Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 27

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 20←Archive 25Archive 26Archive 27

Account temporarily compromised but control restored

Hi all. My son has recently been dipping his hand into editing and accidentally made an edit using a device I was logged in with (unbeknownst to me, they'd been asking questions at the Teahouse). I'm really sorry about this but the device is back under my control. I've reverted the edit but is there anything else I should do? I will obviously recluse myself from answering his questions! Cordless Larry (talk) 17:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

The edit has now been suppressed by request, which reduces my embarrassment somewhat, though I still feel pretty silly that I allowed this to happen. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:52, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
I suppose I'm biased, but of all the things which could be done with a compromised admin account, asking a (good faith) question at the Teahouse is the best possible one. 😉 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:11, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I agree, this is probably the best outcome that one could hope for in a situation like this. — Mugtheboss (talk) 16:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

INDEX

Why is the Teahouse not indexed by default? Toadette (chat)/(logs) 18:07, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@ToadetteEdit It's not something I've really thought about, but, because completed Teahouse discussions get archived after just a few days, I imagine there'd be little point in search engines indexing them. Any links to discussions would soon be redundant. In addition, individual discussion threads appearing outside of the Wikipedia space would probably attract unwanted and irrelevant attention from non-Wikipedia users and end up being disruptive to our work in supporting the needs of active editors. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
The Teahouse, and the Help desk, are not "part of the encyclopedia". They exist to help with the construction of the encyclopedia. This is also true of user pages, and article talk pages, and drafts, and policy guides. Only actual articles, and disambiguation pages and suchlike, constitute the encyclopedia itself. Maproom (talk) 21:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Edit requests

Help at User:AnomieBOT/SPERTable and User:AnomieBOT/EPERTable is appreciated. The amount of unresponded requests is increasing, and these can be nice for new users (autoconfirmed) as well, since most are just minor typo fixes. NotAGenious (talk) 05:54, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

@NotAGenious: I reviewed each request and responded to a few. There are no more minor typo fix requests. GoingBatty (talk) 14:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
There were ~10, but I did most of them last night. My point was that typo fix requests are indeed common. NotAGenious (talk) 14:23, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Hosts changing their usernames

Just a gentle reminder to all hosts who might in the future change their Usernames to ensure that they also change their entry in our list of hosts, please. New users following links from the 'Meet your hosts' page are liable to be confused if they arrive at a page with a different name. I've just fixed four that needed changing, and it'd be great if editors would think about making this update themselves, as I only ever check the list in detail every 6 months or so. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:07, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Request: Editors Interested in Wikipedia Research Ethics

Hi All. I was directed to this space to find 3-5 editors are interested in joining us and other editors in a remote online workshop to talk about Wikipedia community values and how they interplay with research that is conducted on/with Wikipedia. We're in a bit of a bind with scheduling a synchronous workshop and would really appreciate any help! If this is not the space for this kind of request, I apologize in advance and will promptly remove this post. If you're interested, you can learn more at our Meta Research Page. Leave a comment here or on our talk page and I can reach out with more information. Zentavious (talk) 16:00, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Zentavious. As this page is for the management of the Teahouse help forum, and is likely to be watched by experienced editors who act as 'Hosts' to assist newcomers in issues around editing Wikipedia, I think some of them may well be interested in having an input into your research. So, I suggest your post remains.
However, I think there are other fora where you could more effectively seek input from us.
One of those is to repeat your post at WP:Village pump (miscellaneous) - a place to raise matters that don't neatly fit into our many other specific fora. (It has 2,600 people 'watching' it.)
The other forum, when you want to reach administrators and a suite of very active (and often quite opinionated!) editors, is to post at WP:Administrators' noticeboard. (5,260 watchers).
If you haven't yet seen them, you might wish to read and and follow relevant links at these pages on English Wikipedia:
I hope you might find some of this helpful. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Nick Moyes, thank you so much for your guidance. I'm familiar with a few of those pages! I will definitely raise this on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous). Cheers, Zentavious (talk) 14:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Recurring questions about "profile"

Both here and at WP:Help Desk there are frequently questions about about a "profile" (or, worse, "my profile") meaning an article about that person (or, worse, themselves). The mere presence of the word "profile" in this context triggers the thought that the enquirer subconsciously thinks that Wikipedia is in the same category as social media services such as Facebook, Twitter/X, Instagram, etc. and about the person in question promoting themselves and having controls over their "profile" there.

Might it be useful to have a guideline or essay, perhaps WP:Article not Profile, to which such enquirers could be immediately directed, as the first port of call, to learn the background and context of how WP articles and social media profiles are very different?

Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@Feline Hymnic: WP:NOTCV could be a good start in such cases, but I agree a separate guideline may be helpful, too. --CiaPan (talk) 22:38, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
@CiaPan: Oh, I'd overlooked WP:NOTCV. Thanks for the pointer/reminder to it! Feline Hymnic (talk) 22:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
@Feline Hymnic @CiaPan: As a point of interest, it probably didn't help that, until mid-2019, Teahouse hosts were still telling people "We don't have profiles here!" whilst our own Teahouse page continued to present "Host Profiles" (diff). We even encouraged 'Guest Profiles' in the early years of the Teahouse, too! (see here). Nick Moyes (talk) 23:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: And we also say (correctly) "articles, not pages", implicitly referring to article space. Yet we often use "page" when referring to the (very different) "User:" space! Feline Hymnic (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
That is very true! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:01, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
I added "profile" to WP:NOTCV. Cullen328 (talk) 00:22, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
I'd say articles are a subset of pages rather than mutually exclusive. For the sake of avoiding redundant essays, improving NOTCV to address the queries here seems a good solution. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 14:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
+1
All Wikipedia articles are pages, but not all Wikipedia pages are articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:14, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Indeed. Telling new users "we don't have pages, we have articles" is totally unhelpful. -- asilvering (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
I hope it would be helpful to emphasize that Wikipedia has encyclopedia articles that are independent of their subjects, not social media profiles. Hopefully people are familiar enough with traditional encyclopedias and social media to understand the difference in such a comparison. GoingBatty (talk) 17:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
I added shortcut WP:NOTPROFILE. Mathglot (talk) 18:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
I'd thought about that. But thanks for actually doing it! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I see that @ColinFine: seems to have some useful standard text. Might this be useful to include or abstract?

Hello, <user-name>, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you are in the same position as thousands of other people who ask questions here, who register an account, and immediately plunge into one of the most challenging tasks there is: creating a new article. This is like buying a musical instrument you have never played before, and immediately going out busking: you are going to have a frustrating and miserable time. I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million articles before they try to create a new article. (They will probably over those months add far more value to Wikipedia than they would by trying to make an article before they are ready). When you think you might be ready to try creating an article, read WP:YFA and especially NCORP (if it is a company). For most companies in the world you will quickly discover that there are not sufficient quality sources to establish notability, and there is no point in trying to create an article about them.

Feline Hymnic (talk) 13:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Feline Hymnic. A few years ago I did distil something I often wrote into a template, {{HD/WINI}}, which I still often use. But I haven't distilled the above - so far. Anybody else is welcome to do so.
On the main subject, I see that back in 2012 I started writing an essay User:ColinFine/Wikipedia doesn't have profiles, but I didn't get very far. ColinFine (talk) 14:15, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
@Feline Hymnic @ColinFine: Hi there! I like your template, but wonder if "busking" is a common enough word for people to understand. Maybe replace it with "performing"? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Not my template; ColinFine's! Feline Hymnic (talk) 16:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
@Feline Hymnic: Apologies for that. Fixed the ping. GoingBatty (talk) 16:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
I haven't made this into a template so far, GoingBatty. I used to talk about "playing a recital", but I thought that would be too far from many people's experience: everybody knows buskers, but perhaps not the word. ColinFine (talk) 22:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
I find it useful to say something like this, though as a personal rule I don't use canned responses aside from {{welcometea}} here at the Teahouse. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Me too. I maintain a long page of 'useful' answers that I've written which I feel I might want to use again - but I rarely do, preferring to write a bespoke answer each time to make life more interesting. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of my Question

Excuse my asking, as I'm sure there are good reasons, but why was my question about how to add sections to articles removed? Did I put it in the wrong place or word anything the wrong way? I hope that it can be restored for myself and other users if we want to add sections to articles, if you don't mind my repetition. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 01:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)


I asked this question before but it got deleted for some reason.

I want to add a section about live events to the Tree Fu Tom Wikipedia page, but I don't know how. I would look here, but as I said, my question on that got deleted. I won't ask anyone to answer again in case it gets deleted again, but can someone please add a tutorial on how to add sections on that tutorial on how to use Wikipedia? Triviatronic9000 (talk) 02:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Triviatronic9000. Your question was not removed. It was archived. Here is the answer I wrote for you on November 1. Inactive threads get archived in two to three days. Cullen328 (talk) 02:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Triviatronic9000. Please read Help:Section. I use the source editor, which makes it very easy to create a section. In the edit window, on a new line, you type two equal signs, then the new section mame, then two more equal signs. The wikicode code looks like this:
==New section==
It is that easy. Cullen328 (talk) 02:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)


Worth noting it was archived, after 48 hours; but the archive then got borked by an unclosed reference added in a later update on 6 November, which I've just fixed diff. So the archived question can now be seen at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1204#Adding Sections to Articles. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hi Triviatronic9000. As pointed out above, your questions were archived; the first one can be found at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1199#Adding Sections to Articles and the second one (the one Cullen328 answered) can be found at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1204#Adding Sections to Articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:18, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Not just you but everyone who replied. Why archive the question? One of the reasons I ask is so that anyone who comes wanting to have the same question I had answered can have it answered without asking. Sorry if I sound... spoiled, for lack of a better word for asking. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 03:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Because otherwise the page gets too long. It is a very high traffic page - lots of questions per day. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Ah. Reasonable enough, I suppose. Thanks Triviatronic9000 (talk) 03:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, if we didn't archive it, it would be illegible and take forever to load... sort of like EEng's talk page but not that bad, obviously.[FBDB] Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Special:Homepage

As a general note, Teahouse hosts should probably, at least once, enable the Newcomer Homepage in their preferences. All new accounts have this turned on by default, and it is their landing page, on par with, and as accessible as, their User: and User talk: pages.

