked & answered will have vanished before some of the questioners had seen the answers. Not a polite way of treating new contributors. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

It surprised me too. I agree with David Biddulph - this wasn't a merge, and may confuse new contributors whose questions have vanished. I am not opposed to a proper merger, but I don't believe the process has been thought through properly. I have posted a query at User talk:AnnaHendren. Gandalf61 (talk) 11:33, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I am also puzzled as to why this wasn't discussed at, or the discussion signposted from, Wikipedia talk:New contributors' help page/questions. I would have appreciated the chance to talk through any such proposal, rather than find my edits to NCHQ transferred here without notice. A very unsatisfactory way of treating OPs with questions on the old page. - Karenjc 13:06, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

For the sake of convenience, here's a link to the last version of NCHQ and its active questions before the moves began - now hidden in the page history at Wikipedia:Teahouse/questions. - Karenjc 13:52, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I, like NtheP and others, was a bit baffled by the quick move. As I understood it, the discussion that did occur was merely generating a consensus to start the real discussion with everyone involved. If I am seeing this correctly, the move was performed unilaterally by a pretty new editor with few edits and other notices on their talk page (and archive) suggesting general disruptive boldness. I suppose what's done is done, but can we find a way to contact the recent helpers of NCHQ and notify them of what has happened and why? We would love to have them all help out at the Teahouse. hajatvrc @ 17:00, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Point taken about the editor performing the moves. In which case, my own preference would be to regard this as a good-faith error by an enthusiastic newbie, and to see the page moves reverted as soon as possible by an admin with the ability to move content over redirects. This would at least allow us time to sort out the current problems of loose ends, confusing signposting, vanished content and archive links caused by the moves, and work out how to merge the two pages if consensus says they should be merged. - Karenjc 18:40, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree with this plan of action. There are quite a few active admins who are familiar with the Teahouse. I hope one will have the time to do something quickly. At least this event reignited the merge discussion that was left in the dust a week ago. hajatvrc @ 21:21, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

This is also being discussed at WP:VPT#I've never posted in the teahouse but it's in my contributions so I think it might be getting undone. NtheP (talk) 06:26, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I see that questions have been asked at the talk page of the user who did the move, but she hasn't had the courtesy to reply, and has merely archived the talk page and removed the link to the archive. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:24, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

The move has been undone, with help from Redrose64 (talk · contribs), so the WP:NCHQ page is back in action. I'll post at its talk page and maybe attract some more comments for the merge discussion. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:43, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

For the record, I changed the WP:Teahouse/questions (lowercase 'q') redirect to point to WP:Teahouse/Questions instead of WP:NCHQ. Hope I didn't overstep my still-newbie bounds. Madam Fatal (talk) 18:32, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Normally I would say no but in light of the recent history of this page and the ongoing discussion I have undone this change. Once the water has settled about the merge then it might be a different story. 20:53, 30 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nthep (talk • contribs)

I'm confused. Regardless of the outcome of the merger discussion, what is the logic for a redirect from WP:Teahouse/questions to WP:NCHQ (unless you are going to make a new suggestion that WP:Teahouse/Questions be merged to WP:NCHQ)? - David Biddulph (talk) 21:08, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I am also confused. I don't support this redirect. WP:Teahouse/questions should direct to WP:Teahouse/Questions, which is pretty obvious in my eyes. I'd like to change it back, please. SarahStierch (talk) 21:17, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Trace the history. NCHQ got moved to q (lowercase) and then redirected to Q uppercase. Following the discussion above and the VPT thread all those changes were undone leaving the redirect q to NCHQ. I just think that until we get a final resolution and the chequered history it's best not to mess around with any of the pages. Actually my preferred option would be to delete q. NtheP (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Ok, whatever! I'm going to assume good faith and be patient :) SarahStierch (talk) 22:05, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I've added {{db-r2}} to that redirect, it doesn't need to exist. heather walls (talk) 22:23, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I've removed the speedy deletion tag; one way or another, R2 just doesn't apply here. With deference, Nthep, I've also changed it back to pointing to the Teahouse page; there is no scenario I can imagine where it should be pointing to anything else. After all, everything is still there in the edit history. Cheers! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:31, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, thanks, Writ! heather walls (talk) 01:24, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I miss the dates. Can they be included now that the pages have been merged?--Lineagegeek (talk) 23:03, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Blank space on Teahouse

See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Blank space on Teahouse. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Answered there. :) heather walls (talk) 23:23, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Welcome wording

I chanced on your welcome template on a new users page- while it seems like an excellent idea, in order not to alienate immediately every new British English speaking new editor could you check that your spelling is neutral. In my neighbourhood- spelling is important and to miss out an essential 'u' from a word, harbours resentment. Personally, I avoid using some words to prevent difficulties- and this word can be substituted with 'local'. --ClemRutter (talk) 23:57, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi ClemRutter — do you have a link to your changes? I'd just like to have a look. Theopolisme _Boo! 20:13, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I believe he is talking about Wikipedia:Teahouse/Invitation and that the ending of the automated invitations end with "This message was delivered automatically by your friendly neighborhood HostBot". Regards, — Moe Epsilon 23:25, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Interesting question. Friendly neighborhood... is actually a specific phrase so saying local wouldn't have the same effect to everyone. :) heather walls (talk) 01:20, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Moe. Heather: heh... Yes. Theopolisme _Boo! 01:26, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

All joking apart, ClemRutter is right, there's no reason for the bot's greeting to have a US-English watermark (I must not say "flavour"). In any event, the more the term "friendly neighborhood" has some specific meaning over there, the odder it is to attach it to a bot, which is neither friendly nor neighbo(u)rly. It's just a bot and does not need to carry any baggage. Moonraker (talk) 02:37, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

That the spelling of an English word, whether British or US in origin, "alienates" anybody is a strong claim to make, and I would argue that it probably doesn't alienate anyone; either word's meaning, however it is spelled, is understood no matter who is reading it. As for the idea that the bot should neither be friendly nor be like a neighbour, I don't really think it will be constructive to make its messages less friendly or neighbourly. The bot is created by an actual person with the intention of welcoming users-- why should it not be either of these things? I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 03:56, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

No offence to ClemRutter but I do think this is just a storm in a teacup. I'm English, the use of British English, American English, Australian English, Canadian English or any other variant doesn't bother me in a bot message or in talk pages or anything like that. Article space, yes it can matter, but elsewhere I think it's good to reflect the global audience of WP. In answering questions I use British English because that's what I write in. If that has every alienated someone or they think "Who is this idiot who can't spell" then they've never said. If a bot owner has inadvertenly assigned a personality to a bot by the use of language, what the hell/heck? (PS if anyone wants to tax the brain and the typing skills, do some fairly major edits to or create an article that uses a variant of English that isn't your own ). NtheP (talk) 10:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll admit I used my native spelling of 'neighborhood' in the sig without much thought, but I don't really see the risk of alienating anyone. BTW, HostBot actually uses this invite template rather than the generic Teahouse/Invitation one. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 21:35, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

