Template talk:Help me/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Usage

This template is a self-reference and so is part of the Wikipedia project rather than the encyclopedic content.

It is designed to allow new users to get help from more experiences editors.

Placing {{helpme}} on a page automatically places it in Category:Wikipedians looking for help.

Also, a bot in the Boot Camp IRC channel monitors the category and notifies the IRC channel of any additions.--Commander Keane 08:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

What links here?

Problem is, if you check what links here, the use of {{helpme}} is included too. How to tell the difference? The Minister of War ^(Peace) 12:47, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

If the template is included, it says "(inclusion)" after it. Also, the template has a category in it, which is what is being used to find out who needs help. Talrias (t | e | c) 12:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

New layout

I suggest that the layout is slightly changed to be less obtrusive and a reason for the parameter given.

I am looking for help!
why are you delating WebHat CMS while you keep http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Sitecore ??? Please let me know.

regards

I agree with the guy above me to an extent.

Note to helpers: once you have offered help, please remove this template.

Comments? x42bn6 Talk 07:48, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

A template parameter (I'm assuming that's how this would work) is unnecessarily complicated for newcomers. They can put their question under the template if they like, and many do. The bolding looks ok though.--Commander Keane 08:04, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I Aggree with Commander Keane. How is a new user supposed to learn how to do this: {{helpme|I am having trouble with something}} Usually new users don't know why they use {{ }} instead of [[ ]], so they just copy & paste {{helpme}} from a welcoming message to their talk pages and don't change it once they've copied it. --GeorgeMoney^{Talk  Contribs} 05:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Requests to be unblocked

Should we add something about not using {{helpme}} for requests to be unblocked? Many of us who respond to helpme don't even have the ability to unblock. Then again, I suppose using {{helpme}} in conjunction with {{unblock}} can help some collateral-damage victims get the attention of an admin more quickly. --TantalumTelluride 00:37, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Mmm. I just added two instructions, the ones I thought were most critical (then I saw this question, a good one). It will be interesting to see if the instructions are followed. Perhaps we could include "Don't use {helpme} to get unblocked", I have no problem with that.--Commander Keane 21:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Other annoying questions are about signatures and userpages. Ideally {helpme} users should only ask questions about building the encyclopedia, but if we add that the template will be getting long - so I'm not sure.--Commander Keane 22:20, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I don't mind questions about custom signatures or userboxes. Of course, we don't have time to actually design signatures and user pages, but we can simply provide links to WP:SIG and WP:UBX, respectively. Also, I doubt that many newcomers read the template talk page before transcluding the template, so we should probably put a brief set of instructions on the actual template. That way, the users would be able to see the instructions after placing the template. What do you think?--TantalumTelluride 03:42, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyone who faces this problem regularly may get some use out of {{helpme-unblock}}. I made a few weeks ago, after some discussion on IRC. It seems like a good start, but if anybody sees a way to improve it, feel free. :) Luna Santin 23:09, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikilawyer help

Is it possible to design a self-referencing template like {{lawhelp}} so that the owner of the talkpage in which this template is added gets added to a page called Category:Wikpedians seeking legal help? If yes, then how? The purpose would be to help newbies who do not know the complex laws of the Wikipedia and are being bullied by old users (including admins). ♔BADMIN♛ (आओ✍) 08:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

There are no laws on Wikipedia. If you feel you are being treated unfairly, go to the admins' noticeboard. Dan100 (Talk) 18:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

added a warning tag

...I added a warning tag to this template. When putting this template on non user talk pages, a warning tag will appear. Anyone opposes to this idea? AQu01rius (User • Talk) 01:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Mmm, I just removed the warning tag system. I think a note like "Use {{helpme}} on your talk page" in the template is enough to steer people in the right direction (I suppose you could use the namespace detection to enable this warning, it doesn't matter much to me). The problem with the warning is that it is confusing and a little scary (eg "Oh no I have broken something I better stop using the {helpme} thing now"), and the people using {helpme} are sometimes more susceptible to confusion.--Commander Keane 00:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Reason

I've removed the

Ask your question by typing {{helpme|question here}}.

part. Most who use this template don't actually do that. They type heaps and heaps underneath the template. For the ones that only do write a short bit, it makes it easier for the helpers to replace the {{helpme}} with {{subst:tl|helpme}}. If they've got text as a parameter it makes it {{helpme|How do I make text bold?}}, which can't be changed to {{subst:tl|helpme|How do I make text bold?}}, because it only has one parameter, the template name. . Of course we could just copy and paste it below, or just delete it, and leave it in the page history, but it seems the easiest option, not to encourage users to use the parameter, for the sake of ease of use :) — Deon555^talk_desk^{sign here!} 22:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

You can just use 'tlp' rather than 'tl' when the use in question's given a parameter. --ais523 15:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Removing the Template

Why did it get changed to say: "Note to helpers: once you have offered help, please replace this template with {{tnull|helpme}}", when it used to say: Note to helpers: once you have offered help, please revove this template"? Nocturnal Wanderer ^{Sign here!} 21:13, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, there no special reason why the template should not be removed, and the additional syntax makes the template less straightforward. —Centrx→talk • 23:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