Hosts not being familiar with, for example, what the Impact Module looks like is probably just as inexplicable to newer editors as it feels to us whenever we encounter someone who doesn't know they have a talkpage. Folly Mox (talk) 13:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice. I had a look at my "Homepage". I learned from the "Impact" seesion that the most viewed article I've edited was Star of David. I've no recollection of ever editing (or even reading) it; maybe I did once. I was encouraged to do some copy-editing on Hui mian, and did so. Then I found that the most viewed article I've edited is now Macau. I learned that I have a mentor, who has made about 1/10 as many edits as me.
If a new user ever asks me about their Newcomer Homepage, I shall tell them that it's a rather weird place which they can safely ignore. Maproom (talk) 17:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Oh right I forgot to mention you may be assigned a mentor you'll have to unassign. That happened to me too.
And yeah, the Impact Module is kinda misrepresentative. It caps out the "edits in the past 60 days" stat at 1000, for example, and teaches us more about pageviews than our own contributions (I doubt my fix of a single template error in a reference on the article Google improved the reading experience for all 400,000+ people who opened the article since then). But yeah it's the new default so may as well experience it to stay in touch with the kids these days. Folly Mox (talk) 08:44, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
The impact part of somebody else's Special:Homepage can be seen by manually making a link like Special:Impact/Folly Mox. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
I have made User:PrimeHunter/Impact.js which adds an "Impact" link for a user whose userspace you are in. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
This is very useful to know. Thank you PrimeHunter and thank you, Folly Mox. I agree that hosts should probably be familiar with all the Growth Team features and at least some general knowledge of the mentoring and editor retaining efforts. --ARoseWolf 13:25, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm adding myself to the host list!

—since I try to help a lot anyway. I haven't done so yet because I've spent a considerable time learning on the job, including how to always be friendly and as helpful as possible. Of course it doesn't mean anything particular, I just wanted others to know that me adding myself to the host list is coming with an explicit commitment to be the best host possible. :) cheers! Remsense留 23:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Nice to have you involved {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:01, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to hosting and I echo @Sdkb. It is nice to have you involved. --ARoseWolf 13:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Talkback script

So, I've installed the talkback script, and am getting into the habit of using it—but I do note that it asks for the question to be reentered—it seems possible that this could be done automatically, since the button is in the context of a header on the page regardless. I assume this has been discussed before? Remsense留 06:49, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

You're referring to User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/talkback? I haven't used that script and aren't too familiar with it, but you could share suggestions with the script's author, Qwerfjkl.
Putting talkbacks on users' talk pages has become less important now that the WP:Talk pages project has rolled out the subscription feature, which makes it so that editors will now automatically be notified about replies to threads they start at the Teahouse, even if we forget to ping them (which we always should, since it'll result in a bolder red notification rather than a blue one). A talkback will still give them the orange bar, which is the most noticeable of all, but I don't tend to bother with it unless I see someone continuing a behavior seemingly unaware of a response at the Teahouse. In our role educating editors about how Wikipedia works, we should be modeling normal pinging behavior, and talkbacks aren't used anywhere else these days. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
That makes sense, thank you—I did feel the TB was a bit of a "making extra extra sure" gesture—I just wanted to make sure I was acting inline with expectations in the Teahouse host guidelines. Perhaps they should be tweaked to reflect this? Remsense留 10:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I'd support that. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Is the Teahouse targeting women?

From the link on the Teahouse page, I was reading https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Teahouse, where it says Although the project will welcome all good faith new users, women are a particular target population. Is this true? I have been a Teahouse regular for many years and I have never seen anything at the Teahouse or anywhere else on Wikipedia that suggests it is targeting women users, only that it is supposed to be friendly for any new user. Was this a goal at one time that has since been dropped, or is there something I am missing that encourages women to come to the Teahouse? RudolfRed (talk) 20:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: I noted that the phrase "women are a particular target population" was in the original version of the Wikimedia page from 29 November 2011. I'm not aware of people making a special effort now to encourage women in particular to come to the Teahouse (but there are many things of which I'm not aware). GoingBatty (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
The Teahouse arose out of a bunch of Foundation research on welcoming new users; the version that operates today has evolved a lot from that. Wanting to welcome women may have influenced some of the earlier decisions, such as the Teahouse's visual design. Today, I think the friendliness approach we take is naturally more likely to aid female editors who come here, given that women are less likely to endure hostile online environments than men. I also know that when culling the list of active Teahouse hosts in the past, we've given a bit more leniency to female hosts. Trying to make the Teahouse welcoming to women should be something we always have in mind as we try to fight systemic bias, but it dovetails pretty well with the things we do to make it welcoming for folks of all genders. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
"Today, I think the friendliness approach we take is naturally more likely to aid female editors who come here, given that women are less likely to endure hostile online environments than men." Not true.
"I also know that when culling the list of active Teahouse hosts in the past, we've given a bit more leniency to female hosts." Care to elaborate? Biolitblue (talk) 01:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
RudolfRed, while it is old verbiage, I do agree with Sdkb on the benefits offering a variety of social approaches may potentially have for editors of different genders. — Remsense诉 23:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, everyone, for the replies. RudolfRed (talk) 04:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I was thinking it was a vandalism leftover, as a woman myself, it really confuses me, and I think it should be removed as to promote neutrality and/or positivity among all groups. Cometkeiko (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Cometkeiko, this seems perfectly reasonable, especially as it's not contingent to the goals of the Teahouse at present. I would be interested in hearing more from others about removing the passage. — Remsense诉 12:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I think the meta page is at this point largely a historical report document indicating how the foundation thought about the Teahouse c. 2012. I wouldn't be opposed with a notice at the top indicating that more clearly, but I don't think it'd be appropriate for us to change it. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 15:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I don't have an issue with it staying as is. --ARoseWolf 16:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
For encouraging thousands of new editors to become a contributor to Wikipedia. The Teahouse is a million dollar idea. Seriously. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 16:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, @CactiStaccingCrane, but wouldn't this be a bit better placed on the talk page? 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
(And now it is on the talk page, due to MAGIC 😉) 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
-:-) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 02:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Brilliant idea indeed, but I thought barnstars are for users. Abdullah raji (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
I remember that a very long Wiki-time ago (in about 2006 or so), a group received a "WikiMedal for janitorial services" (I was one of them). Not a barnstar per se, but I always took it that if an award is given to a group, everyone involved (say, Teahouse hosts) have been awarded the recognition. Lectonar (talk) 14:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse Hosts!