I also don't think anyone would be "alienated" by a spelling used in some places and not in others, so for me ClemRutter overstates his case. All the same, I agree with his point that sometimes it's best to avoid using certain words. If this bot greeting were using specifically British English spellings, then no doubt some American users would find it uncomfortable and complain. A greeting intended for use across the whole of the English language Wikipedia should surely be put into what we could call "universal English" without local preferences getting in the way, and for anyone to oppose that strikes me as rather odd. On another matter, I didn't suggest that a bot shouldn't be friendly, just that it isn't in its nature. Moonraker (talk) 22:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the HostBot singularity is most definitely not near. I've changed the template to read 'your robot friend'. I hope no one minds if I keep the wording slightly cheeky/casual? - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 20:20, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

How about Your plastic pal who's fun to be with? NtheP (talk) 21:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Too depressing. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:27, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

{od} "I'm not bringing you down, am I?" - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 04:57, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Religious statements on the Teahouse Frontpage

Is this place supposed to be a haven for the explicitly religious? I was greeted by this: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Guest/Featured/5 on coming back here today and the last person I interacted with here seemed to use Christian morality as his guide for interactions on Wikipedia. Junjunone (talk) 18:41, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome. Editors on Wikipedia come from a variety of cultures and backgrounds. No, the Teahouse isn't explicitly Christian. Though that's my religion, I don't use it as justification for what I do here on Wikipedia. I'm not sure specifically why this user says that, but it's within his ability to say that, and it's in your ability to have whatever belief you so choose on Wikipedia. Go Phightins! 19:18, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern, Junjunone. Just like on userpages, I believe users are within WP guidelines to express their individuality and beliefs on a limited basis such as displaying a quote or a userbox. Also, per this record of your last visit here, I don't really see anything about specifically Christian morality that guided that conversation or content dispute. Assuming good faith, and avoiding personal attacks are guidelines here at Wikipedia and do not really stem from Christian ethics. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 02:52, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

• Considering the image for the guest is of a mosque I doubt it's too Christian. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:00, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

? Looks like puppies to me. I don’t see what’s supposed to be peculiarly Christian about the message either.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 04:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

• Looks like the image is random, actually. It was the ceiling of a mosque when I opened it, now it's a whole bunch of different things. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks; I should have been looking at the history, not the current (now previous) version. The images on what I assume to be the profile in question—the quote is “Both the rich and the poor has one thing in common: They were created by God”—appear to be random, but the others are fixed. Anyway, I still don’t see the remark as especially Christian—if, not being one, I’m entitled to an opinion ;). Theistic, sure, but not at all specific otherwise. Furthermore, IRL as well as here (excluding articles, of course), my own AGF technique concerning such sentiments is to just to ignore what I consider “baggage”, as it were something like an unnecessarily florid metaphor, to be treated as a matter of taste.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 05:54, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

I have just been a bit surprised by the amount of religion that users seem comfortable invoking what with religious-identity userboxes and the statement about God and so forth. I am a religious scholar myself and was interested in how much religiosity portrayed by some here at the Teahouse. But maybe that's just my bias! Junjunone (talk) 14:00, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

There's a user I remember seeing (can't remember the username) who was looking for an adopter to take him, but required that the adopter be of (presumably his) particular flavor of Christianity, which I thought was interesting. I guess it kinda makes sense for an adopter/adoptee; more common ground that way. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:05, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I think your experience with editors is unusual, Junjunone. There are users here and there who are more forward with their faith, but on average, I think many editors, even most at The Teahouse, have no interest in proselytizing as it's sometimes considered disruptive to the principles of the project and can cause interactions to go sour, particularly for new users. However, in the example that Writ states above makes some sense (though I consider it to be mostly inflexible). There are also WikiProjects focused on particular belief systems; I am sure many participants there, share those beliefs and use their faith as a guiding principle on Wikipedia. Like any set of beliefs, religious or not, it can be used poorly or well when it comes to editing and editor interactions. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 14:15, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps there is something about the Teahouse which just makes religion more prominent somehow. It's just a feeling I got, nothing more. Junjunone (talk) 16:03, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, my impression is that the Internet in general has an atheistic tendency; perhaps places on the Internet that try to be more friendly attract more religiously-inclined people who feel marginalized elsewhere. Plus, those that are here might feel more comfortable expressing their views here than other places on the Internet for the same reason. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Junjunone, you say above "I am a religious scholar myself", but I don't really believe that after your attack on User:Gtwfan52 's religious beliefs: "You may be a Christian who bases your moral outrage on a subset of interpretations regarding ancient Bronze Age and Iron Age texts" [1]. And I agree with User:I Jethrobot above that nobody was pushing any Christian or even moral imperative, so IMO there was absolutely nothing unusual about the other editors. Aarghdvaark (talk) 02:18, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Is there a place?

Hello. As I have only recently become aware of the teahouse I have a question. Is there a place to report new editors that look like they need some direction and/or instructions in how to edit here? We get new editors who don't understand how to edit but who are unresponsive to messages on their talk page or in edit summaries. In other words is there some sort of teahouse noticeboard where we can report a newbie so that you can attempt to turn them into a productive editor instead of going directly AIV or other noticeboards where blocks are the usual outcome. As an example I have come across this editor today Ishraqboss (talk · contribs). The way they are editing at the moment is doing more damage to articles then anything else. They also seem to be using this IP 99.30.203.2 (talk · contribs). Thanks for your time. MarnetteD | Talk 21:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

No specific place; this is probably as good a place as any, I suppose. I've always been puzzled with how to reach people who ignore/don't know about their talk pages. There's blocks, I guess, but that's a bit like using a live hand-grenade in a friendly game of catch. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:11, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I know how important AGF is but I also know how some people who do not have WikiP's best interests at heart take advantage of that. I also know that we all work as volunteers. I just don't have the time to try and walk a newbie through getting started so if there are editors who want to give them a chance it is good to have a place to leave their names. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 21:38, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

HRT F1 Team User Page

We need acistance editing are main page will you help? HRT F1 Team 20:22, 26 August 2012 (UTC).

Merge

Should we look at merging with Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/questions? Rich Farmbrough, 14:00, 19 October 2012 (UTC).