One problem with the "tnull" is that if the same helpee adds a 2nd {{helpme}} request, it will not work if there is already a {{tnull|helpme}} on the page.--12 Noon ^2¢ 19:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

It should work. Why doesn't it?--Werdan7^{T @} 23:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Strike that, either that was one of the days when things were funky with WP, or the user did not put it on the page properly and I did not look closely. In any case, I cannot locate the specific page that this was on and it works fine when I test it. So...Never mind.--12 Noon ^2¢ 23:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Userbox

I added this here once before, I'm not sure where it went:

Code	Result
|{{User:UBX/helpme}}	This user helps Wikipedians by monitoring the {{helpme}} page.	Usage

Feel free to use —— Ryan ^(t)•(c) 09:11, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Namespace restriction

Why is this restricted to the user talk namespace? Although it's nice when people put it in the right space, it makes more sense to answer helpmes wherever they may be, rather than confuse new users trying to get it right. What's more hassle: removing a helpme from the wrong namespace and asking the question anyway, or cleaning up after a new user who's botched trying to put the helpme in the right place, and simultaneously tracking down what happened to the question? --ais523 18:09, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely, the namespace restriction is bad, it doesn't even leave the tagged page in the category so it is impossible to find the page.--Commander Keane (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

It should probably just check if it is any kind of talk page. The {{talk other}} template can do that for you.

--David Göthberg (talk) 00:37, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Redesign idea

Feel free to mod. I was thinking of making it switch to use an exclamation point and the Speedy type if its not on a User talk page. ViperSnake151 20:53, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

That's slightly different, and actually uses {{Ombox}}, which has the effect of reducing the padding somewhat. The style/image can easily be changed. :-) Stwalkerster [ talk ] 21:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Or you could linkify the IRC channel so they could request help there? —— RyanLupin • (talk) 21:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I like it. Also I created {{donehelpme}} for completed requests. Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 21:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I don' quite get what that template is supposed to do —— RyanLupin • (talk) 22:38, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

All it does is creates a new section header Help me question. I am being lazy. instead of using tnull and getting {{helpme}} we can just add done to the template and it formats nicely. So if they create a help me tag with: {{helpme|How do I get unblocked?}} and you add done to the begining it will display like this:

Help Me Question

How do I get unblocked

Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 14:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Just added a helpers info line. I am not sure if it is needed or not. Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 14:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Change the #wikipedia-en-help link to the IRC client. You can either use mibbit or the one on toolserver. —— nixeagle 16:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Since this is a talk page message box I suggest it should use the talk page message box style standard. That is, I think it should be talk page brown. Perhaps with a yellow border like the suggestions above. And the easiest way to do that is to use the {{tmbox}}. So something like this:

I don't currently have much of a point of view on the text content, I just reused one of the examples above. But I have some thoughts:

• I think that we should recommend that the helpers use {{tl|helpme}} instead of {{tlnull|helpme}} to disable the template, since {{tl}} is simply shorter and nicer to use.
• If we link to instructions it should not be to Template:helpme/doc, but instead to Template:helpme. Linking directly to /doc page can get unwanted effects since /doc pages are coded to look nice on the template page, not on their own /doc page.

--David Göthberg (talk) 00:31, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with both your thoughts. {{tl}} is much shorter and easier to use. -download | sign! 02:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

New design deployed

I have now updated this template based on all the discussions above. Here are the changes and fixes I have done:

1: Made it use the standardised brown talk-page style, by using the {{tmbox}} meta-template. And I used the big yellow question mark image suggested above. The 60px image size is larger than the talk page message box guideline allows, but I think we can allow this template to be an exception.

2: It now uses the new message text and text styles suggested above.

3: I kept the recommendation to use {{tlx|helpme}} to disable the template, since that is what we recommend for other templates such as {{editprotected}}. And we can not use {{tl}} if the user have added the question as a parameter to the template, while {{tlx}} can handle parameters. (You can of course use {{tl}} if there is no parameter. If there is a parameter and you prefer the more compact normal text style then you can use {{tlp}}. Or if you don't want to link the template you can use {{tlnull}} or {{tlf}}, but I think not linking the template is a bit evil. The options are endless... :)

3: It now always categorises into Category:Wikipedians looking for help, no matter on what kind of page, so we can find all usage and answer. Previously it only categorised when on "User talk:" pages.

4: Minor detail: I added standard "category=" suppression, so we can make it not categorise when testing and demonstrating the template. That is, {{helpme|category=}} won't categorise.

5: It now always shows the whole box, even when placed on the wrong kind of pages. And instead of the old big scary red warning message it now shows a softer and nicer warning message that says "This template should only be used on talk pages". You know, don't bite the newcomers etc. This is also a change from before when it only could be used on user talk pages. Now it can be used on any talk page, since I think it can be good to be able to ask a question on the talk page of the page the question concerns. That means the answer is there for future reference for others that work with that page. See also the discussion above about this.

6: For backwards compatibility it still can take the question text as a parameter. (I even saw a user do that today, it must be mentioned on some help page somewhere.) But now this template renders the question text below the brown message box instead of inside it.

