Wikipedia talk:User pages

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the User pages page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19: 2 months

YOU MIGHT BE ON THE WRONG PAGE.
This page is not meant for general questions, nor discussions about specific articles.
This page is only for discussions about the Wikipedia page Wikipedia:User pages. To discuss an article, please use that article's talk page. To ask for help with using and editing Wikipedia, use our Teahouse. Alternatively, see our FAQ.

Archives (index)

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

UI Spoofing archive (2007)

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Newcomer homepage

I saw a reference to this in the Teahouse archives but I don't know where it is covered. Apparently not on WP:UP. Based on the response to the question, I got the impression this would be a "user page" in the sense of user talk pages and user pages.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:16, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Logging in § Your user page and user talk page is the only thing I could find that indicates that a user/talk page is located in the top of every window. Primefac (talk) 15:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should the newcomer homepage be added to that information on that page?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Growth Team features#Newcomer homepage (and the section above it for why certain articles keep having extra links added by new editors). You can turn it on at the bottom of the User Profile tab in Preferences. NebY (talk) 17:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking for something that explains the newcomer homepage to new editors.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this acceptable from a fairly new editor?

187 edits, claims 15 years [1] Doug Weller talk 14:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Their biography does state they've been editing as an IP for that time period, so I don't see why not. Primefac (talk) 16:24, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that makes sense. Whatever is there, I think good faith means we ignore it and I shouldn't have brought it here. Doug Weller talk 16:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTP acronym

Re: [2]

I thought my edit was fairly uncontroversial. I should know by now that very little is uncontroversial in Wikipedia editing.

My position is well articulated at User talk:Primefac#UTP, so I won't repeat it here. ―Mandruss ☎ IMO. 17:27, 9 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:KEEPDECLINEDUNBLOCK

It's been pointed out to me that WP:KEEPDECLINEDUNBLOCK was modified a couple of years ago to apparently allow for declined unblock requests of non-sitewide bans to be removed. I'm trying to find the discussion of this -- it doesn't make much sense to me, so I'd like to see how the consensus was developed. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 20:36, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see no good reason for the change; I think declined unblock requests should only be removable when the block is, regardless of its scope. Jclemens (talk) 23:22, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jclemens. I should think that reviewing admins would want to see previous requests/responses, whether it's a partial or sidewide block. Schazjmd (talk) 00:35, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall but I guess the idea is that someone might be indefinitely partially blocked from an article, but there is no need for them to wear the badge of shame forever. By contrast, a notice for a currently active sitewide block should be retained. That seems reasonable. The contribs for The ed17 at that time show that single edit with no corresponding comment in a discussion. Johnuniq (talk) 01:15, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps prior requests (for parblocks) should be kept or at least pointed out if a new request is made? 331dot (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a less obvious way to keep notes of declined non-site-blocks readily accessible to any administrator? Gaming the system as stated now is so simple I don't think BEANS even applies. Jclemens (talk) 01:50, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping Johnuniq. I have no recollection of what prompted me to make that edit. As you say, it's a real outlier of an edit that day. I have no objections if anyone here wants to modify it. Ed ^{[talk] [OMT]} 17:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]