Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 15

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

→

Archive 20

Feedback: draft of a new Teahouse header (Header 2)

Greetings, There is now a (not activated) page Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header 2 that I created in the hopes that it is useful for mobile devices. This is my first attempt, and I realize there may be errors in the wikicode and a better way. I tried to keep it simple. I invite everyone's feedback so if there are improvements, feel free to jump in and make them. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 03:03, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi, JoeHebda! I like your mobile Teahouse page! It does do a good job of showing everything on a mobile screen.

I have a few (purely aesthetic) suggestions, but I'm not sure how to add them. Here they are:

1. I would like for the large blue word "teahouse" to be removed, as it seems to be somewhat redundant.
2. I would prefer for all of the buttons ("Question forum", "Host profiles", "Guest profiles", and "Experienced editor? Become a host...") to go down the left side of the page. (Currently, the button "Guest profiles" is on the right side of the page, and the others say that they are in the center of the page, though they seem to be on the left side of the page.)
3. I would prefer for the links to "Learn more about Teahouse" and "Question archive" to be either along the bottom of the box, or on the right side of the box.
4. I would like for the box which is empty save for the Teahouse logo to be removed, as it seems to take up unnecessary space. If the link to the Teahouse is necessary, perhaps it can be moved to the icon in the top left corner.
5. I would like for the text in the link "Learn more about Teahouse" to be changed to "Learn more about the Teahouse", as this seems to be more grammatically correct.

Those are all my suggestions for right now. I hope that they will help!

Once again, nice page!

Noah Kastin (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

It looks like this new header would solve the problem I see on some of my screens where the {{stb}} template's "skip" instructions overlap text in the header, so I like it on that basis. I also think it looks less cluttered. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 17:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

• For the desktop view, i prefer the current header. I never use the mobile vuiew, so I have no opnion about how it looks there. DES ^(talk) 17:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
• The Transhumanist, Cullen328 and Nettrom – If you could take a look at this proposed new Teahouse header, I would appreciate your insights and feedback. (The link for Header 2 is above in first sentence.) Thanks, — JoeHebda • (talk) 13:57, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Joe, I like the theme presented in the title. It sounds cozy. Embellishing this theme with imagery to provide ambiance would be nice. A tea house is an establishment which primarily serves tea and other light refreshments. Sometimes the meal is also called "tea", and is funnest when served in a tea house. There is no better time and place to have a nice discussion with friends or new acquaintances than over clotted cream tea. I just have one question... Where are the tea and biscuits? The Transhumanist 20:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC) P.S.: Lose the exclamation point. Tea houses are supposed to be relaxing, not exciting. How about "Welcome to the teahouse..."

Thanks The Transhumanist, I made the change and agree that it is more welcoming. Cheers... — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Greetings, Asking for Teahouse header feedback (Cordless Larry—PrimeHunter—David Biddulph—Gestrid—ColinFine—Checkingfax—Bfpage) Since most of you are Teahouse Hosts, can you please give your thoughts and opinions about this new Teahouse/Header 2. The main feature is that it is better for mobile view. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:07, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

It looks just fine to me, JoeHebda. My only suggestion is to increase the size of the Teahouse logo, perhaps 50%. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 16:50, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328, I changed title to "huge" size, and yes it looks much better. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 20:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Is it just me, or is the Request list of articles to update link confusing? It's not really clear to me what it is from the piped text. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, I changed the wikilink pipe text to "Articles to improve". Hope that clarifies. I also added that same "Articles to improve" as a page title on the Suggestions page. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 23:26, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Is there any reason why the "Question forum" button acts as a way to get to Wikipedia:Teahouse instead of working the same way the "Ask a question" button works? People clicking the button will already be on the page it leads to since this is (I assume) supposed to replace {{TH question page}}. — Gestrid (talk) 03:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Good catch Gestrid, I had missed that while making this new "Header 2". Last night I added the "Ask a question" button and moved the "Question forum" button into the next group. Thanks for the feedback. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 13:42, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Still, JoeHebda, what's the point of having a button that leads to the very page you're on? I would suggest simply removing the "Question forum" button all together. At the very least, it'll be weird to new editors to have a button like that. At the most, it'll confuse them into thinking the button's not working. — Gestrid (talk) 14:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Gestrid Good point. I can "shade" the "Question forum" button for now. After this "Header 2" goes live, it can be "cloned" onto the header for each of the other TH pages linked to. Thanks. — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Startup plan for TH Header 2

• Note – Install main page first Last, because of high activity level.