And I of course tested it all in this template's /sandbox and /testcases pages before I deployed it.

--David Göthberg (talk) 20:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

((adminhelp))

I am planning to rework the code and documentation of {{adminhelp}} so it works like {{helpme}}. I won't do much changes to the text content of it, since I already like the text. But I think it should have a softer error message when used on the "wrong" pages. And it should always categorise, so we can find all cases even when used on the wrong pages. See the list of fixes I did to {{helpme}} in the section above.

--David Göthberg (talk) 16:10, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

I have now updated the {{adminhelp}} template.

1: Before the update it broke down and became a blank box and didn't categorise when used on the wrong kinds of pages, now it instead always categorises and shows a soft warning message below itself when used on the wrong kind of pages.

2: For backwards compatibility it still can take the question text as a parameter. But now this template renders the question text below the brown message box instead of inside it.

3: I changed the "Note to admins" text to recommend using {{tlx}} instead of {{tlnull}}, since {{tlx}} gives a link to the template which means the user can later go there to find links to more help, or learn more about the template.

4: I did a major rework of the documentation. I think the documentation can need a little more work but I am not a native English speaker so I can't get the finer details just right.

5: I didn't change anything else in the template text. But I think the text can need a little work too:

5.1: I think the "If a response is not swiftly forthcoming" part needs quantifying. What is normal, an hour or several hours? We should state that. If I were a beginner I would think after about 5 minutes that the time was up and seek help elsewhere.

5.2: I don't think this template should talk that much about that "if you want to help out", since this template is for those that need help.

Anyway, this template is now technically sound. I'll leave the finer language details to you native English speakers.

--David Göthberg (talk) 00:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

IRC or not

{{adminhelp}}

The current wording of the {{adminhelp}} template suggests it pings IRC when placed on user talk pages. Is this, in fact, the case? If so, it should ping the admin channels rather than the regular one. If I recall correctly, the reason Category:Wikipedians looking for help from administrators is not a subcat of Category:Wikipedians looking for help is because that would have caused requests in the former category to ping IRC like the latter, which was deemed problematic. Skomorokh 08:36, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

No worries, the system works fine. Both templates ping the same IRC channel. There are many admins that hang out in #wikipedia-en-help. And we wouldn't want the help request pings in the admin channel, they would be very disturbing there. You are welcome to #wikipedia-en-help to see first hand how it works. (And hey, perhaps you want to try your skills at some non-admin help requests if you are in the mood?)

Technical details: The same bot watches both Category:Wikipedians looking for help and Category:Wikipedians looking for help from administrators. And then it pings the same IRC channel. And it continues to ping the channel once every three minutes as long as the request is up.

But let's do a test run: I added {{adminhelp}} above, can the admin that responds to it leave a short hello here? :))

--David Göthberg (talk) 13:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

I came, but then I saw I wasn't cool enough :( — Deon555^talk_{I'm BACK!} 13:35, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

By the way, many of the {{adminhelp}} requests are just advanced questions, and doesn't need admin rights. So even if there is no admin in the IRC channel at that moment then the users in the channel usually anyway can help out.

--David Göthberg (talk) 13:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

(non) Administrator Deon here, what be the problem? :) — Deon555^talk_{I'm BACK!} 13:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

adminhelp wording

Currently, the wording of the {{adminhelp}} template header is:

Admin, I am looking for help!

Personally, I think that sounds a little abrupt – what about a change to something like:

I am looking for help from an administrator!

or something similar? haz (talk) 14:31, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I've made the change – if anyone's unhappy with it, feel free to discuss. haz (talk) 11:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Linking to IRC

How about put a link to the Wikipedia help channel using webchat freenode? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 09:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

{{tl}} vs. {{tlp}}

Why must answerers replace the {{helpme}} code with {{tlp|helpme}} instead of {{tl|helpme}}? I know it wouldn't save much time, but is there an actual function between either? (Since I seem to attract "you're-a-noob-answers," I'm looking for the difference between the two, not what either one does.) Thanks. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 02:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

The latter can be used to show extra parameters that one needs to include or had been included in a template, which isn't necessary for the helpme template (it doesn't carry any parameters). An example could be {{Unsigned|Killiondude}}. {{Unsigned}} doesn't show the parameter. Killiondude (talk) 04:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Ahhh, that's awesome, okay than you! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:22, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Design Update

Speaking with Chzz and some other users in the IRC, we talked about letting the person requesting help to show how skilled they are with wikipedia and wikicode. this can be useful for beginers because when i ask for help, i sometimes get answers which i do not understand and are far to advanced for me. thats why i made {{User:Sophie/sandbox10}} as a pre design. instructions can be found on user:sophie/sandbox9. the "1", "2", "3"... are taken from the babel idea but after a review from chzz, this could be changed to B (beginer) M (moderate) A (advanced). the default option would be the beginer option as a new commer would not know how to change the options and because not all helpers assume that the person who needs help is a beginner based on how long they have been on Wikipedia. Please let me know what you think

NB: im not sure whats up with the template link above, but the page can be found at User:Sophie/sandbox9.