Is Teahouse Host a formal position here, like Administrator? Or is it more like Editor in Wikipedia at large, referring to anybody who ever comments on a question (or adds a comma to an article)? Uporządnicki (talk) 15:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Slightly in between — there's a listing at WP:Teahouse/Hosts, which is the sense in which it's formal, but anyone can help respond to queries. Sdkb talk 15:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
I haven't joined the official list because I don't want to feel an obligation to contribute regularly. There are several regular contributors who are not on the list and a few that are on the list but almost never contribute. Nick Moyes occasionally removes those who have stopped contributing. The only important requirements for contributors, IMO, is that their answers are largely accurate and made politely. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
I believe it's a holdover from when the Teahouse was first established, but the concept doesn't hold any significance as to who may answer questions, so long as said answers are accurate, courteous, and helpful. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
@AzseicsoK As has been said, it's a very informal title which people who do feel they help out here quite a lot here might wish to give themselves. But anyone is free to answer other users' questions at any time without signing up as a Host (so long as they give helpful answers!). I regard it is a very good first step for some editors who are becoming interested in some of the behind-the-scenes administration and support work to do. That's probably how I started my own journey to becoming an admin when @Cullen328 suggested I participated here as a Host. It taught me so much (and I'm still learning from other people's answers to this day)
All that said, a very tiny number of editors do occasionally sign themselves up as a 'Host' for the wrong reasons (see WP:HATCOLLECT or WP:CIR) and they do get removed in due course, as do those who have never made much - or any - contribution here, or have got themselves blocked or regularly warned for inappropriate behaviour. The key things any Host needs is to be polite, patient, helpful and welcoming.
You will find a tiny handful of names of editors on the host list who are not actively answering questions nowadays, but have nevertheless played a very significant role in the establishment and running of the Teahouse in the past, or who still do research or bot-related activities here. I hope this additional info is of interest. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
and I'm still learning from other people's answers to this day is probably the most relatable thing here. I've got this place watchlisted primarily to answer questions I feel I can answer, but also just to learn stuff I probably never would've done by contributing anywhere elsewhere. There's such a wide array of questions asked here that you'll never stop learning. CommissarDoggoTalk? 22:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Meet your hosts formatting

In signing up to be a Teahouse host I have managed to mess up the formatting of my entry (specifically the image). Obligatory trout Self-trout. If anyone knows how to retroactively amend this do let me know! Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 22:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

@Unexpectedlydian:  Fixed in this edit. The template only calls for the file name and nothing else. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Amazing, thank you Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽ 22:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Someone should close this discussion

Someone (preferably an admin) should probably close WP:THQ#Notice: I am considering quitting everything since it's a discussion that's going nowhere and seems more for the OP's vanity than anything else. I would close it myself, but I've just commented in it and feel it would be a bit odd for me to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

@Marchjuly I'm not sure closing is really necessary. Looks to me like it's come to a natural end and isn't going to continue. But feel free to close it if you wish. (As you know, I commented, too). Nick Moyes (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
You're right Nick. I was actually going to self-revert this post first thing since I reached the same assessment, but I'll leave it here now just for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:Drafts - proposed split

Information icon There is currently a discussion at WT:Drafts regarding a proposed split of WP:Drafts. The thread is WT:Drafts#Split into help page and guideline. Thank you. S0091 (talk) 17:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

The wikilink is messed up a bit. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Drafts#Split into help page and guideline. —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Bot inoperable

It appears that the bot that leaves talk page notifications that Teahouse threads have been active archived has gone inoperable, and the operator hasn't been around in a few months. Would anyone be interested in taking over the task or filing a request for it to be taken over? Sdkb talk 19:32, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