The main TH page "Wikipedia:Teahouse" uses "Template:TH question page". Before "go-live", post a notice to alert TH hosts and WP editors. At the "Clear" after "Ask a question", add this wikicode.

Notice: This Teahouse page will be tested starting June 3, 2017. It will look different but the same functionality should remain.

Next, update TH main page to use "Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header 2" instead of template "TH question page".

Check that everything still works correctly. If yes, wait a day or two, then begin work on below. If not, reverse above by returning to "Template:TH question page".

• Startup sequence: – Install new Header to these TH pages

One by one clone "Header 2" into a custom heading for each of these TH pages

1.  Done Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host/Featured - 12 pageviews (May 29, 2017; 14:12)
2.  Done Wikipedia:Teahouse/Suggestions - 55 pageviews (May 29, 2017 16:48)
3.  Done Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host start - 120 pageviews (May 30, 2017 08:11)
4.  Done Guest profiles - 145 pageviews (May 30, 2017 09:27) Needs cleanup of complex wikicode. Asked for help at Village Pump, Technical. Now OK, thanks to User PrimeHunter for solution.
5.  Done Guest archive - 38 pageviews (May 31, 2017 15:23)
6.  Done Host profiles - 363 pageviews (May 31, 2017 15:43)
7.  Done Question forum - (Wikipedia:Teahouse/Question-form2 - Ask a question) - 16,586 pageviews

•  ToDo Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_Index
•  ToDo Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host_lounge/Announcements

Last of all, look for more pages that might need the new TH header. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 03:37, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

1. Why is the header copy pasted all over the place ? This is what we have templates for isn't it ? (Then you also don't need to 'look for more pages that need the new TH header' the next time)
2. There's some important problems still there. Some clearing problems.. lack of margins.
3. An horizontal list that isn't an list...
4. That button is not exactly in the middle. Is that intentional ? —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 21:53, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Pinging JoeHebda. — Gestrid (talk) 02:16, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Greetings TheDJ Thanks for the feedback and for your "Header 2" improvements yesterday.

1. These headers are each different. From what I could see, each of these TH pages has a different purpose. Plus, I have not learned much about templates, so I don't know how to pass a parameter to make one line of wikicode different depending on the parameter. If a template can do this, I am all in favor of using a template instead.

2. As I mentioned above, each page seems to be a little bit different, so if they all can be standardized that is great.

3. Horizontal list? Please clarify with specific part of the Header 2.

4. The "Ask a question" button seems to be "bumped" off-center because of the left-side TH logo. I tried to fix without any luck, with my limited wikicode experience.

In conclusion, a question whether to hold off on today's main TH page test/install? Until above are answered? Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 13:23, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Note – I changed the bottom four wikilinks to "clickable button"s. Looks more consistent now. — JoeHebda • (talk) 13:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

New TH Header 2

After installing new TH header, everything is working correctly; except that blue button "Add a question" no longer opens with a full URL page. I added this issue to the main TH page. Hopefully an expert will be able to fix as I have no idea how. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:24, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

"Add a question" opens a box with "Write out your question in the textbox below" instead of a normal edit window. That is an intentional Teahouse feature for users with the default setting Enable the Teahouse "Ask a question" feature at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. But I think there also used to be a normal "New section" tab. I don't see one now. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks PrimeHunter - That's exactly what is was. When I un-ticked in Gadgets Enable the Teahouse "Ask a question" feature, the Question box shows full page. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 16:13, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