Sophie ^(Talk) 08:05, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea. The only thing I can foresee with this though is that the beginner option would be the only one used. As advanced users are unlikely to need help or are more resourceful than to need to use the helpme template in the first place. -- œ^™ 05:04, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Firefox and IRC link

{{editsemiprotected}}

The current template uses a link "irc://irc.freenode.net/wikipedia-en-help", in Firefox irc://* requests are handled by a site call Mibbit, and Firefox changes the link to "https://www.mibbit.com/?url=irc%3A%2F%2Firc.freenode.net%2Fwikipedia-en-help", Firefox seems to be unsupported as it hangs "Loading..."!

Please change the template link to: "http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=wikipedia-en-help", to allow more compatibility as some browsers don't use the irc:// protocol well but all browsers are able to understand http:// requests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by R12056 (talk • contribs)

Done monosock 18:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

"Search the FAQ" link broken

The or [[tools:~tangotango/nubio/|search the FAQ]] section of this template needs to either be removed or updated, since that user's account has apparently expired. Could someone please oblige? Frank Westerton (talk) 09:40, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

I've changed it so that it now links to WP:FAQ – thanks for pointing it out. AJCham 11:43, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Propose removing link to IRC

I'm concerned that by directing editors to the help channel via the {{Adminhelp}} template they will get the idea that they can request page protection and other admin actions through IRC instead, bypassing normal WP:RFPP process. This is not good, the #wikipedia-en-help channel should be for non-administrative help only, everything else that requires admin action should follow process, whether it be WP:ANI, WP:AN3, WP:RFPP, etc. -- œ^™ 19:01, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, forgot to mention, this pertains to {{Adminhelp}} only. Its talk page redirected me here. -- œ^™ 19:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

That really wouldn't be very different from using this template to request the same. It's a hazard regardless of whether the template or IRC is employed, no? --Bsherr (talk) 19:19, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

True, in fact I can't think of any actions that {{adminhelp}} would be useful for that aren't already covered by some existing on-wiki process. However, I haven't seen the template being abused in this way, but that's probably because the link to irc is there: impatient people would rather bypass even this template and go straight to the live chat with an admin! (which btw isn't guaranteed anyway because it's not an 'admins channel' it's just a regular help channel). So maybe we should just get rid of the template altogether then? -- œ^™ 21:05, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

It's useful when a user is unsure of the noticeboard at which to post, for example. --Bsherr (talk) 21:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, or in emergencies I suppose. I'd rather not delete the template, but I still think we shouldn't be directing users to #wikipedia-en-help from it. -- œ^™ 23:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I hear that, but I'd need to understand why one and not the other. --Bsherr (talk) 23:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I think it will be better to link to Wikipedia:Requests for administrator attention instead. {{helpme}} is okay to link to the IRC help channel, but {{adminhelp}} shouldn't link there because it's simply not an admin channel, there's no guarantee that an admin will be in that channel, and even if one is I still think it's controversial for admins to be taking off-wiki (and therefor off-the-record) requests for page protection and blocks. -- œ^™ 01:56, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

That's fair. No opposition from me. --Bsherr (talk) 03:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

As I stated below, what is urgent for admins or long term editors is very different from what is urgent for a new user. Dealing with a help or adminhelp request needs to respect that difference in perspective and experience. Protonk (talk) 03:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

As someone regularly in that IRC channel, I can say these concerns are valid, though not occurring too frequently. I think that the issue is people misunderstanding the purpose of the template, so many clarification on what to ask for help with (i.e. someone forgot to get rid of an autoblock after unblocking a user) and what not to ask for (protection of a controversial page during a dispute) on IRC and onwiki with {{adminhelp}} would be good as well. At any rate, I don't see much issue with removing the IRC link (I don't seem to remember the last time anyone came in for an admin help situation after using the template) or just offering IRC as an alternative for possible admin advice on where to go for an issue. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 02:41, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

• I think there are problems with the use of IRC for admin actions, but they don't stem from novice users asking admins who happen to be online to deal with what the user sees as an urgent problem. Deleting a link to an extant IRC channel in favor of sending new users to some arcane (and they are arcane) WP process page where they can get a rude introduction to how the bureaucracy works is the opposite of what we should be doing. Dealing with new users (anyone new enough to user adminhelp counts) should be about solving the problem at the lowest level possible and making the user's experience seamless. It is *not* a teachable moment where the new user can learn what a cool page like AN3 or RFPP does. It is not an exercise in crossing t's and dotting i's. It is a problem that needs to be solved and the simplest and most direct route to a solution should be used. If the admin making the action feels like they can't respond unilaterally they can post a request on those process pages themselves, ask other admins on IRC for help or go to AN. Overuse of IRC for actions which someone feels should be dealt with via a process simply isn't an issue here because removing the link won't alter the actual IRC channel one whit. Likewise concerns about propriety don't factor in here because the admin action itself is undertaken by someone who the community trusts and they should have the judgment to decide where unilateral action is appropriate or where more discussion is appropriate. Remember, processes and noticeboards serve us, not the other way round. Protonk (talk) 03:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Very well, but is IRC a consistently viable alternative solution to using the adminhelp template? If not, it shouldn't be on there. --Bsherr (talk) 03:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't follow. For one, the help and adminhelp templates already trigger a chatbot on the help channel, so admins and users there will see a help template. Adding the channel simply helps connect users to potential helpers. It doesn't need to replace the template itself in terms of functionality. Besides the complaint was that process might be subverted through the inducement to use IRC, which is what I intended to push back on above. Protonk (talk) 03:54, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