For the curious, Tigraan noted back in November 2022 at User talk:Tigraan/Archive 3#Problem with Teahouse notification template that The server [Muninnbot] was running on was shut down and I am supposed to migrate the tool to another one, but I procrastinated doing that. (No promise about when I will fix it.) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
See also: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User_talk:Tigraan#Muninnbot:_Digging_Teahouse_archive_links_failure Nick Moyes (talk) 00:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
To keep discussion on one place, I notified WP:BOTREQ of the existing discussion here. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Maintainer: Tigraan (inactive 4 months)
Bot: Muninnbot
Source code: https://gitlab.com/Tigraan/Teahouse-bot/-/blob/master/scripts/teahouse_archival_bot.py
BRFA: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Muninnbot
Toolforge account: Muninnbot –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:59, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
If what is needed is someone to run and maintain the bot could a current bot op take over the task with the same code on a new bot account? Geardona (talk to me?) 12:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
@Novem Linguae, is the old source code still functional? – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
Not sure. I think the next step is someone needs to do wikitech:Help:Toolforge/Abandoned tool policy. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
I've notified Tigraan on their talk pages and via email, as required by the policy :) Frostly (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
Courtesy link: User talk:Tigraan#Muninnbot (permalink just in case). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
  • Hi folks, bot operator here. Thanks for the notification. I would like to get back to Wikipedia contributions and Muninnbot, but honestly I am not sure I can make that promise due to real-life events. I can however promise to stay around and answer queries in the next couple of weeks or so.
What stopped the bot was the migration of Toolforge server. I was supposed to move to the new server, but did not. (Just to be clear: I am not blaming the migration team, the messages were perfectly clear about what ought to be done and by what time.) The code itself should be still working. I have not tested, so changes to dependencies (deprecations etc.) could have broken it; but at least it’s worth a shot. Note also that it has a dead man’s switch, running a couple of unit tests before posting notifications all around, and stopping if any of those fail; that is not guaranteed to catch every bug of course, but it will catch some of them. Looking at the code, it certainly is not perfect but it aged way better than my other years-old projects did. All the important Python code is in this Python file, which should be run via a cron job.
The only problem I can envision to getting it back up is the one described at User:Muninnbot/doc#Race_condition_with_lowercase_sigmabot_III: as it stands, the script must be run exactly once between two archival runs, else notifications are missed or duplicated. Back when I set it up, LS3 ran once every day around 5:00UTC, hence just running the bot once a day at a time different from that worked. However, looking at the TH history right now I can see timestamps at various points around the clock. This may be buggy behavior from LS3 (User_talk:Σ seems to mention issues with the bot), but I do not think "runs every day at the same time" was ever a promise made by that bot, so relying on it is not good software design anyway. Fixing it would require development but should not be too hard (simple fix off the top of my head: have a log file that contains the ID of the last LS3 edit to be processed, process every LS3 edit that occurred after that one, update the log).
So... next steps that I see:
  1. (done) Anyone interested in becoming co-maintainer (Frostly, usernamekiran, any others?) files the Toolforge paperwork for adopting the tool. Feel free to link to this post as proof I did not object. I will also specifically say that access to the Toolforge for the tool should include access to secrets therein (I am 90% sure there should be an OAuth token to post as Muninnbot, but without it you cannot really run the bot).
  2. (Optional but highly recommended) the same people send me a gitlab ID so I can add them on the gitlab repo (create an account beforehand if needed). Either here, on my user talk page, or via email if you prefer (note that project members on public gitlab repos are public though, so there’s not much privacy point in using email).
  3. The same people add themselves at the places they ought to (User:Muninnbot for instance?)
  4. Someone (the first one to code it I guess) fixes the LS3 issue mentioned above
  5. Someone (the first one to cron it I guess) puts the bot back online at Toolforge
If it was me, I would mildly prefer doing #4 before doing #5, but honestly I could imagine myself YOLOing it. If you do so, watch over the LS3 edits for a couple of days.
I would imagine the BRFA is still valid - although technically the bot has not edited for two years, it was not due to a change of consensus, and I see no opposition to restarting it in the discussion here. Of course anyone is free to object at any point.
That should cover it. Any issues with that plan, questions etc.? TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 19:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
thanks for theresponse Tigraan. I have only one doubt. I'm not sure if OAuth is required with pywikibot. Years ago when I setup my tool/bot, to post as KiranBOT II, all I had to do was create BotPassword, and use it in the config file. Regarding other stuff, I'll respond in 18ish hours. Courtesy ping to Frostly. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Thanks so much for the reply, Tigraan!
The easiest / least bureaucratic way to accomplish #1 would be to add myself and usernamekiran as maintainers in the Toolforge admin console. My Toolforge username is EpicPupper (it was my previous Wikimedia username); usernamekiran's looks like it's the same.
Re #2, my GitLab username is "frost-ly". Long-term, I'd love to potentially migrate the project to Wikimedia's instance of GitLab.
There's a new Toolforge jobs framework that "replaces" cron, which is probably the best-practice way to get the bot up and running again.
I agree that the BRFA is likely still valid :)
Looking forward to hearing usernamekiran's perspective.
Cheers, — Frostly (talk) 03:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
I have added you both on the Toolforge admin account, and frost-ly on Gitlab.
I have not yet logged back on Toolforge to dust off the furniture (new computer, I will need to dig to retrieve the SSH keys). I should be able to do so later this week though. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 19:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
@Frostly, Usernamekiran, and Tigraan: hi! Hope you all are well. Just out of curiosity, is this ongoing? Thanks, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
@Rotideypoc41352: Hi, apologies, I thought this one was taken care of. I will be busy for 40ish hours from now. But this will be the first thing I will take a look at as soon as I get time. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
@Rotideypoc41352: I just logged in to the bot's account on toolforge. @Tigraan, and Frostly: I have created a file named "usernamekiran.log" in root directory. I will soon look into the cronjob issue, and I will keep you guys posted. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Usernamekiran, thank you! Will take a look into the bot as well. — Frostly (talk) 01:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
@Usernamekiran @Frostly You should be able to use botpasswords and OAuth on Toolforge. Tho OAuth in my experience is relatively easier to setup with custom containers. I run a cross-wiki(source) bot with a similar cronjob configuration in the wsstats account on the new Toolforge infrastructure. (The code for my bot is at https://github.com/sohomdatta1/wsstats.git feel free to copy over parts of the boilerplate code if you want). Sohom (talk) 05:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
@Sohom Datta: Hi. Using OAuth, I was able to login to enwiki with Muninnbot on the first attempt, but I am getting an error with the script. I tried to fix it, but couldnt. I have mailed Tigraan, hopefully they will respond soon. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