• Support Since the Teahouse has been, statistically speaking, more effective in new-user retention, I would say that NCHQ has become deprecated (at no fault of the participants). It has been an excellent driving force in its time, but it is not as organized as such a project probably should be (an example being the Teahouse). New users who find that and not the Teahouse may be less likely to stick around due to a less-favourable paradigm. I see that some of our hosts are answering questions there anyway. It may be best to recruit the participants of that project who meet our expectations and gently dissolve it, pointing all traffic that currently leads there to the Teahouse instead. I would suggest an RfC. hajatvrc @ 15:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Addition I suspect that there may be the objection that NCHQ requires less commitment than the Teahouse, which is why it is the project of choice for those who cannot make a large commitment. I do not think that this is true. The participants at that project can do the same amount of participating at the Teahouse, just in compliance with the five simple expectations that have made the Teahouse so successful. hajatvrc @ 15:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support Why not. As long as it isn't messy and tea doesn't get spilled :) Also keep in mind the folks participating there replying to people. How do we "merge" with them? SarahStierch (talk) 16:09, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
• Support Though, we might want to get some editors active over there (if any) to participate in this merge discussion. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:11, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

  Maybe through an RfC, if it is possible. hajatvrc @ 16:13, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

• Support The NCHP is a vastly underutilized tool anyways. It used to be much better, but a year or so ago some reorganization happened making it very difficult for new users to find anyways. It would be a good idea, and improve the utility of the new user help system, to reduce the redundancy anyways. This board seems to be working well, and attracting new users should be the idea. Has anyone posted a Merge notice on the pages in question, BTW? --Jayron32 18:10, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

   Done Theopolisme 15:19, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

• Sure, I see no problem with doing so. Is there someone(s?) who's been semi-maintaining/watching over it? We could talk to them. Theopolisme 15:17, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
• I'm game if the nebulous "they" at the NCHP are. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:31, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
• Support. But echo Writ's caveat above. I'd say that if folks start objecting, we back down without a fight. I'd rather not invite more acrimony to Teahouse_talk. :/ - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 21:23, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
• Comment. Shouldn't there have been a notification of this discussion at Wikipedia talk:New contributors' help page or Wikipedia talk:New contributors' help page/questions? Still, I agree that the teahouse is doing a better job than the NCHQ page was doing, and there was a large overlap between NCHQ and the main Help desk. One to think about: how is anyone going to find the Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/Archive with its seven years of accumulated wisdom? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:54, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
• Comment. What John of Reading said. I'd have liked the chance to collaborate to see if and how we should merge the two resources, but since nobody bothered to alert those of us active at NCHQ to this discussion we now have a thoroughly bodged non-merge, an orphaned archive, and probably a set of puzzled OPs wondering what happened. Nice. - Karenjc 13:30, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Please do not confuse one editor's premature "non-merge" with a fault of anyone at the Teahouse. No one here was going to make that kind of decision without discussing it with everyone involved first. The editor who performed the merge was kind of new and seems to like to perform inappropriate non-admin closures as well. They may have just seen that this discussion had been stagnant for a while and thought that meant there was a consensus to do the merge. hajatvrc @ 17:18, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

• Comment Many thanks to those who restored the moved pages and did the associated cleanup work. Now, to the question of if and how to merge them properly. It does appear that there's a general interest in doing so. I'm marginally less enthusiastic myself, partly for the reasons Hajatvrc gives above and partly because I can see the appeal of a no-frills resource like NCHQ, devoid of all the "cuddly" extra stuff that the Teahouse ethos offers and which may well not appeal to those new users (like I once was) who want minimal engagement other than simple Q&A when they get stuck. However, this is absolutely not intended as any kind of criticism of the contributions of the Teahouse volunteers, who are obviously doing a good job and, more importantly, reaching new users effectively. When I returned from an extended Wikibreak to find a brand new Teahouse, plus some changes to the format of NCHQ which (IMO) made it much less accessible and easy to use, I stuck with the latter but suspected that eventually the one would be subsumed in the other. So yes, if we end up with more people willing to answer new users' questions, the merge is probably an improvement. So, how to proceed? I suppose we start by rewording the various templates, signposts etc. currently pointing at NCHQ to direct users to Teahouse/Questions instead. Then, once traffic is flowing there by default and NCHQ is effectively fallow (which may take some time), we archive NCHQ and redirect the page here. I'm willing to help with the re-signposting process if we get consensus to go ahead. What about the NCHQ archive? Could it perhaps be accessed by adding a link from Teahouse/Questions? Or is there a way of linking Teahouse and NCHQ question archives in a single search facility, rather like the way the RefDesk search function operates? This is not my area of expertise. Anybody got any suggestions? - Karenjc 17:39, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
• Oppose Personally I prefer the way WP:NCHQ works, giving replies relatively briefly with links to the relevant guidance where appropriate. Another concern I have about the Teahouse is that it confuses new users by getting them used to methods of working which are the opposite of those generally used elsewhere in Wikipedia talk. On other talk pages new topics will be at the bottom of the page, not the top, and questioners are in general expected to look back (probably with the help of the watch list) at where they asked the question, rather than always being prompted with a talkback note on their own user talk page. There is also the niggle that the "Ask a question" button doesn't work on some browsers; if I were interested in using the Teahouse I would of course raise this at WP:VPT or somewhere equally appropriate. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

For the record, David's points help explain why I never get involved here either. But if consensus is to merge the two, I will help with the cleanup. - Karenjc 19:27, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

• Note I never intended this to be poll, as I would of course have raised it at both places, but was half expecting a reply that such a merge had already been considered and discarded for some reason. Please don't beat up the new user who was over bold, this sort of thing can happen and should not be made into a big deal. Rich Farmbrough, 00:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC).
  

I would like to just add that as a contributor, I found the teahouse first and then the NCHD. I found the teahouse to be small and had no navigation to past questions. Perhaps it should be that way afterall it is a teahouse and not a kitchen. (Easy navigation+less storage vs Hard navi+a lot of storage). Secondly I actually prefer the NCHD and wish I was a early user of wikipedia. If a merge should take place I say it should with consensus of the users at NCHD, especially volunteers because I am sure they have put work into it and to just merge to new Teahouse without there views heard would be like Capitalism. Furthermore if merge takes place then the teahouse should expand and have clearly labelled archives which are categorized in more than chronological format and perhaps a system of keywords in questions be used to categorize answers accordingly. This way new users can search instead of just ask. Airbender3 (Talk) 16:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit Notice

There have been quite a few occasions when a new section has been added at the bottom of the page. Should we put a edit notice to prevent it? --Anbu121 (talk me) 19:03, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary. Some folks might prefer not to use the Gadget, and others might not have Javascript turned on. As long as we keep an eye on the Questions page history, we should still be able to tell that someone asked a question. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 22:11, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Korean wiki Teahouse

For your information, Korean Wikipedia's Teahouse was named after Daddy-Long-Legs (novel). :) --kwan-in (talk) 04:56, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Navigation and search box for archived questions

I've noticed a number of comments mentioning the difficulty of searching through the question archives. The question index, Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive Index, has not been updated since July and does not include many of the recently archived questions. The index page also lacks search functionality. To address the problem, I've created a navbox with a search bar (shown on the right). Are there any objections to its inclusion on the Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions page? Or any suggestions on improvements?--xanchester (t) 19:06, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me; go for it! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 04:29, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, this is a most welcome addition. I think it can go up at anytime (and can probably replace the older archives dated from 3 months ago.) I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 05:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Looks like we were working on this at the same time :). Sorry I've been messing with your lovely template a little, I'm trying to make it blend with the page a little (and why I hadn't saved my own attempts yet). Thanks for the awesome work! heather walls (talk) 18:59, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

No problem! And thank you for the help. I agree, it needs to blend in better with the page. It's still a work in progress. Any assistance is very much welcome.--xanchester (t) 19:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Oops!