OlEnglish asserts that administrators aren't necessarily available on the IRC, that the IRC is not specific to administrators, and that referring to it is therefore misplaced. --Bsherr (talk) 07:48, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's too much of a real issue. There are usually always admins in the channel (though they might be idling, depending on the timezone, etc.). If person A (a non-admin Wikipedian, familiar with IRC) is helping person B (a newbie), then person A would know where to go to get an admin if they really wanted/needed to. Killiondude (talk) 07:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

First, there are generally admins around in -en-help (I don't actively comment most of the time, but unless I'm otherwise occupied at the moment, I'm generally responsive to pings). Second, in many cases, the {{Adminhelp}} is used for something that doesn't really need an admin anyway. So yes, keeping the IRC link is useful. T. Canens (talk) 10:35, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I suppose it depends on the personal preference of the administrator that happens to be in the channel, whether they should choose to take admin actions is to their discretion. Personally, when I'm helping users in #wikipedia-en-help, I'm not acting in my admin capacity, my function there is to direct users to the correct process, I *am* there as a teacher. I will not use the admin tools to take personal requests or 'favors' from users off-wiki, where it may be taken as a unilateral action by other users on-wiki, and then I'm accused of being part of some corrupt cabal network. It's better to follow due process and let these requests occur on-wiki where they can be reviewed by the community. Of course if someone tells me on IRC that a user is doing mass pagemove vandalism then I won't hesitate to act, it's for the good of the project, but if a user specifically seeks me out on irc because I'm an admin to ask me to protect an article they've been editing because there's some editwar or somethingrather going on, I see that as being analogous to coming up to an off-duty janitor sitting in a pub somewhere chitchatting with colleagues, and asking him, just because he happens to be a janitor, to come and cleanup a mess they found in the pub's washroom. Or calling up your buddy who happens to be a cop, to come and arrest some guy, instead of dialing 911. meta:IRC/wikipedia-en-admins/Guidelines reads that IRC is not an "alternative to on-wiki debate, and is not intended as a shortcut", I see that as good advice. -- œ^™ 12:21, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

• I see that as good advice as well, which applies to long term users. IRC is a poor substitute for a talk page discussion between users because it is both ephemeral and opaque. However IRC as an alternative to sending a new user to an alphabet soup of policy pages is priceless. We are so used to the network of policy and process that we fail to see how bewildering and superfluous they seem to an outsider. Asking a question and getting a response, even if that response is sometimes "I can't help you, go to WP:XYZ", is better. Protonk (talk) 14:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Move request of Template:Adminhelp

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

---

The above template is incapable of properly displaying the name of the template to which this discussion relates. See the following for the actual proposal. Template:Adminhelp → Template:Admin help — Proper spelling with spaces in it. On this talk page, because Adminhelp's talk page redirects here. --The Evil IP address (talk) 17:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose. The name help me is far more user-friendly, and that's particularly important for this template, which is an important part of the welcoming system. Andrewa (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

This isn't a proposal to move Template:Help me. --Bsherr (talk) 03:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

• Move. Natural language is best. --Bsherr (talk) 03:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
• Comment you should use the multimove template instead of the regular move template. 65.93.15.80 (talk) 04:18, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
• Probably what should have been done was to remove the redirect from the Adminhelp talk page, and then make a move request there. Anyway, there don't seem to be any objections to the actual proposal (when people realize what it is), so let's move Template:Adminhelp to Template:Admin help. (It's move protected so an admin will have to do it.)--Kotniski (talk) 11:33, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Would this work on a non talk page

Hi

Strange fact finding mission I know, but would the {{adminhelp}} template work on a non talk page? or is there another one that can be used in pages that are not talk pages? (and not in mainspace)

I would like to investigate a way of getting admin help quickly to project users and it seems a brilliant way to do it if it is possible.

Obviously this is only a request for info :¬)

Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 05:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Yes it will work on any page in any namespace. -- œ^™ 14:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

If by "work" you mean "does it transclude the category tag so an administrator will see it?", it only works on Talk namespaces and the Wikipedia namespace. On all other namespaces, such as Help, Category or Portal, it only produces a message box telling you you're in the wrong namespace. This is actually why I'm on this talk page, see below. — Bility (talk) 20:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh! ok, I guess I was wrong.. I think it should though.. work on any page in any namespace.. that would make it more useful, and accessible to newbies. -- œ^™ 09:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Categorize other transclusions?

Should there be a maintenance category for when this template is used on non-talk pages? I just found one by accident on a userpage and saw there's no tracking category for this. I think adding this template to the userpage instead of the talk page could be a common occurrence among new users. For instance, there are ten transclusions on user pages as of this writing, including a few blank requests. Not a big deal (most people will just read the box and move it themselves), but thought I'd mention it. — Bility (talk) 20:36, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Update adminhelp for...realism?