Dadvan Yousuf

There seems to be a coordinated effort to get "first Iraqi on Everest" into the article Dadvan Yousuf. In these two days alone, there have been five accounts asking about it here and on the article's talk page. Is there something we can do? '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:47, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Not really, besides direct people to the talk page and provide reliable sources. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
You could put an {{FAQ}} on the talk page but I have a hunch that it'd mostly get scrolled on by. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Wikitia discussion seems to have moved beyond the scope of the Teahouse

@Anachronist and PrimeHunter: I think that WP:THQ#Deleting a page probably should be closed down because it has moved beyond the scope of the Teahouse. Assuming that the OP isn't trolling, there's nothing Wikipedia can do about Wikitia anyway and the IP's/OP's last response has even further moved a discussion in a direction that's just might lead to some things being posted that shouldn't be posted. Since you two are admins and both responded to the OP, the discussion could be continued on the OP's user talk page if either of you want to, but I don't see anything further to be gained by doing so at the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Anyone can close a discussion, it doesn't have to be an administrator. I just wrapped it in archive tags. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
I'm aware of that anyone can close a discussion, but I figured I give one of you the chance to do so given that the two of you had posted several responses; moreover, as admins, you're also capable of WP:REVDEL if you deem it to be necessary. Anyway, it's a moot point now since you closed the discussion and another user courtesy blanked it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

"Teahouse (Wikipedia)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Teahouse (Wikipedia) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 4 § Teahouse (Wikipedia) until a consensus is reached. cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Are we allowed to remove questions?

Hi. I was wondering if removal of posts are allowed, if it is obvious that the asker is not here for help. (Such as this one) Thanks! '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 11:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi CanonNi. In my opinion, your best bet is to probably follow the guidance in WP:TPO, particularly WP:TPG#Off-topic posts. If you assess the post to be a serious violation of a policy like WP:BLP, WP:OUTING, WP:COPY, etc., you can probably remove it asap but should leave an appropriate edit summary explaining why. You then probably should seek assistance from an administrator (there are usually a few active at the Teahouse at various times of the day but there's always one at WP:AN) and ask them to review it because it might need to be WP:REVDEL if it's really bad. If it's a case of someone posting too much of their own personally identifying information (email addresses, phone numbers, real names, etc.), you can use the template {{redacted}} as well, politely explain to the person who posted why, and then contact an admininstrator or WP:OVERSIGHT to see if revdel or WP:SUPPRESS is needed. If it's just someone rambling about something unrelated to the Wikipedia per editing or something not really within the scope of the Teahouse (i.e. a general reference question), you can politely respond that such a thing isn't within the scope of the Teahouse and redirect the person to another Wikipedia page or another external website (if one exists). You can try to answer the person's question if you want, but that might lead to further discussion that might end up needing to be closed at some point. A lot could depend on the context of the post. For certain things, sometimes this posting a WP:DISCLAIMER like response works best because trying to delve into too much detail (especially about sensitive subject matters) might create a new set of problems.
The account who made the post you're asking about has already been blocked for disruption, so there's no point in warning them about. The posts it made at the Teahouse have already been removed by an administrator named Graham87. For reference, though, posts like this could probably be non-contentiously removed per WP:R VAN or WP:TPG#Off-topic posts if you want, but you might want to check the poster's contributions' history first to see whether they're just drive by posting and have already been dealt with or they could possibly be asking a "legit" question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for the detailed reply! I understand now. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 13:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
@CanonNi How do I put in a question. Do I edit it in? Jacobacademy (talk) 19:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 June 2024

I asked my actual question here, whoops. I would like to request permission to ask questions in the Teahouse. TheSoS9k 16:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done – sorry, there was some spamming so editing is temporarily restricted. It'll be back to normal in a few hours. If you need to reply to a comment on your question, just reply here and notify the user with {{ping|username}}. Tollens (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
@Tollens How do I put in a question? Jacobacademy (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

How do I ask a question?

I don't know how to edit one in and I am incapable of using the "Ask a question" link because I cannot use links that redirect me outside of the Wikipedia app. Jacobacademy (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@Jacobacademy I just noticed that from the app the button redirects you to the browser. You can then ask your question from the browser (I would recommend it over the app). Alternatively, from the app, go to Wikipedia:Teahouse, scroll down to the last topic at the bottom of the page, click the edit button and add a new topic there. Make sure you add a header for your topic between double equal signs, like this: == Header ==.
Note for the Teahouse experts: the button should not redirect outside the app. Anyone knows how this could be fixed? Broc (talk) 21:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
This appears to be because the template {{clickable button 2}} takes |url= as a parameter, which requires a full URL, not a wikilink. This is presumably done to immediately put the user into edit mode, and it would be impossible to do so with a wikilink. With the introduction of DiscussionTools and the Reply tool I'm not sure how redundant that would make the button. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

Uh, what exactly is the "Teahouse"?

