::{{reply|Blaze the Wolf}} The same is true for other pages in the "Wikipedia" name space if they are intended purely for information and not intended for discussion, although not protected from editing. [[Wikipedia:Reference desk]] and [[Wikipedia:General disclaimer]] are other examples. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 17:12, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
::{{reply|Blaze the Wolf}} The same is true for other pages in the "Wikipedia" name space if they are intended purely for information and not intended for discussion, although not protected from editing. [[Wikipedia:Reference desk]] and [[Wikipedia:General disclaimer]] are other examples. ~[[User:Anachronist|Anachronist]] <small>([[User talk:Anachronist|talk]])</small> 17:12, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
::If you want those tabs, you need to add the <code><nowiki>__NEWSECTIONLINK__</nowiki></code> to the page (can be hidden in a transcluded header). [[Help:Magic words#Behavior switches]] has information.
::If you'd like to try out the (new) New Discussion tool, you could replace the link in the big blue button with this URL: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse?dtenable=1&action=edit§ion=new That would guarantee that people's first comments were signed.
::Unfortunately, there's no way to turn the Reply tool on automagically for everyone arriving at the page. [[User:Whatamidoing (WMF)|Whatamidoing (WMF)]] ([[User talk:Whatamidoing (WMF)|talk]]) 19:38, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
== How to give draft artical to promotion "REVIEW" ==
== How to give draft artical to promotion "REVIEW" ==
Revision as of 19:38, 2 September 2021
This page is only for discussing how the Teahouse is run and operated. If you need help with editing, or have a question about how Wikipedia works, click here to go to the Teahouse Q&A forum.
This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the Help Menu or Help Directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.Wikipedia HelpWikipedia:Help ProjectTemplate:Wikipedia Help ProjectHelp articles
This page is within the scope of WikiProject Editor Retention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of efforts to improve editor retention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Editor RetentionWikipedia:WikiProject Editor RetentionTemplate:WikiProject Editor RetentionEditor Retention articles
Hello, all. The Editing team's been thinking more specifically about newcomers recently, and I wanted to give you all a quick update.
First, please take a look at the pictures in phab:T274832. These aren't the final designs, but even 20 seconds spent glancing at them now will give you an idea of what a red-linked talk page might look like in the future. These are designed mostly with newcomers in mind (and mostly not for the English Wikipedia, which has fewer empty/red-linked talk pages than nearly any other wiki); experienced editors already know what to do on those pages.
Second, mw:Talk pages project/Notifications (aka "topic subscriptions") is in Beta Features at Meta-Wiki. If you have enabled Discussion Tools in m:Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures at Meta-Wiki, then you'll get a [subscribe] button (over there. It may be a long time before it is offered here). I'd like you all to be thinking about the future, and how we might want to handle default settings. On the one hand, I suspect that you'd like all newcomers to be automagically subscribed to every section they post in on this page. On the other hand, I'm not entirely sure that you'd like to get Echo/Notifications for every section you post in on this page. So please be thinking about what you'd like – different prefs settings for newbies vs. old hands? A pop-up that encourages newcomers to subscribe the first time they edit a talk page? Something else? If you know your preference, you can post it at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications (or ping me).
Finally, the Reply tool will eventually be turned on for everyone here. This should reduce the amount of time you spend fiddling with incorrect indentation and unsigned messages. However, it may be a couple of months. Ops has invoked their Wikipedia:Don't worry about performance escape clause, and Editing can't deploy it any further until some technical problems have been fixed. Once that's underway, the English Wikipedia will probably be one of the last communities to get it by default (because size matters; OTOH, because of the nature of the problem, converting this wiki might actually be part of the solution, rather than the riskiest deployment). Please put Wikipedia:Talk pages project on your watchlist if you want to keep track of this. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:37, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Maproom: Surely, that's just a talk page for a new user where that talk page has yet to be created, but would be if someone posted there. Hence it's red-linked. e.g. User talk:Mapropst (which is the next account alphabetically after yours.) Nick Moyes (talk) 13:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's all red talk pages and how they should appear for the benefit of new user. In fact the phab says it's specifically about talk pages that are not user talk pages. Instead of being an empty page, it's going to be pretty, filled with instructions on how to create the page per their particular need. And it needs discussing what kind of pretty it should be to be more useful and less obstructive and annoying to experienced users.