I also posted this at the host lounge but thought I'd post here too: I answered a question on the Teahouse without thinking, but I am afraid that only hosts are allowed to answer questions here. Should I delete my answer? Is anybody allowed to help out if they feel they can? Thinking back, I regret answering since I'm definitely not an experienced editor and I definitely don't want to give other new editors wrong answers. --Wieldthespade (talk) 11:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Never mind, I have deleted the answer. I noticed that talk page notifications are not automatic so I don't think I have to worry about the asker noticing that the answer disappeared. --Wieldthespade (talk) 13:04, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it's okay for anyone to answer a question! I actually started out at the Teahouse by answering questions without being a host. (Well, there was some other stuff in there, too, but still.) I was relatively new then, as well. Feel free to answer any question that you have an answer for! The only things we really ask are that you keep it friendly (greeting the person in the first sentence is a great way to do this) and that you to use the talk page notifications, since not all our guests know about things like the watchlist. So don't worry about it! :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Writ Keeper. That's great advice. I feel a lot better now. :) I looked around and found the guides so once I'm more familiar with the place I'll surely be back to help. The Teahouse is just an awesome place, it's been so helpful so far - thanks for being part of it! --Wieldthespade (talk) 14:40, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I too, started answering questions before actually becoming a host. Just try to be upbeat and remember to greet the editor when you do! If you know something, it is awesome for you to share it with people. Thanks! Gtwfan52 (talk) 16:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Same here, so don't worry. It's perfectly fine to answer questions without being a host. Just remember to notify newcomers with Talkback messages once you've answered their questions (either the Twinkle Talkback or the one designed for the Teahouse). I hope that helps. Cheers,--xanchester (t) 17:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Making the Teahouse Q&A archive easily browsable and searchable

• Somebody appears to have changed the original user interface of the Teahouse top page such that there no longer appears to be any clear link to the browsable past questions at Teahouse/Questions. It would be nice to have a "browse recent questions and answers" link from this top page to Teahouse/Questions. It would also be nice to have a simple search box on the top page. There is already a search box at the top right of this talk page, and it should be a simple job to transplant this—perhaps minus the archives link and plus a "search past Q&A" label—to the top page. I wonder who created the Teahouse top page—would they be prepared to fix these usability problems? LittleBen (talk) 20:50, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Um, if you're talking about the archive box, it's already on the page; it's just below the table of contents. Easy fix. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

• (Have modified the suggestion above to make it clearer). LittleBen (talk) 20:56, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Hi LittleBenW, I'm not sure which changes you are referring to because we have had a few :). The archive search on this talk page is for the archive of this page, not the Question page (which I am sure you understand). There is a search box for the Question page at the bottom of the table of contents or on this archive page which hasn't been updated since July (probably because of time outs or page length). We won't be adding a search function to the top page as we want to encourage people to feel comfortable asking questions even if they have been asked before. There are a few "browse recent questions and answers" links from that page but they are intended to show you the recent discussions and not the archives (for the reason I just mentioned). I hope this helps. heather walls (talk) 21:02, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

• Just FYI, I moved the archive box from below the table of contents to above it as a result of this, since the TOC takes up so much vertical space; as always, feel free to revert, Heather. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:04, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

• Hi!! I just removed the title since it's kind of redundant. Woo! Teamwork! heather walls (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

A mailing list?

Heya! Has there been any talk of setting up a mailing list for the Teahouse? The Perl community has a mailing list which explicitly allows "stupid" questions to be posted over and over again; the idea being that if someone has a problem, they can send it to perl-beginners and expect a friendly, sensible reply that isn't just "RTFM n00b". I just thought about this over a user I noticed get blocked from Wikipedia for having an incorrect username; I'm helping that user out on e-mail, but I can only reply to so many e-mails; it'd be nice to say "you just need to email [email protected] and someone there will help you". Sort of like #wikipedia-en-help but with e-mail! -- Gaurav (talk) 10:03, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Don't think it would be inherently wrong or anything like that. However, I always saw (one of the many) benefits of the Teahouse being helping editors get familiar with — or at least acquainted with — wikicode. In adding an email component, we kind of destroy that aspect...I'm not saying I'm completely against the idea, but that's something we should take into consideration. ...I see nothing wrong with a trial, though. —Theopolisme 12:22, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not against the idea in principle, but I see a couple possible issues in addition to the one Theopolisme raises:

• answers are only visible to others who are on the list. The Teahouse Q&A board gets a few hundred pageviews a day. At least some of those are likely to be from folks who don't ask or answer questions. But you can learn from reading answers to other people's questions (I know I have). If we direct activity towards a list, where you have to opt in to view, we're restricting the number of people who can benefit.
• doesn't the list you're proposing kind of duplicate the functionality of the Q&A board? Or do you think we'll reach different people on a mailing list that we're not already reaching?
• I don't know how easy this would be to set up. I'm not a list admin on lists.wikimedia.org. Is anyone affiliated with TH a list admin? just read the 'create a new list' link. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 19:53, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, everybody! These are great points.

• I think the mailing list might act as a replacement for the IRC/Q&A board for people who are completely new to wikicode and Wikipedia. I don't know if there's some way to get people off the mailing list and into Wikipedia asap. It could also be an off-wiki place for new users to talk about things that need fixing. I do agree that keeping Q&As have the advantage of creating a space for beginners to learn wikicode.
• We could keep archives of the mailing list, which could be picked up by Google. I don't know if we want to set up a lets-learn-together type mailing list (which would be public) or a this-is-a-place-to-complain-and-hangout kind of place (in which case it should be private). Google Groups has Q&A forum type of mailing list; maybe that would be a way to collect common problems? Of course, we could also just set up a StackExchange for Wikipedia. Do you think we could get 200 users for that?
• I would like (assuming it is possible!) to use the mailing list to reach out to users who (1) are starting from scratch in terms of editing content online, but are interested in contributing, and (2) those who would like to "fix one tiny mistake" but need some hand-holding through their first edit and their first interactions with other editors. I know lots of users who tried to make a couple of edits and were scared off by hostile users, and I feel like once they walk away from Wikipedia, it'd be hard to re-engage them again. Getting them onto a mailing list and giving them a sympathetic ear might help.

Once again, thanks for responding! I am less sure now that a mailing list would be all that helpful, although it is technically feasible. Let's wait and see what other Teahouse contributors think about how to go about this. -- Gaurav (talk) 08:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Ooh... I love the idea of a Wikipedia Stack Exchange. In general, I think you make some excellent points Gaurav. I don't see any problem with creating a list. Although I will say that we closed down (or at least, stopped prominently featuring a link to) our IRC help channel because no one showed up. A list might meet the same fate. But then again, it might not! Experimenting is the only way we're going to know what works and what doesn't. Well, I guess we already know some things that don't work: like leaving newcomers to fend for themselves completely. I'm pretty sure that's not a viable long term solution :) - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 05:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Introducing new users to WikiProjects

I was curious what the process is for pointing new users towards WikiProjects. It appears there was a little bit of discussion about this a while back, something about creating a suggest bot or a manual quiz, but it seems nothing has come out of it. From what I can tell, hosts help out the new users and suggest WPs based on their editing history. Is that correct?