• I don't see that there was anything approaching an RFC to install this new header. I certainly wasn't aware that plans to implement it were in progress. I call for it to be reverted spending a fuller discussion of its merits and demerits. DES ^(talk) 15:58, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Greetings DESiegel - Sorry I'm not familiar with RFC. I thought above discussions would be adequate. I knew that based on the huge number of daily pageviews for the TH main page, there will need to be follow-on conversations. From the feedback above, there are some who like the new TH header page as well as some who do not care for it. Also, I did not know of any way to test it out, so I just built the "Header 2" page, then cloned it into some of the TH pages. Based on those updates and some expert help several changes where made to improve both look and content. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Purely as a matter of aesthetics, if possible, I think the ask a question button should be centered underneath the two lines of centered text above it. It looks cockeyed to me with the current lack of alignment between them.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:29, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit - I did a bit of "tweaking" on that "Ask a question" button to bring it closer to center. It may not be perfect wikicode but it does look better. Thanks for the feedback. Cheers! — JoeHebda • (talk) 00:44, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit - The above change messes up the mobile view. I tried a few things without any luck. Will look at it again on Monday. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 01:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't if you made another attempt after leaving the message above, but it is displaying as centered with the text above now (and looks much better because of it). Thanks--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:40, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi! I like the new mobile Teahouse header!

I just wanted to mention that, on my mobile web browser in portrait mode, the "Ask a question" button sticks out of the yellow box. Also, the header is broken up into two bits, like this (with the logo in the approximately square missing part):

Welcome to
the

Teahouse...

I hope that this feedback will be useful!

Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 22:56, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Noah Kastin, At the bottom line of pages, there should be a line that says "Mobile view" or "Desktop". Try using your browser with Desktop & see if that helps. I know of a few editors that only use a mobile device & Desktop combo, and that works best for them. Also you might have a better view experience with Landscape mode. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:07, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion, JoeHebda! I will try those other options. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:06, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion: TH Archive index

@JoeHebda: That Question Archive index page (which really should be divided into year and months) is two years old. I don't think we should link to it unless we somehow have a bot update the report, including at least most of the ones that were archived that aren't listed on that page. — Gestrid (talk) 06:48, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Greetings Gestrid, I took the liberty of adding a subsection title to your above feedback. Yes, I agree about that page being dated. The link to it existed on the previous TH header so it was brought across to the new TH header. To get the bot working again, should that be taken to Village Pump-Technical? Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

That's probably where the people who know about this kind of stuff are, so we should do that, JoeHebda. I do wish I knew who made the modifications. (I would assume Legoktm, but you never know.) It seems the one who made the request for the change is no longer active on Wikipedia. — Gestrid (talk) 06:22, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion

It might be good policy to ping users that are under discussion here, especially when they are being discussed, especially when it is done in a negative or contentious manner. Not doing so gives the impression that this place is a secret clubhouse for organizing attacks or canvasing against users.

It may be better policy to not have such discussions here at all, but if you want to take this place from being a teahouse the the fighty dojo place then thats on you really. Artw (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

There's no specific need for such rule. Pinging involved and mentioned users is standard practice on all discussion pages, the Teahouse is not an exception. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Apparently not [1]. Artw (talk)

(edit conflict) Eh? I could probably count the number of occasions there's been a substantive discussion at the Teahouse of a named editor (other than the OP of whatever the thread in question is) on the fingers of one hand; this is a help page for brand-new users seeking advice on Wikipedia policies and the technicalities of wiki markup, not a Wikipedia administrative page. Can you give any examples of the sort of discussions here that you have in mind? ‑ Iridescent 19:10, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I am pretty sure any users responding to such threads would be more than capable of pinging if they put their minds to it. Artw (talk) 19:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedia article

Whenever a user edits a article, red or green numbers appear with a negative or positive sign. What does that mean? Are those how many keystrokes a user increased or decreased the length of the article, up and down votes, or something else? Barrythevet (talk) 22:29, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

@Barrythevet: As stated on this page, this page is for discussing the Teahouse itself; questions should be asked on the main Teahouse page. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

As an aside, this question was also asked on the Teahouse page yesterday by Barrythevet, and was responded to. I'm not sure why it's now showing up over here. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 19:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

I have added several external links. Does this help?---- Maynor1972 (talk) 04:39, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

I think you might have intended to post this at Wikipedia:Teahouse#Wiki page, Maynor1972. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:18, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

THANK YOU

Thank you for make a new articles for Hyungwon and Shownu from Monsta X. Your contributions so important for me and other peoples who need their information. Thank you very much :) Fenny novita (talk) 06:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you fr the Inviting into Teahouse

Hope the Regresa plot was good Simi.sk902 (talk) 12:36, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Archival bot: update and questions (bot name, posting to IP talk pages)

Hello folks. I have coded a good half of the Teahouse archival bot thingie (you can have a look at a few subfunctions in my GitHub). Basically, it will let User:Lowercase sigmabot III do the archival (as before), and rely on the archival edits to perform the notifications: identifying the initiator of a post is basically done, and I can recover the archival link from lowercase sigmabot III's edit summary. I have still the posting to user talk pages part to do, but I am going to need to go through the bot approval process before I can do any serious testing of that and there are two questions for which I would like some input.