The second one seems to be about watchlisting talk page sections, which I would find more interesting and important and urgent. In fact, it looks kinda important. So, I wanted to learn everything in detail before commenting here, which is why I hadn't replied to the post yet. Regards! Usedtobecool☎️13:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Usedtobecool, the notifications system uses Echo/Special:Notifications, not Special:Watchlist. But I'm pretty happy with it so far. It only notifies people if there's been a new comment added (and not, e.g., every time someone fixes a typo or changes the section heading – that's what the watchlist is for). If you want to try it out on this page, then https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Teahouse?dtenable=1 will give you a temporary [subscribe] button.
They are looking at having people auto-subscribed to sections they start or comment in (if using the Reply tool). That'll be months in the future, but I think it would be helpful for newcomers to the Teahouse. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, WAID! As long as it's one notification per thread, not one notification per comment (I sometimes come back to half a dozen notifications about my talkpage when it's just one post and five type corrections to it), I think, auto-sub could work. I'll probably disable it though; what I want is to choose to sub some select threads in select pages. Obviously can't know before trying it out for real.I wish the reply tool would start with a ping for whomever it is a reply to, like Enterprisey's used to do. You get a button to add, but it's the ugliest format (@[[user:username|user:username]]); I'd rather it gave me just the username, so I could click it after typing in my favourite template. (Now that I typed its favoured method of pinging, it's giving me a list of participants to this thread; if only it did that with the templates that I like). But I am rambling at the wrong place. Regards! Usedtobecool☎️02:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Last I recall, the pipe trick causes it to expand into [[User:Example|User:Example]] after rendering the response, so there'd be no difference. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So when you're reading the diff, you still see the full wikitext, and when you're typing (in wikitext source mode, which might not be typical for newcomers), you'll see something that you're unfamiliar with. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, where is the part of the Teahouse Hosts page where I can change the photo on my Host profile? I want to include a photo of myself. Cheers, Rubbish computerPing me or leave a message on my talk page19:27, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
@Qwerfjkl: I find it very useful to check for new comments on any talk page; I don't need to check the page's history to determine if new comments have been added in older discussions further up the page from the bottom. It also helps demarcate comments on the same indentation level from each other, which has irked me for quite some time. A big limitation I'm running into so far is that it only works properly if everyone signs their posts, which has been neglected a lot (I might start another discussion about that on here later) with a fair share of newcomers' follow-up comments. What do other hosts think of the script? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:51, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like a useful tool, but I think I'll forego it, as it seems to conflict with all the editing modes I use. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:03, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
NFM Not for me, thanks. I have enough trouble reminding myself of the tools I already have if I don't use one for a while; I don't need another one to get me even more confunsed.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't heard of "Teahouse helper scripts". I started reading about this script, but what I read didn't excite me, and I confess that as I continued to read I soon tuned out. -- Hoary (talk) 08:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't personally find "Convenient Discussions tool" convenient (for me). So, I don't have any opinion. I'd go with what the other editors think is better. ─ The Aafī(talk)09:18, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I'm in the same boat as Gronk Oz... I have enough trouble remembering that add-on tools exist and staying on top of how they work that it's almost invariably easier for me to just do everything in default-newbie mode. I have to use so many different platforms that any added abstraction layers in any of them immediately get forgotten. So, if the tool helps you, more power to you, but I don't have any useful suggestions. Bill Woodcock (talk) 03:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't use any tools or scripts when I edit and, thus, am unable to speak from first-hand experience on the matter. I will state that I think if an editor feels they need to rely on a script to answer a TH question, then perhaps they don't really have the experience to be answering questions in the first place. FWIW, I think for the most parts scripts and tools are quite helpful and do save time; however, I'm not sure that time saving is such a huge priority here at the TH as it might be in other types of editing. In addition, some newish editors tend to see tools and scripts as a way to establish their Wikipedia credibility (WP:HATS); they mostly mean well, but sometimes things unintentionally go awry. So, maybe if such a tool/script was created, it would be best to set it up so that some sort of WP:PERM is required to make sure editors don't mistake it as quick and easy way of becoming a de-facto TH host. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To add to my previous comment, I do regularly use tools such as AWB, HotCat, Twinkle etc but for either minor edits, repetitive edits, reverts or capitalisation. I don't tend to use them for a longer discussion: it'll hardly save much time. I prefer to edit the Teahouse manually. Rubbish computerPing me or leave a message on my talk page11:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks potentially useful, but not something I plan to use. Teahouse replies aren't that difficult, and so for me I don't see the need to use a tool for it. May be useful for other though. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've enabled all three options (including 'Quick Replying') in the 'Discussion Pages' section in my Preferences. I do rather like this new reply feature, which I'm still coming to terms with. I'm now fairly happy with how replying currently works, so won't be spending time assessing this tool, I'm afraid. So I feel the consensus here is that, as useful as it might potentially be to some, it simply isn't a 'killer tool' that needs to be offered to every new Teahouse Hosts. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Hi, Sorry to interrupt here.