Also, how can we, as WikiProjects, design our project pages to be more welcoming to new users? Are there examples of project pages that are more welcoming than others? Thanks. –Fredddie™ 23:56, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know as the teahouse has an actual policy on that. Personally, if a person is looking for technical (sourcing, project-specific graphics, etc) help with a certain kind of article, I direct them to the appropriate project. Same if they express a directed interest towards a specific subject area. Again, speaking for myself only, I find the schools project to have a very friendly front page. As a new user, their well thought out and fairly specific article guidelines were a reassuring line to follow when I was first starting out. As most everyone remembers, the vast mish-mash of sometimes contradictory and almost always confusing policies and guidelines around here were very intimidating. A clear, step, by step; this is ok and that is not kind of guidance was a good chance to start out in a safe sort of way. Fredddie, I am not trying to "out" you here, but I am guessing that this question may be stemming from a discussion I participated in at the Highways project! Highways would lend themselves very well to a step by step do this and not that sort of guideline. No one really likes conflict, and I have seen many many new editors show up here at teahouse already embroiled in a conflict in their first few days. Not demeaning what we do at the highway project, but a highway stub is fairly easy to write. It is also fairly easy to get it up to a start class. After that it gets tougher. But I think it important that the projects that have "easy" to create stubs in their domain to make a concerted effort to recruit the newest of noobs, so they get a chance to swim in the shallow end before getting thrown in with the sharks. Unfortunately, it seems that every new editor wants to write a BLP right out of the gate. That is akin to teaching a child to swim by swimming the English Channel.

I think one of the best things a project can do for new users is to create a project-specific welcoming template, with a place for a personal message in it. That way, when you see a new editor editing on one of your watched articles, you can send them an invite to learn more about your project and leave them a personal note so they don't see Wikipedia as a vast machine that will chew them up and spit them out. Gtwfan52 (talk) 00:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

You are correct with my ulterior motives with regards to WP:USRD, but I was speaking in generalities so people reading this in the archives may find the answers they're looking for. I do like the idea of a step-by-step guide for new editors. I want to say an FAQ section was mentioned in some forum, which is another great idea. –Fredddie™ 01:43, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey Fredddie. I'm actually working with nettrom right now to get a Teahouse-specific suggestbot request template working. You can actually play with a (grungy and non-functional) prototype of this in my sandbox if you want--just click 'Sign up' to see the basic workflow. Basically, the idea is this: SuggestBot already has a request template for making recommendations based on specified categories. When a new editor clicks the 'sign up' button (it would be placed somewhere in the Teahouse, not sure where yet), they have the opportunity to select up to three categories of articles that they're interested in. So we give them a list of WikiProject Article Categories to choose from. When they click 'save', the SuggestBot request template is posted to their talk page. But SuggestBot takes 5-10 minutes to come up with a set of suggestions (which is actually incredibly fast, considering), which is fine for most folks but tough for newbies because as far as they're concerned, nothing happened when they clicked save! So in the meantime we provide them with links to the relevant WikiProjects, which they can visit if they want. As long as we make sure the list of categories provided to the newcomers only includes highly active projects, the newcomer has the option of clicking the link and checking out an active project. The current list in my sandbox workflow contains some of the largest categories from some of the most active WikiProjects. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 05:24, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

On the WikiProject side, I agree completely with Gtwfan52 that the best thing your project can do is create a good invite template and judiciously invite new editors to participate. But be prepared to send a lot of invites for each newcomer your recruit: we send about 100 invites a day from the Teahouse, and our response rate is only about 4%! If you're looking for new members and want to put an 'ad' for US Roads somewhere on the Teahouse or something, let's move this discussion over to the Host Lounge. I don't think other hosts would mind, but we should check. We do have a WikiProject list that's surfaced for some Teahouse visitors (those who have just created a profile), but since it's just a list of links I'm afraid it's probably not very effective. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 05:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I cannot overemphasize the importance of placing a personal note in that template. I am young enough on the project to remember easily how overwhelmed I felt with templates and bots and such when I first started. The use of a personalized welcoming template allows you to add a friendly greeting such as we begin every answer we give at the teahouse Q&A page. Being noticed by an actual person who will take the time to answer your questions, no matter how lame they may seem in retrospect, I think will make all the difference in retaining editors, both for the various projects and for the overall project! Gtwfan52 (talk) 06:12, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I thought I'd pop in here after J-Mo pointed me to this discussion. As he mentions we're currently working on making SuggestBot Teahouse-ready, and part of that is to allow users to specify categories related to WikiProjects. A side-effect will be that it might be easier to get suggestions related to WikiProjects, I suspect you could actually make that a two-click operation (click a button to get the edit page with the template already filled out with the right WikiProject, click save).

When it comes to how to support the projects, there was a research paper at CSCW in 2010 called Socialization tactics in wikipedia and their effects. If my quick read of the paper is not too badly off, it appears that the best way to treat new users in a project is to invite them automatically but welcome them personally if they choose to join the project, so the idea of a personalised welcome template sounds like a good trade off. Cheers, Nettrom (talk) 22:17, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Freddie is correct. While dropping {{subst:welcome-t}} templates here and there, I check contrib's and suggest Wikiprojects to newcomers based on their early edits. "Looks like you might be interested in..." as a personal note. Only takes a line or two below the template. I seldom get a response but it's worth the bit of effort. DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·cont) Join WER 23:10, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

J-mo, netrom, that sandbox looks great. If you ever get it working, feel free to add categories from the highways projects. –Fredddie™ 02:43, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Will do, Fredddie. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 04:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

@Doctree. I do that occasionally as well, especially when I notice they edit some subject that I don't find interesting but which definitely has a WikiProject. It would be cool if someone wrote a welcome template that semi-automated that, perhaps by looking at the categories of articles the newbie has just created. Though it would probably be best to avoid a maintenance project like biography and stick to real wolrd ones like MilHist and cricket. ϢereSpielChequers 10:55, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Question

Um excuse me but is this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Welcometothenewmillenium (talk • contribs) 03:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

If you have any questions about editing Wikipedia, please visit Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions. We'll be more than happy to help you out. Welcome to Wikipedia!--xanchester (t) 18:53, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you kindly for the invite Doctree.

I haven't any questions at the moment, but I'm certain this page will prove incredibly valuable when I do. The article I have been trying to create The Young Brothers, was tagged for deletion review, but I've been working hard on it, & I think I've done a pretty good job so far, of cleaning it up. Of course, although another wikipedia editor complimented my efforts & awarded me a "Cookie"...lol, I am still trying my best, to improve upon the page, in an effort to prevent it from being deleted. I really just wanted to stop by & say "THANK YOU" Doctree, for kindly inviting me to this group page. I'm sure I'll be stopping by often with questions, as I am new to Wikipedia. Tybllc (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2012 (UTC)tybllcTybllc (talk) 03:09, 8 December 2012 (UTC)  :)

Thank you!