I'm still kind of confused, sorry if this shouldn't be written here. Crylophosaurus (talk) 03:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Crylophosaurus. The Teahouse is just a place where beginners can ask questions about how to edit Wikipedia. Actually, anybody can ask, but it is aimed at beginners. It is just like the Help desk except that people here at the Teahouse make an extra effort to be patient and not "bite" the newbies.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
@Gronk Oz How do I ask a question at the teahouse? I am working on a device with some restrictions and cannot use any links that redirect out of the Wikipedia app. Do I just edit the question in? Jacobacademy (talk) 19:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, @Jacobacademy: Sorry you are having trouble. You don't have to leave the app to ask a question. If you go to the Teahouse (WP:TEA), you will see a big blue button near the top that says "Ask a Question". Press that and it will open an edit window for a new question. Or if you prefer you could edit the page to add your question at the bottom - but the button is the better way (especially since multiple people might be editing at once, which can cause problem with clashing edits). Note that the page you are on now is not the Teahouse itself - this is its Talk page, to discuss how the Teahouse works, raise problems with it, etc. So to ask a general question about editing Wikipedia, make sure you go to WP:TEA first. I hope that helps.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Welco
me
to
the
Teaho
use!

Hi all. Please try looking at WP:TH on a phone in mobile view mode and in its default portrait mode. Many users will see it this way. Sadly, our Teahouse image is so large that it forces our welcome message to be (rather humorously) spread across 6 separate lines as shown:

Welco
me
to
the
Teaho
use!

I think we need to fix this so that the image size is reduced in mobile view and the text reads more normally. Hopefully, some experienced template editors could take a look? Pinging Sdkb who, I know, has worked on this before. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

Definitely a problem. Coding a more mobile-friendly header requires someone with more knowledge of HTML stylings than me, though. Sdkb talk 19:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, Sdkb. Maybe @PrimeHunter could suggest how we might take this forward. Perhaps a post at WP:VPT asking for help? Nick Moyes (talk) 04:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes @Sdkb I fixed it, see diff, by ensuring the Teahouse image is at most 50% of the total width in mobile view. I tested it with various mobile sizes and it seems to work well. Please let me know if you find a bug or the change is not to your liking. Broc (talk) 10:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
@Broc Thank you! That looks a whole lot better now. On my mobile, it's nearly, but not quite perfect, as I'm seeing the header welcome message properly laid out, although the text beneath it (i.e. "Your go-to place... ...and editing Wikipedia") all right justified, apart from the last two words (..."editing Wikpedia") which I suspect have slipped under the Teahouse image and now appear centrally justified. But I can live with that. Thanks again, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes that was already happening on my phone (which I assume has a higher resolution than yours). The reason for this is that the "Welcome to the Teahouse!" message is in the same column of the buttons "Ask a question" etc. "Sticking" the column to the right would cause all the buttons to appear on the right side instead of full-size.
It's not an unsolvable issue but it would require some larger changes, so I decided to only apply this minor fix. Broc (talk) 15:15, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
That’s absolutely fine. I didn’t mean to sound critical. We’re grateful that you’ve made it look a lot better than it was. Thanks again, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

How it was going

Apologies to DandelionAndBurdock, RudolfRed, Cordless Larry, and CFA for my recent deletion of the thread "How’s it going", complete with their well-meant contributions; but as the thread developed it became increasingly obvious that the original (and repeated) poster was either an extraordinarily silly person or an attention-seeking troll; either way, a time-waster. There's no point indulging such people. -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

That's understandable. I was going to close the discussion until I saw that the instructions at Template:Hidden archive top state that that should only be done by an uninvolved editor. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
The IPs have now been blocked for block evasion and trolling. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:03, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

"Publish" vs. "save"

I'm curious to hear from other hosts about what you've been encountering with editors being confused by the button to save an edit when creating a new page being labelled "publish" rather than "save," as it used to be. It seems that this has caused a lot of confusion, e.g. here, here (both handled by @331dot), here, and here, among many others. We have the ability to change it at MediaWiki:Publishchanges if we decide to do so. Sdkb talk 02:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't think we can change it; as I understand it was Wikipedia's lawyers who wanted it changed, to emphasize that every edit is public. Apparently "save" does not carry that implication. I think we just have to live with it. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Users think, understandably, that "Publish" means "put in mainspace". Some want to put their draft into mainspace and are puzzled when "Publish" doesn't do that. Others just want to save edits to their draft but can't find a "Save" button. It's strange that lawyers think WP's legal position is stronger when its users don't understand what they're doing. Maproom (talk) 14:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I've wondered if there was a way to reword it to both make it clear what the button does and satisfy the concerns of the lawyers(who I think are trying to avoid users saying "I didn't know that would be public!" or some other legal concern) but I feel like that would be hard to do in a concise manner with a minimum of confusion. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
I've thought about it a bit and think the solution isn't in the wording (as both put us in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation), but in a warning dialogue box that says something along the lines of:

Warning: Your edits will be publicly viewable. If you wish to keep your edits private you will have to do it off-site.