I meant to post this at the Talk page for {{admin help}}, but it appears that that redirects to here, which is a little strange, but I'll assume there's good reason for it.

In any event, I recently posted an {{admin help}} request to my Talk page due to a brewing conflict on a Wikiproject's Talk page. I was hoping to get an admin to at least look over the situation, without the formality and possible drama of an ANI filing.

Unfortunately over 12 hours later I still had not received a response to my adminhelp request and said conflict had indeed grown worse. At that point I filed an ANI request to discuss whether the template is an effective tool, and if not whether it can be made effective. That discussion got a bit sidetracked, but the bulk of the material relevant to this thread is available here. One admin stated that not receiving a response within 12 hours is not significant, another stated that they ignore such requests, while a third stated their opinion that the template is too generic; as requests are not categorized there's no way to know upfront whether the help needed will be in a field that the admin considers themselves well-suited to address.

The text provided when an editor invokes the template is as follows- "I am looking for help from an administrator! Ask your question below. If a response is not swiftly forthcoming, or if you require input from multiple administrators, you may wish to raise the matter at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents. If you do not require help from administrators specifically, it is best to use the template {{help me}} instead of this one. The IRC channel #wikipedia-en-help is notified when this template is used. You can join that channel (chat room) if you want to get real-time assistance or if you want to help out. (Click here for instant access.)"

To my mind, this suggests that a response should, generally, be "swiftly forthcoming". When an editor has to wait over 12 hours for an acknowledgement, I do not think "swiftly forthcoming" is the appropriate description. It was suggested that if editors really do wish for a swift response to an issue that they should file an ANI request. If that is the case then I would submit that the text of the template should be modified to make it clear that that is considered the best practice at this time.

As far as concerns that the template is too "generic", I was wondering how others would feel about creating additional templates that would request help with a clear indication of what type of help is needed. Perhaps {{adminhelpcivil}}, {{adminhelpcopyvio}} and other templates as appropriate, with use of the standard template suggesting that editors might wish to use one of the more specific templates instead?

I greatly appreciate any feedback other editors might have. Doniago (talk) 14:47, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

It would have been better to post your original request directly to WP:ANI. There is no possible way to avoid 'formality and possible drama' if you want admins generally to look into something. If you really want *exactly one* administrator then open up Special:Log to find the name of an admin who is currently active and try posting to their talk page. Regarding the 12 hours -- it is unlikely that any template system is going to produce fast action. Even Category:Requests for unblock which is actively patrolled takes longer than 12 hours in many cases. EdJohnston (talk) 16:16, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

This seems to go back to my point that the wording of the template should perhaps be reconsidered so that it doesn't suggest action will be "swiftly forthcoming". Doniago (talk) 16:42, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the 'swiftly' is a bit much. This template, if it is kept, should be seen as an aid to newcomers who may not know how to use WP:ANI. I doubt that this template will be a good option for experienced editors. EdJohnston (talk) 17:38, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

I've used it from time to time at the Help desks to draw attention to a question needing an admin. It's worked well there. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

In my experience the helpme templates are usually seen quickly, even if it's not by an admin but by someone who knows how to go and poke one if one is needed. Twelve hours is not a long time, but I am certain in this case it will have been seen and ignored by several admins. The problem as I see it is that you didn't need an administrator, but a mediator instead. Whatever led you to think an admin was needed may need more tweaking than the adminhelp template. In this respect I'd agree with you: I'd suggest a strongly suggested parameter indicating which admin tool is required in the request. Not so much for the admins, but for the person using the template. If no admin tools are needed the request should instead be directed to the wider community. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:42, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

12 hours may not be a long time objectively, but I don't believe one generally expects to wait over 12 hours if they have been led to believe that a response will be "swiftly forthcoming", as previously noted. Even after the ANI filing, when it was made clear that I filed an admin help request, it still took hours before anyone actually addressed the admin help request (granted it had been somewhat mooted by that point, but even so...). I'm not aware of a way of requesting help from a mediator via one's Talk page, and as I noted, I was trying to avoid having the situation escalate if there was an alternative. In any case, it certainly appears that some adjustment of the template to clarify its purpose and offer alternatives may be warranted. Doniago (talk) 14:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

• I have never seen the adminhelp template used to direct administrators to a brewing situation - we have very specific noticeboards for vandalism, ANI, 3RR. Adminhelp is intedned to draw someone's eyes for some help - not always an admin. Just like most unblock requests are viewed by at least a half-dozen admins before being actioned (because they were drawn by the template) the adminhelp draws similar views. Of course, the first half-dozen viewers might not be admins, nor might they feel competent to comment based on the situation. adminhelp will draw people, just like yelling "help" will draw some attention - if you want real action, you call 9-1-1. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:07, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