Hi, I am in just a bit of dilemma here, I have created an article and it is recommended for deletion. Can you help me rescue that? The title is Rebecca Masterton. --Lubna Rizvi 01:21, 8 December 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lubnarizvi (talk • contribs)

If you take a look at the discussion, it seems that they're debating whether she is notable enough for Wikipedia. It looks like your article will probably survive. By the way, you can ask questions at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions; this page is just for talking about the Teahouse. -- YPNYPN 02:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

is it true that wikipedia prefers sources from books rather than internet??

Its annoying for me to no end if people use books as a source to back up their data and facts. Because books are not online you cant rent them or buy them all the time as they sometimes dont exist anymore in the stores, and who has the money and time to do this to really check it out if they do exist. So is it true and if yes how can i change that? Is it possible to wrtite to admins or something?--Noelmantra (talk) 17:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Noelmantra, this is an interesting question and because it deserves a wider audience I've moved it to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#is it true that wikipedia prefers sources from books rather than internet??. Hope you don't mind. NtheP (talk) 19:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Instructed to click "hide" but no "hide" button

At Wikipedia:Teahouse/Guests/Left column, there is a floating box in the lower-right with "Teahouse Barnstar Hires.png Thanks for introducing yourself! Next..." and a set of links. The top line says "Click [hide] to close this box. → [hide]". If I click the [hide] button, the box collapses to just that single line, leaving instead a [show] button to uncollapse it. But that remaining line still tells me that I can click [hide], which no longer exists, to close the box, which has *never* been true (it just collapses, not disappears). DMacks (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

True enough, it's just some very basic capability we have there and we all have to use our imagination until someone builds (or points out) a real dismiss button. :) heather walls (talk) 18:38, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

featured "Recent question"

The recent question that I saw featured on this page isn't answered in the Questions subpage. In fact, it was removed with the edit summary "rm attack"[2]. I think that it is a reasonable concern to wonder where the Wikipedia fundraiser money is going and how wikia is related to Wikipedia. imho, those should have been addressed and maybe the "attack" could have been reworded rather than removing it altogether... --Jules.LT (talk) 16:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I am not the one who removed the question, but in all honesty it did not belong on the Teahouse Q&A. The Teahouse serves a specified purpose and it is not to give a soapbox to the uninformed. The Foundation is extremely clear about it's financial expenditures and is bound by law to be so as a 501(c) organization in the United States. hajatvrc @ 17:40, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Moreover, it wasn't a real question (all uses of the question marks appeared to be rhetorical), and the point he was trying to make was incoherent anyway. Of course the money Jimbo makes from Wikia stays in his pocket; it's his business. Wikia and the WMF are separate entities, with separate bank accounts. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:54, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Bah, it shocked me mostly because it was "featured" on the Teahouse home page. Now that I know that it wasn't specifically brought forward, I guess I kinda agree. Cheers, Jules.LT (talk) 16:09, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

I removed it from the featured questions when you pointed it out (thanks!) a bot rotates them and the content is random. It's good to look out for it on occasion. If you have fundraising questions feel free to ask, though the Teahouse is not the best place. I can point you to some or find someone to answer your questions on the Teahouse question board. There is a FAQ page, though not all of the answers are up to the minute current. heather walls (talk) 21:00, 18: December 2012 (UTC)

: : Oh no, I know exactly where to find that information and I have no worries about it. I just find that it is a reasonable worry for people to have. And glad to be of help :-) --Jules.LT (talk) 05:02, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Great note about you guys from an editor in the Wikipedia Education Program!

Hi, all! I recently collected a post-semester survey from some editors in the Wikipedia Education Program in the US and Canada, and I wanted to pass along a kind note from a new editor who had an otherwise challenging encounter during the assignment:

"To end on a positive note, I did enjoy the welcoming by the teahouse; it was a very nice thing to have for a nervous, new editor....I really appreciated that."

Thanks for being so welcoming! JMathewson (WMF) (talk) 20:46, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know, Jami :) - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 19:21, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 December 2012

{{edit semi-protected}} The current given coordinates for Muir Woods National Monument are for a spot well inside the park boundaries, not near the main entrance. Many people use these coordinates in their gps and end up on Ridge Ave Mill Valley which is the closest point to the given coordinates (from outside the park) but a long way from the main entrance to the park. Every day people drive to Ridge Ave and ask the locals how to get to Muir Woods Park. Please give the correct coordinates of the entrance to the park which are on the Muir Woods National Park Service website (but are not what Wikipedia lists). Therefore, please change the given coordinates from 37degrees 53' 56" N, 122degrees 35' 2" W to 37degrees 53.519' N, 122 degrees 34.254' W. I used "degrees" because I didn't have a degree symbol which, of course, should be used. I also used the same format as in the NPS website--degrees and decimal minutes for the coordinates, not the degrees, minutes, seconds given in Wikipedia.

Plrichardson (talk) 01:52, 26 December 2012 (UTC) Plrichardson (talk) 01:52, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Plrichardson. I'm not sure how you ended up at this page, with this request, but this is not the right place. This is a talk page for discussing the workings of the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Since you are seeking action with respect to the article Muir Woods National Monument, a place to discuss changes to the article is its talk page, located at Talk:Muir Woods National Monument. Also, the method you've used to make your request is not a good fit. You've used the template, {{edit semi-protected}}, but it is specific to asking someone to make an edit to an article that is semi-protected, and the Muir Woods National Monument article is not protected at all. I don't mean any of this as criticism. Wikipedia is a vast and intricate place with a steep learning curve. I'm just trying to get you to the right place and give you pertinent information. Let me lay out what I see as your best options (I would simply take care of the issue if I could, of course). First, you could make your request at the talk page of the Muir Woods article I linked, and use the template {{helpme}} in conjunction, which will call people to look at your request. Another option is to go to a central forum for help requests and questions, such as one associated with this Teahouse project: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions. There's also the Wikipedia:Help Desk. Lastly, since your request is specific to coordinates, you might try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates, though I'm not sure that is a very well-monitored page. Hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:19, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

I think it might be easier if I just chose one for you. Since you ended up at the Teahouse, I'm going to copy your post at its question forum. Please see Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Help fixing coordinates in Muir Woods National Monument.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:35, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion

I'm not sure who created the "Respond to this discussion" functionality, but I have a suggestion. First, I think it is a great idea, and I hope it is helping. My simple suggestion is that there is a note at the bottom reminding editors to sign. How hard would it be to add a button that does the signing. I would rewrite to read something like:

On Wikipedia, you should sign all of your posts by ending them with four tildes (~~~~) (Or click here to sign this response).