This would be enabled by default for non-autoconfirmed users and removed once they become autoconfirmed. Unfortunately, IP addresses would most likely have to be left out as there's no way to differentiate between veteran editors who wish to remain anonymous versus complete newbies. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Save & publish, instead of the current Publish changes.
There's already a disclaimer by such buttons (including the "Reply" button on talk pages) giving full details. Bazza 7 (talk) 14:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
Speculating about what's legally necessary rather than seeking clarification is a surefire way for us to get bogged down in circles. @Slaporte (WMF), can you let us know if there's any legal reason the button needs to say "publish" rather than "save"? Sdkb talk 16:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
The answer (I assume Slaporte isn't going answer at this point) is because "Save" led to a lot of newbies believing that the contents were being saved privately, and thus were a perfectly safe place to make a note about your password, or your home phone number, or to stash a copy of a copyrighted text that you meant to cite. We also had problems with students who thought that 'Save' meant 'My supervising teacher will not be able to see this yet'. The UI needs to give people the information that they need to protect their privacy. Since the meaning of 'Save' shifted in the public's mind from the 1990s idea of 'This puts a copy on a hard disk' to the 2010s idea of 'When I save my e-mail draft, it does not send it to anyone yet', new users didn't feel like what they expected from a 'Save' button is what they actually got from the big blue button.
It's probably worth noting that the group of experienced editors who never complain about this change are the ones who worked in Wikipedia:Oversight before this change was made.
If memory serves, the Hebrew Wikipedia got approval from WMF Legal to use "Save and publish". I don't know whether this solves any actual problems. I assume that the net result is to have newbies ask "Where's the plain 'Save' button? I only want to save it. I don't want to publish it yet." At the time, a significant part of their idea was that it would ease the transition by retaining and expanding the old wording, rather than replacing it completely. I do not think that such a change would be helpful to us. (Also, as a matter of pure personal aesthetics, I don't happen to like it myself.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
See this announcement for background (and further discussion further down the page). 57.140.16.57 (talk) 19:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
I do regularly (though not frequently) encounter questions from new users who are confused by the publish button. I find it somewhat embarrassing to have to trot out the "it's a legal requirement that's been forced on us" explanation on each occasion. It is time-consuming to have to explain what the difference between 'publish' and 'Publish' means. But I haven't experienced the constant confusion amongst large numbers of new editors that I had actually expected. If I could change it back, I would, as it's the most logical title when saving edits in a draft. But I suspect most new users manage to understand it well enough, and that we are where we are, and are stuck with it. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
What about displaying different words to different user access levels? Autoconfirmed and above could stick with Publish; non-autoconfirmed could get Save publicly and a separate disclaimer above or below the edit summary textbox to the effect of Everything saved to Wikipedia is immediately publicly visible.
I suspect a knock-on effect of the Publish wording is people leaving the editing interface open too long (till they're ready to "Publish") and being unable to commit edits made due to the "no stashed content" Mediawiki error, which is something we get questions about several times monthly. So even though we don't hear specifically about the wording very often, I suspect adding clarity for newer editors may help in that regard.
Of course, I just realised people might get even more confused when the wording changes upon becoming autoconfirmed, so this idea is probably at least mostly dumb. At least I necroed a whole thread about it. Folly Mox (talk) 10:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
If we thought it was a significant source of confusion, we could add a little pop-up note for first edits that says "Everything on Wikipedia is public. There is no way to save a private copy on wiki." But I don't think it's that big of a problem. If I were going to add a message, it would probably be about the desirability of citing sources. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

First edit stats

Some of you might be interested in some first edit stats I asked for.

BLUF: 70% of first edits are to an existing page, and 90% of those are to the mainspace/articles. If your first edit is to create a new page, then a third of them get deleted within the first week. Only 1 in 60 of those first-edit page creations get moved to the mainspace, and about 20% of those get deleted shortly afterwards.

The queries are quarry:query/84512 and quarry:query/84486 if anyone ever wants to re-run them in the future. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

My quotable takeaway factoid from the above synopsis is Editors who attempt to create a new Wikipedia article as their first action have a 1-in-75 success rate. Folly Mox (talk) 11:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
That sounds about right. And it's likely much lower (perhaps by about an order of magnitude) than in our pre-ACTRIAL systems. We are probably losing notable subjects because of the hoop-jumping required by NPP and AFC. There are downsides as well as upsides to our current systems. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
For sure. We've got a lot of priorities to balance, and pervasive lack of agreement on the weightings. I'm really grateful for your involvement. Folly Mox (talk) 14:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

"Searc..." and "Se..."

The above two strings are what render in Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header on my device when the "search help pages" button is labeled "Search Help" and "Search", respectively. Can someone who knows what they're doing (evidently not me: see my bungled attempt) have a go at reformatting Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host lounge/Announcements/1 or the header itself such that a full word appears on the search button on narrow screens? Folly Mox (talk) 10:28, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Resolved
 – Special:Diff/1236986938
Please let me know if this makes the "Search Help" button look stupider for anyone. I imagine the true fix is getting it to display the same regardless of client parameters, but  Works for me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Folly Mox (talk) 14:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Teahouse/Archive_27&oldid=1258988575"