Now there are so many article in teahouse about different subject, which are all listing in the main page. I'd like to suggest that if it will be better when they are split into different subject in different pages? Pavlov2 (talk) 11:39, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Pavlov2, I think you're suggesting that there should be multiple teahouses for different types of questions? We do have several different help desks on Wikipedia, which you can find links to at Help:Contents. The teahouse is for brand-new editors who don't yet know how to find those or even which one is most appropriate for their question. —valereee (talk) 11:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Pavlov2, not at all! The Teahouse is a help desk! It's just intended to be a place where new editors can go and get help from people who are good at helping new editors. Wikipedia is a gigantic maze, and for new editors it can be very difficult to even figure out where to go to ask your question, so we often invite new editors to the Teahouse as a first step. —valereee (talk) 20:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲talk00:18, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
@Whatamidoing (WMF): Thanks for this. I signed up to Wikimania a couple of weeks ago and hope to attend a whole range of presentations, including this one. I've not added my name as an attendee to any specific talks as I didn't think that was necessary. Is it? Had my Remo intro yesterday - quite looking forward to being able to attend Wikimania for the very first time. I've long felt that major subject conferences often attract the top speakers from big organisations to give the presentations and only the top activists in their field from those organisations can afford to attend. The 'joe averages' in that subject rarely get a chance to benefit or attend. This year looks a whole lot different. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:32, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As you've doubtless figured out by now, you don't have to sign up for anything in advance.
The session notes and a link to a recording are available on the Wikimania page linked above. I believe that all of the presentations were recorded, so even if you couldn't attend "live", you can watch the videos at any time. They're on YouTube now and will be uploaded to Commons later.
@Whatamidoing (WMF) Thanks for that, though figured it all out in the end. I spent a fascinating four days on Remo, listening to presentations and participating in the unconference spaces. Great to chat with some of the WMF staff (PPelberg et al.), and recordings were a great way to catch up on things I missed. (Programme here for anyone who wants to check them out.)
I guess you're right about applying for a travel scholarship to attend in future, though with the meta:Sustainability Initiative coming to greater prominence, I feel that we should be minimising face-to-face meetups and developing virtual meetups to reduce our environmental impact. I think I picked up along the way from Gnom's talk that the WMF servers consume around 12GWh of non-renewable energy each year in servicing user searches, so adding kerosene-based global travel to our carbon footprint doesn't seem the right thing to be doing from now on. (To that end, I've switched my default search engine on Chrome to Ecosia, and I hope other Wikipedia users and WMF staff might consider making that small change, too. Will you?) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
After the first stage of the Growth team beta, which some of us participated as mentors (and we had more volunteers - we just had to cap it at 19), the project is looking to expand to 5% of new accounts getting a mentor. That means we need 150% more mentees - 50 mentors.
Currently we haven't formalised the pseudo-perm we're discussing, but please make sure you have some experience before joining.
I cannot find an obvious order for the hosts at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Hosts though the script adds newer people at the bottom by default, whom have lower possibility of being discovered then. One solution could be to implement a random generator, another is to push the more active people on top. Were there past guidance around this issue? I mainly joined, since it's something I have been regularly doing and enjoy. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Shushugah. The Host list is in chronological order of signup - at least it has been sorted thus since I joined in 2017, and feel it should stay that way. I find this very helpful as it allows me to manage the names of those who have signed themselves up but have never really contributed, and thus warrant removal after 6 months or so. (The reality is that quite a few newish editors think that adding their names to the Host list without ever helping out here confers them sort sort of credibility or status - which, of course, it doesn't.) I would really not want to see random sorting each time I visit the page, and (apart from the now-redundant badge icons) I feel it perfectly adequately serves its purpose as a list of Hosts, and that there's no need for a 'solution' as you call it. We do of course, also have a randomly-shown list of some of the most active Hosts in the Teahouse Header, and it is extremely easy to find any host name by simply copying it and searching the host list (Ctrl-F) on a Windows PC.
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? ― Qwerfjkltalk17:07, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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. Qwerfjkltalk19:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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. ― Qwerfjkltalk19:38, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@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. ― Qwerfjkltalk20:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
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}}talk20:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
(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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
[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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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.
~TNT (she/they • talk) 00:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