That would let new editors know how to do it in general, plus make it easier to sign in this case.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 16:00, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Equazcion (talk · contribs) wrote "respond to this discussion" as a userscript, based on the Teahouse Gadget code written by Werdna (talk · contribs). And Writ Keeper (talk · contribs) integrated the two. But the hardcoded requirment to sign your post was part of the original Gadget. It probably wouldn't be too hard to add another button... but since the point of requiring guests to actually type the four tildes is to give them practice in good habits, I don't think we'd gain anything by providing them with a short cut. Do you see evidence that a lot of users are getting confused and giving up because they can't post their response, and don't understand the note? - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 21:51, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts help?

Hey Teahouse hosts, on the editor engagement experiments team, we have a project we could probably use your help on...

We're trying ways to help new editors without any of what to do find an easy first task. We're sending people who just registered to Special:GettingStarted, which includes a link to where they were at before they signed up, and a small list of articles that need simple improvements like copyediting.

The list is updated on an hourly basis, and the articles in the list tend to get a few edits by newbies. If you look at the history of the pages contained in Special:GettingStarted, it's pretty easy to see which are new editors. The only sad part is that, unless they're vandals, the new editors either get ignored entirely or just slapped with a big welcome template with a laundry list of links.

It would be really nice if Teahouse hosts, famous for being friendly like you are, could give these people a nicer welcome, even if it was just to say hello and thank you. (In the future, we're going to make this easier by tagging the edits from Special:GettingStarted.) Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:58, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Steven. Good idea. I posted an announcement about this to the Host lounge and added a link to the Invite Guide. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 22:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks J-mo! Steven Walling (WMF) • talk 22:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Questions page

I believe the questions page could be better organised. How about something to indicate that a question has been answered? Sort of like a discussion closed option. And a way to auto-archive closed discussions after a given time, say 3 days after it has been answered.

(I suggest the criterion for being answered be that the editor asking the question indicates so or there has been no reply after an answer is given by the hosts after a period of 10 days[in which case the reply must also be posted on the talk page of the user asking the question])) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:15, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

To reply in reverse order, questions are already set to archive 5 days after the last item in the thread subject to at least 12 threads remaining on the page post archive. Side note to anyone familiar with MiszaBot configuration is it or can it be set that threads with only one item in them i.e. just the original question are not archived?

Closing discussions in the way you suggest seems both bureaucratic and contrary to the spirit of the Teahouse to me. The whole ethos is that the Teahouse is friendly and easy to deal with, and that there are no expectations set on editors asking questions. Someone drops in with a question, it's replied to and that editor is never heard from again here is equally as fine as them coming back again with other questions or saying thanks. Formally closing discussions is alike manner to WP:AN (I don't know if this is the style you were thinking of) is uninviting, can look ferocious and disuades people from future intervention e.g. a thread could have been closed and I come along and think "Actually there is something extra I could have added in response but it's closed so I won't bother because that involves reopening the thread". Posting replies to questioner's talk pages is either Big Brother or nannyish "Look you haven't acknowledged the answer so here it is again" - we have the talkback system as a prompt which I'm not aware of anything that says that isn't working and that seems enough to me. Any more is not only leading the horse to water, making it drink and insisting it drinks at least a gallon as well. NtheP (talk) 13:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I am not sure if the archiving conditions can be changed to suitably meet what you said. But the current scheme has the bot archiving after 5 days, even if there was just the original question there.

The main reason I suggested that was because I found it a weird structure to be followed. Mainly, it was very long, and there was no way for me to find out which are the questions that were unanswered. If the AN structure (That was what I had in mind; It would have allowed me to understand which were the questions that had not been answered) cannot be done, then the resolved button also does the trick.

The reason I suggested that we again reply on their page was because I was thinking what happened if a user sees the Talkback after the thread has been archived. Then they would come here to not find their thread at all. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 15:57, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

How often do we think questions don't get answered? I just peeked at one of my db tables used to calculate monthly metrics, and it appears as though between 12/20 and 12/27 every question received at least one response. Granted, not every response will give the guest the info they need, but there's certainly no harm in adding your 2 cents to a question that already has an answer, if you think you have something useful to add. And with most questions getting a response within an hour or two, 5 days to archiving seems like a reasonable interval. I guess I don't see a problem here that needs solving? - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 21:44, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I understand. But what if a user sees the Talkback after the thread has been archived? (With newer editors, you cannot be sure of the frequency of them coming to WP) Then they would come here and not find their thread on the Q/A page. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 22:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Then they come and complain and we dig it out :) it all works out. heather walls (talk) 23:18, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Snuggle: newcomer socialization wiki-tool (IRC demo session)

Hey folks, I'm working on a new wiki tool to help help make the socialization process on Wikipedia easier. I call it Snuggle. It's designed to help mentors quickly and efficiently identify good newcomers who are running into trouble. The tool isn't quite complete yet, and that's exactly why I'm here. I'd like to show you some of the basic functionality via an IRC demo and get your feedback so I can make sure I focus on the most important functionality first. Here's the details:

• IRC Office hours: Friday, Jan. 4th at 1700 UTC/11AM CST
• #wikimedia-office

--EpochFail^(talk|work) 22:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Rotary phase converter

I edited the article "Rotary phase converter" but my English is quite week, pls. check my work

Many thanks

User Robogos on hu wiki

--194.176.244.13 (talk) 14:15, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Done - I hope I haven't changed the meaning of your text (which I didn't really understand. :-) Alansplodge (talk) 18:57, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

I am new, but I am, a "Baby code monkey"

Lol!

This user is a Baby Code Monkey!

I made it myself. I have a bad habit of making user boxes so if anyone want's one that is not like ubberly ridiculous let me know! A Wiggin13 (talk) 01:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Neat! Thanks, Andrew. Welcome to Wikipedia. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 20:34, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Problem with wiki table

Hey guys, I really have no idea where else to go and ask, luckily I found this nice and quiet place called teahouse :) I am quite experienced user and I never needed any help, but now I have this problem with the wikitable. In this article, Boxing at the Summer Olympics, there is a table explaining history and evolution of boxing weight classes at each Olympic games. What I'm trying to do, is to change the size of the brackets in the last collum, 2012. I am trying to make the "Welterweight" window larger and take over part of the "Light-welterweight" window, while making the Light-welterweight window smaller and giving its upper part to Welterweight window. The table itself is extremely difficult and I didn't find any logical system in it. I'd be very thankful if someone could help me. Thank you. --Novis-M (talk) 09:45, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Novis-M, thanks for this. I hope you don't mind but I've moved the question to the Teahouse/Questions page and replied there. NtheP (talk) 13:04, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks, my bad :) --Novis-M (talk) 18:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

"You can also talk in real time chat at {{irc|wikipedia-teahouse}}"

Shouldn't the line that says "You can also talk in real time chat at #wikipedia-teahouse ^connect" also be mentioned here and here, for those with questions? Biosthmors (talk) 00:05, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Biosthmors, it was that way for a while. Turns out that very few people ever showed up and hosts were worried that there would not be help there 24 hours a day. We also prefer to answer questions where other people can benefit from answers. You can always come to IRC and chat if you like. :) heather walls (talk) 01:02, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Support for Today Article for Improvement - welcoming new editors