If admin help won't necessarily draw the eyes of an admin, then admin help would seem to be a misleading name for the template. In this case the situation was a discussion rapidly descending into incivility. I had some involvement in the discussion so was uncomfortable issuing civility warnings. Admin help seemed to be the most prudent course of action, especially given that I didn't want to make it a high profile issue if there was another option, and I would think admins are generally qualified to advise as to better courses of action if such exist. As it turned out one of the incivil parties in fact was an admin, though I wasn't aware of that at the time. In any case, you seem to be supporting my argument that the template should be revised for clarity. Doniago (talk) 14:42, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Having watched your situation unfold, and understanding your frustration, I looked at the template with an eye towards what could be reworded. I concluded that the current wording doesn't seem to imply that an answer would be "swiftly forthcoming", because it only says "If a response is not swiftly forthcoming, or if you require input from multiple administrators, you may wish to ... ". I can't see a way to improve this wrt a situation such as the time you used the template. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

But why would a template say, "If a response isn't swiftly forthcoming, then do x," if a response wasn't likely to be swiftly forthcoming in most cases? I read it as, "You should get a response soon...but if you don't, then here's your next best course of action..." If nothing else, maybe it should be phrased as, "If you feel your situation requires immediate attention, please do x rather than using this template."

That said Sandy, thank you for your input. I know we've had some disagreements in the past, and I appreciate your input in this matter as someone who was "there at the time". Doniago (talk) 20:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I see your point, but have to defer to admins who are the ones reviewing the typical scenarios ... perhaps your suggested wording would result in trivial requests overwhelming ANI (not saying yours was trivial). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:28, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

If, as noted above, this was a situation in which a mediator was needed more than an admin, perhaps a template or other "quick and easy" system could be set up to call a mediator's attention to a situation where there's smoke but no fire (yet), in order that they may intervene before things get out of hand? If such a system exists, I'm not currently aware of it...and I think one of the purposes should be to avoid making the kind of issue of a situation that an ANI filing typically involves. Believe me, I wish the previous issue hadn't gotten that far.

I do also think that there's merit to partitioning the admin help template into more specialized templates to avoid the "this is a generic problem" issue that was noted as well. I would be happy to assist in such a refinement, though I'm not sure my knowledge of wiki-coding is up to the task. Doniago (talk) 21:42, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, nothing apparently came of this discussion. Would anyone object to my coming up with a proposal for alternate wording? Doniago (talk) 12:27, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposal

Current Text: Ask your question below. If a response is not swiftly forthcoming, or if you require input from multiple administrators, you may wish to raise the matter at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents. If you do not require help from administrators specifically, it is best to use the template {{help me}} instead of this one.

Change To: Ask your question below. If you feel your request requires immediate attention, or if you require input from multiple administrators, you may wish to raise the matter at the administrators' noticeboard for incidents. If you do not require help from administrators specifically, it is best to use the template {{help me}} instead of this one.

• Support, as proposer. Doniago (talk) 15:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Help requests filed at wrong place

Some newbies or IP editors add there admin help request at Template:Admin help/doc and these requests go unnoticed sometimes for days. Any thoughts to resolve this? --SMS ^Talk 15:05, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Romanian wiki

Could someone make this work on the Romanian wikipedia as well? Căluşaru' (talk) 13:13, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Error in helpme template paragraph

Is it just me that this looks incorrect to?
Users who monitor the category this places and those on
Shouldn't this read
Users who monitor the category this places a notice on and those on
Geremy Hebert (talk | contribs) 14:16, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I've read it over, and it would make more sense to "Users who monitor the category this places and those on the #wikipedia-en-help IRC channel have been alerted and will assist you shortly." than it would to "Users who monitor the category this places a notice on and those on the #wikipedia-en-help IRC channel have been alerted and will assist you shortly." in my opinion. We'll leave it up to the admin that responds, but I expect they will agree shorter is better. Technical 13 (talk) 13:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Disabling as it isn't clear there's consensus to change the wording; it would be more technically correct, but at the cost of a perhaps pernickety wordiness. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:34, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Link to Teahouse

Should there be added a link to the Teahouse on this template? -- Ypnypn (talk) 04:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I believe there should be as most of the related templates ({{Help me-na}}, {{Help me-nq}}, and {{Help me-helped}} have links to the Teahouse and {{Help me-inappropriate}} and {{Help me-working}} don't have links to the Teahouse (of which most also had links to WP:NCHD which has been merged into the Teahouse and I cleaned up those links). Thank you Technical 13 (talk) 13:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Disabling for now: please add appropriate code to the sandbox and get consensus for it before re-enabling. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 13:44, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Update: {{Help me-na}}, {{Help me-nq}}, {{Help me-helped}}, and {{Help me-inappropriate}} all have links to the Teahouse now. Only "working" does not as if it is already being resolved, no need to go someplace else and ask for help again. Technical 13 (talk) 14:22, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:Admin help

I'm wondering if the {{Admin help}} template should have a set of sub-templates like {{Help me-nq}}, {{Help me-inappropriate}}, etc. For example, I just fielded Talk:Richard Engel which had three {{Admin help}} on it that should have been {{Edit semi-protected}} requests. I would have liked to have tagged it as {{Admin help-inappropriate}} which would have explained that not everything needs an admin... I am willing to make said templates, but I am requesting assistance from some administrators on what the wording should be. Thanks. Technical 13 (talk) 13:05, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Make Collapsible?

Rather than changing to {{tlp|Help me}}, I think making the template collapsible would be better. When a question is answered, set the default class to collapsed. By default, it would be uncollapsed.