1. I propose to name the bot "MuninnBot" (as in Huginn and Muninn, plus cropping Munin from the Commons 2016 POTY would make a sympathetic picture for the bot's page). But please propose other ideas if you have interesting ones.
2. More serious question: should we apply its functionality (posting archival notifications to user talk pages) to IP editors? The obvious problem is dynamic IPs, meaning that notifications can miss their mark (if the target editor changes IPs, they will miss the notification, and someone else (who took the IP address) might get it instead (which is spamming)). What do you think? (Also, if we do want to notify IPs, there will be a second round of debate during bot approval.) Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:49, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Re question 2: excuse me for being dense, but could you clarify what you mean by "archival notifications"? Is this about people who don't make it back here to look for an answer to their question before the thread is archived? Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 16:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@Rivertorch: Well, sigmabot just archived the previous discussion. See here. Yes, the idea is to post a note to people whose post gets archived, explaining what happened and where to find the archive.

The bot is going to refrain from notifying certain editors. I would propose not to notify an autoconfirmed or blocked user (the former because they are supposed to know about archival, the latter per WP:DENY); the exact criteria for the first one can be debated, but I think it is pretty clear that some form "don't notify the regulars" is needed. (Maybe we could add an opt-in list for those who want.) But IPs, things are more complicated and that is certainly going to come up at WP:BAG, so I would better have a discussion beforehand. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:51, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Question 1: I still think we should just add the archiving functionality to HostBot. It already posts to users' talk pages. But, as long as it does what it's supposed to, I don't really care if we create a new bot or add on to an old one, and I don't really care what we name the new bot.

Question 2: Yes, I believe we should notify IP editors. Many IPs aren't so dynamic that they will change between the time they ask the question and the time they check back for an answer. In addition, we could have the bot use {{subst:shared IP advice}} (or something like it) on IP talk pages if that's possible.

— Gestrid (talk) 07:24, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

• I for one don't care about the bot name, or whether it is part of the existing HostBot or not. I do care about whom it notifies. i think autoconfirmed is far too low a threshold. If you must have a threshold, use extended confirmed, but even that is rather low in my view. Anyone asking a question at the teahouse is likely to find such a notification helpful. Even those who understand archiving can find it tedious to search for the exact archive involved: frankly i wish ANI notified every poster of archived posts, except those who op-out. Why not make this just notify everyone who starts a section unless they opt out? And I agree with Gestrid, notify IP editors. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 17:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

• Agreed, DES. Personally, I think it should notify everyone except blocked editors and those who have some form of the {{nobots}} template on their page or talk page. Additionally, the message the bot leaves should have instructions on how to opt out, and it should let editors know that it's a bot because many new editors have no idea what a Wikipedia bot is or that they exist. (I recall one particular time when someone posted to WP:TH back when it was still a splash page thanking GaiaGirl for her help. GaiaGirl is a part of The Wikipedia Adventure.) — Gestrid (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

• Darn ping... — Gestrid (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

{{U}|Tigraan}} does that give you something to work on? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 23:32, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't think I would have much trouble implementing any threshold that is decided on as long as it doesn't take esoteric invokations of the API. I agree autoconfirmed is too low, I meant ECP but somehow mixed up the two when typing the above.

I take it that unless otherwise instructed at bot approval, I will make no difference between IP and logged in editors. (That's marginally less work, yeah!) So the only check I will put (in the test version at least) will be the blocked editors thing.