There is ongoing discussion about the implementation of Today's article for improvement on the Main Page. It would be good if we could get input from editors at this project over at the discussion. --NickPenguin_(contribs) 17:04, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Cool project, Nick! Thanks. Fellow hosts: if you, like me, are hearing about this closely-aligned project for the first time, here are some handy links for your reference: the TAFI template includes a link to the Teahouse, and TAFI articles will be displayed on the main page, so this could potentially increase our Q&A traffic substantially. I've posted some concerns about the way the template links to the Teahouse here. The original TAFI RFC is archived here, and NickPenguin is particularly interested in having Teahouse folks welcome new users who edit TAFI articles. Jmorgan (WMF) (talk) 21:29, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Pointing to new welcoming opportunities is very good, but I don't think that implying that Teahouse hosts should feel responsible for more than what they have already signed up for (ie- Teahouse related help,) is necessarily a good thing. TAFI is not the only initiative to have that interest. Please be careful when asking people to do things, everyone's time is valuable. I have a fear about other programs relying in any way on the hosts, outside of guests who have been directed here (which is awesome! We love new guests!) Does that make sense? Bottom line, I don't want to create a sense of burden, helping should be cooperative and enjoyable. heather walls (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Sister project

I added Teahouse as a sister project to WP:RETENTION today. Please feel free to join the discussion on the talkpage.--Amadscientist (talk) 23:56, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Snuggle functionality

Hey folks, I've posted here before about WP:Snuggle, a tool I have in development to support newcomer socialization. I'm still trying to work out the right actions to support with the tool. Currently, the tool supports classifying and searching for newcomer in the following groups:

• Good-faith: newcomers who are at least trying to do something productive
• Bad-faith: newcomers who are not trying to do something productive (e.g. vandalism, spam, trying to be funny, etc.)
• Ambiguous: newcomers whose actions do not clearly demonstrate their intentions (yet)

I've gotten some feedback suggesting that these categories might not be the most useful way to look at new editors, so I'm looking for suggestions on how you'd rather interact with these newcomers through the tool. I have a few questions that I think might help the discussion:

• Would you like me to deliver lists of newcomers on-wiki via a bot? (e.g. good-faith newcomers with warnings who joined in the last 7 days)
• Are there specific newcomer situations you'd like to flag? (e.g. newbie in distress, highly productive newcomer, POV pusher, etc.)
• What the most important interactions you'd like to perform with the tool? (e.g. send free-form message, post Teahouse invite, etc.)

To try out the current version, just navigate to http://stat1.wikimedia.org:8080. Any feedback and suggestions are welcome. :) --EpochFail^(talk|work) 19:14, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello and the first question

Hello, I am Marina and I hope I will be able to contribute to our community. Could anyone tell me whether all pictures found o Google images have free license?--Martina Moreau (talk) 17:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Marina, welcome to Teahouse! This should have been asked at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions and I will copy it there so others can learn from the answer. This page is for asking questions about the Teahouse itself. No worries! Most pictures on Google images are not of a compatible license with Wikipedia. I hope this answers your question. Gtwfan52 (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

An AFC FAQ

Hello,

I have tried to create a general FAQ for the AfCs. It can be found here - User:TheOriginalSoni/AFC FAQ. Feel free to look into it, and add anything you think ought to be helpful. Also, dont forget to leave your comments at the talk page.

Cheers, TheOriginalSoni (talk) 07:10, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

How to delete a profile?

I've accidentally created two profiles of myself. Is there any way I can delete one? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yashowardhani (talk • contribs) 14:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Yashowardhani. Don't worry, I've removed the duplicate - one of the beauties of wikipedia is that there is very little that can't be undone. Hope you enjoy the Teahouse and wikipedia in general. NtheP (talk) 14:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you :) --Yashowardhani (talk) 14:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Archive links

Maybe I'm the only one who does this, but I've been working my way back through the Help Desk archives and the Signpost archives, and now that I have discovered the Teahouse I am looking at those too. The way I link to the next archive is to save it in an email to myself and change it each time I send myself a new email since it's easier than remembering how to get to the page where I discovered the links.

If a person were to want to do this with the Teahouse, it only goes back to 51 right now, so a person would have to manually change the way I do.

I noticed there were areas for experimenting, so I created one possible new design for the link to the archives which is currently found at Template:Teahouse questions navbox/sandbox since no one has changed it. It uses Template:Teahouse questions navbox/testcases, also not changed yet, and that in turn requires the redirects Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 09, ‎Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 08 and so on back to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 01 since I couldn't figure out how to actually link to the archives with one-digit numbers.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC) ‎

Hi Vchimpanzee. I'm not entirely sure what you are saying or asking. I don't want to change what appears on the question page, I don't think we need to link to every archive, just the most recent ones. Are you saying something else? Can you explain a little more? Thanks! heather walls (talk) 22:15, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Is it just me, or...

Is it just me, or do we seem to get an increasing number of questions about, "Can I create an article on..." my company, my client, my blog, my website, etc.? Every time I turn around there seems to be a new one. Should we, as hosts, coordinate our answers? Go Phightins! 22:34, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Its not just you. Sarah did create an essay related to this issue (I cant remember what exactly was that) (its this -Wikipedia:For publicists publicizing your client's work) but if we co-ordinate, we can create this essay into a helpful FAQ to link at the main Teahouse Page, saying "Are you here to create an article on your Company/ Blog/ Website/ Client etc? Please go away read the Company FAQ before posting your question on the Teahouse". TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

• Just in case anyone's still interested, there was a proposal for an AFC FAQ from me, which is lying stale. We could use some bit of friendly work on it! TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Well they make a change from the spate of "why was my submission at AFC declined?" questions :-) NtheP (talk) 20:28, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Why are topics in reverse order?

Why are new questions added to the top of the page instead of to the bottom? This is bizzarely idiosyncratic - all other help/talk pages on WP new topics go to the bottom. This contrarian practice here makes no sense and indirectly teaches newbies the wrong method. Roger (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

see Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 1#This really isn't a big deal, but (yes this was the very first topic discussed on this page) - the loop can be gone round again but I suspect the answer might be no consensus. NtheP (talk) 18:05, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi Dodger67. Do you have any evidence that this teaches newbies the wrong method? We've been running for a year and I haven't seen any.

Teahouse Q&A isn't a talk page. It doesn't look or behave like one, and I doubt anyone is confused. And frankly, even if some newcomer did top-post in another WP help forum (which is kind of hard to do, and goes expressly against the directives to 'click here to ask a question' present in the header of most of our help fora), the worst that might happen is that someone will see their help request sooner.

Teahouse/Questions is an activity feed, where newest threads are listed first. This is an age-old web design paradigm that makes it easier for people to keep track of new content in long, high-traffic pages. In that way, it behaves just like most discussion forums, and well... pretty much all the rest of the internet. It's also a paradigm reflected in the design of many other non-talk pages on Wikipedia.

By the way, having new topics go to the bottom of talk pages wasn't ever a design choice: it's just what happens when you have to hack together a discussion forum using software designed for collaborative authoring. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 20:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)