Curiouscrab0 | talk | contribs

21:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

• Strong oppose: That is what {{Help me-helped}} is for... Technical 13 (talk) 21:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:CP

Wouldn't it make more sense just to post a question on the CP, Teahouse, or Help desk? Or is this for getting almost immediate responses?

Curiouscrab0 | talk | contribs

21:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

• Those are certainly other options. This offers an alternative of posting on a group help page that offers more localization. Technical 13 (talk) 21:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Template:Admin help breaks page layout if indented

Someone familiar with this series please check and attempt to repair the condition that leads to this sort of layout problem Special:PermanentLink/626032150. Thank you — xaosflux ^Talk 03:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Xaosflux, your permalink example displays fine. I'm not exactly sure I'm seeing what you consider a problem. Do you mean that the sections after the template are indented? If so, that seems to be a parser bug of not properly closing the <dd> and <dl> tags after transcluding a template containing a table. I suppose that the template could be entirely reworked to not use a table and instead use styled divs regardless if that would actually fix the issue or not, but I don't have the time to do that. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 10:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

• Technical 13 It looks fine? I saw this problem on multiple browsers, the test 2 and test 3 should both be at the same header level, but Test 3 is being indented. Is this not what you are seeing? I actually ran across this on a noticeboard where this template was placed while already at ::::::: and then the rest of the page disrupted. — xaosflux ^Talk 19:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Then the answer to the question I ask is simply yes. This being the case, read the rest of my answer. You (or someone on your behalf) will have to put a ticket on Phabricator (which appears to be off-line currently for some reason) (since Bugzilla is being deprecated) to get the devs to fix it. It is a parser level issue. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 11:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the note! — xaosflux ^Talk 12:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Suggestion

It might be useful if this template included a link to CAT:AH? --82.136.210.153 (talk) 04:04, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Only for use on user talk pages?

Is this template to be used only on user talk pages? I asked because of this - [1] - and if it's true, the template documentation ought to be updated, I suppose. Lightbreather (talk) 21:01, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't see how it would make such sense to place it on ANI given that ANI is, I assume, regularly monitored by a plethora of admins. DonIago (talk) 21:07, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) On June 3, 2013 it was decided at WP:TfD that the article space equivalent to {{Help me}} would be deprecated and redirected to {{Help me}}. The TfD can be viewed at WP:Templates for discussion/Log/2013 May 28#Template:Unanswered. That said, your post on ANI most likely should have been reverted anyways because it was the wrong forum and you didn't actually specify what you wanted closed. I'd recommend making a more specific request on WP:ANRFC and please follow the instructions on that page. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 21:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Lightbreather (talk) 21:18, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Admin help

I routinely see {{admin help}} in places where {{help me}} would be more appropriate. Especially new users, I believe they think it's better to illicit the help of an administrator rather than a regular editor -- when this is sometimes the opposite case. Administrator on Wikipedia means something different than it does on other websites or with corporate companies. For questions that anyone could answer, help me should be the preferred template as there are much fewer administrators around. I would like to propose adding verbiage into the documentation for admin help to state that it should be used in situations whereby only an administrator could help. I think this is already the common understanding but having it in the documentation would help those being declined for admin help to see that the decision is supported by the documentation. Mkdw^talk 17:38, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Seems harmless enough to me, though I'd like to see the specific text to be added. :) DonIago (talk) 19:21, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Open to suggestions, but maybe something like, "If your inquiry or request does not specifically require the attention of an administrator, please use {{help me}} instead". Mkdw^talk 07:06, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

The template itself does already include the text: "If you do not require help from administrators specifically, it is best to use the template {{help me}} instead of this one." Does that address your concern or do you think the documentation itself needs to be updated as well? DonIago (talk) 16:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello. I have some deep concerns regarding the i for that’s been very incorrectly cut and pasted together to create the page “Ahluwalia”

I have read numerous books and and fully knowledgeable in the history of the surname and it’s founders

I feel the page above has been cut and pasted together with a malicious intent which I would like fixed.

Any attempt to change has been taken as vandalism: which it is not.

So much in the page is priced together and incorrect:

Example: Sadha SINGH is listed as the founder of the ahluwalia misl- he was long dead before the misla were even created in the Sikh military system under Maharaja RANJIT SINGH and Jassa SINGH Ahluwalia (Sadha Singh’s son)

Maharani Amrit Kaur was NOT Gandhi’s secretary but the only female fighter who renounced her royal status to fight for Indian independence- and she was also the first female cabinet minister in India’s history post independence.

AHLUWALIAs ARE NOT a lower caste by any means and had royal status from late 1700s until partition.

Much of the info on the page currently is very misleading and I feel been placed with malicious intent

As a reference I would suggest the Kapurthala Online resource portal which accurately explains the full history and lineage of the AHLUWALIAs

Please help on how I can have this info fixed.

Signed:

Walia SS (talk) 09:37, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Walia SS This is not the forum to request assistance, this page is for discussing the operation of the help me template. You should visit the Help Desk to request assistance with an issue. 331dot (talk) 10:24, 27 December 2018 (UTC)