I have no issues with merging my codebase to HostBot if Jtmorgan (ping) agrees, but this would require either that they take up the maintenance of the bot, or that HostBot gets multiple maintainers. I am not sure that is possible. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Tigraan: I'm happy to add you as a co-maintainer of HostBot. It would probably be a good thing, for long-term stability, to have another HostBot maintainer around. There would be two steps involved: adding you as a collaborator on the GitHub repo so that you can push your local code changes there, and then adding you to the HostBot project on ToolLabs so you can pull those updates into production and edit the crontab. This will take a little coordination to set up... the good news is that it can happen at any point; e.g. you can write your code, file your bot request, run a trial, and then we can merge the functionality into HostBot at a later date (I'm sure BAG won't mind). So perhaps it makes sense to run your BAG trial from your own bot account, and we can follow up on merging after it's approved. Let me know what you think, J-Mo 13:27, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jtmorgan: I intended to make the BAG request for a semi-automated trial run for a week or so before going full auto, so we are on the same wavelength here.

Before making me co-maintainer of HostBot though, you must realize that (1) I am going to need some serious tutoring about the ToolLabs etc. and (2) while I would be happy to maintain the task at hand, I am certainly not going to commit to being co-maintainer of other HostBot tasks (at least before I become familiar with bot maintenance without me screwing up big time). But we can talk about that after the initial testing. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 14:10, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan, Tigraan. Cheers, J-Mo 15:01, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Bot request is live

Here. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 18:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Nazim Hussain Pak's questions

Note: Do not click on the links in this post if you do not want to see images of nudity. A user called Nazim Hussain Pak, who signs his posts "Sinner" has posted a number of questions on the Teahouse page, seeking help with blocking images of nudity on Wikipedia. I notice that he has also created User:Nazim Hussain Pak/Books/Breasts and apparently User:Bilad il Islamia/sandbox too, using a different account - both of which contain images of female nudity. I'm not sure whether and how to raise this in response to his questions, so I am posting here for others to consider and advise. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

It looks like the second account has been blocked as a sock. I don't know what he is doing with the images(especially since him using the images seems to be a polar opposite of his original post), but it doesn't seem pertinent to improving Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 20:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

How to deal with socks/trolls asking Teahouse questions

Earlier today, a new editor that I instantly recognised as a sock posted a question at Wikipedia:Teahouse#I just want to know how to put a chemical formula. After Maproom and Gråbergs Gråa Sång had responded in good faith, I started an SPI and posted a link to it in the Teahouse section, saying that we shouldn't indulge socks. Robert McClenon and DESiegel objected to this, so I thought I should raise the issue here to see if we can reach consensus on how to deal with such situations. In a previous case, documented at Wikipedia_talk:Teahouse/Archive 11#Sockpuppetry and Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 14#The "Michael Cole vandal" is back, most hosts seemed to support deleting the questions, but DESiegel has suggested that this is immoral (see comments in the section currently on the main Teahouse page, linked above). Robert McClenon has suggested at User talk:Cordless Larry#Trolls that deleting questions gives recognition to trolls. What do others think? Cordless Larry (talk) 21:22, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Pinging the SPI clerks from this case, Vanjagenije, DoRD and Nthep, in case they have a view or advice on what approach is best. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

User:Cordless Larry - First, thank you for reporting any sockpuppets at WP:SPI. When I report sockpuppets, I do not notify them of the report, or say anything to indicate that I have reported them. WP:SPI is different from other noticeboards such as WP:ANI, in that there is no rule that you should notify editors. Second, the previous discussions had to do with repetitive asking of questions, such as repetitively asking the difference between oversight, revdel, and deletion. (The difference between oversight or suppression and revdel or redaction is a technical one with who can do it, how definitive it is, and when it is justified. Deletion can be done by anyone.) I don't think that there is any benefit, and there is a downside, to deleting one-time questions only because they are from sockpuppets or trolls. I will have to go back and look at what DES wrote, because I don't recall anything to the effect that deleting the question is immoral, only that it is unwise. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Just to note that while today's sock has not been asking the same question repeatedly, they have asked a number of Teahouse questions. I sort of understand your logic, but I think the bigger risk is if we continue to answer questions from clear socks, they will keep coming back with more questions. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:34, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

• (edit conflict)I think that I would revert such deletions from the Teahouse on sight and without discussion, if I became aware of them, unless the question itself was disruptive. And what I intended to say was immoral was the entire concept of WP:DENY. If there is no rule requiring notification of an SPI, there should be. The current SPI system not uncommonly works injustice, in my view. One of these days some editor is going to be sued for declaring another to be a sock based purely on behavioral evidence. But that is a bit off the topic here, i am sorry. In any case I think deletign questions from the Teahouse because the asker is, or is alleged to be, a sock is both unwise and wrong, and also against policy. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 21:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I would not knowingly indulge a troll. But when a username unknown to me asks a reasonable-looking question, I try to answer it. If I were obliged first to form a view on whether he was a troll, it would take me too long; instead I would just give up on The Teahouse. So your reprimand, or so I read it, of me and Gråbergs Gråa Sång seemed misdirected (whereas I have a lot of respect for your work here). If you maintain somewhere a "list of known trolls", I can check it before answering questions. I see now that there is such a list at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations. I'll use it in future, though the need to do so will make me generally less inclined to try to give help. Maproom (talk) 21:45, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm very sorry if my comment came across as a reprimand, Maproom. That was certainly not my intention. My aim was simply to alert you and Gråbergs Gråa Sång that your time was likely being wasted. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Cordless Larry That was how I read it (not as a reprimand). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:08, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Also, I don't think this is a regular enough issue for anyone to need to check any list of suspect editors before answering questions here. That would waste even more time that could be spent answering questions. I just recognised this one from previous Teahouse questions and when I checked their contributions, it was clear that they were socking. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. In general I support the approach of answering questions that appear to be reasonable regardless or not of whether the OP is shown to be a sock, on the basis that the question and answer may help someone else out. My exception to this would be if the questioning is disruptive e.g. repeatedly asking the same question, or just trolling with completely off-topic posts at which point I consider removing the questions to be a reasonable action. In this particular case from one of the user pages I believe we are dealing with a young editor and the socking is competence based not malicious. Nthep (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

Back in the good old days before Teahouse was overrun with paid editors expecting us to train them for free so they could make money, I learned as much from reading others' questions as I did from the ones I asked. So if the question can provide an answer that is useful for anyone, then it shouldn't be removed or hatted. However if it is obvious trolling or WP:SOAPBOX, them stick it under a hat. And our "laundry" should be here, not on the Q&A page. If any host has a problem with another host, it should go to User talk and if wider discussion is needed, here. John from Idegon (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2017 (UTC)

In response to Cordless Larry's ping above: I don't know much about the Teahouse, or the conventions here, but if I saw a question from an account that is an obvious sockpuppet, I'd probably remove their question shortly after blocking them. I'm not going to go in to detail as to whether suspected sockpuppets should be notified (they shouldn't be) or whether WP:DENY is moral (?) or not as those are topics for their respective talk pages. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 01:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

• Many people come here after getting a teahouse welcome. Perhaps people could exercise a little restraint in inviting editors whose first edits don't look like a goodfaith but inexperienced newbie? ϢereSpielChequers 12:22, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

• As to changing notifications, that's done en masse by hostbot, and I don't know that there's an effective way to vet those notifications effectively on the scale that they're happening. Overall, we should err on the side of AGF in answering apparently genuine questions, both to fulfill our core purpose (being basically a monument to AGF), and for bystanders as other's have pointed out. The Teahouse averages about a thousand views per day, which is entirely more than can be accounted for by those actually asking questions. One that note, what the actual hell happened on 31 May? Is that a bug or did we get mentioned on the cover of the New York Times? TimothyJosephWood 12:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

What's the hubbub bub? This is an extreme rarity. But if we know a troll is a troll, block, deny, ignore. Of course we AGF until we know. This has happened what, five times? As mentioned above, we seem swamped with paid editors. I think it would be great if we could focus on refining the notifications system to change whose questions we are answering, even a ten percent change. I am clueless on the tech side of that, but would gladly help if someone told me something I could do on that front.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:16, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

I would like to add that the Reference Desks have become a toxic corner of Wikipedia largely because some editors are so concerned about trolls and inappropriate questions that they increase the severity of the problem by arguing about what to do with the trolls and the inappropriate questions, and that just encourages the trolls. I think that only very very rarely is it appropriate to delete or hat a question. If someone knows that an editor is a troll, the best response is almost always to ignore then completely (not to delete the question). Questions should be deleted if they are inherently offensive, but I haven't seen questions at this Teahouse that are inherently offensive. If a question is merely repetitive, having been asked before, is there any harm in just ignoring it? I agree that trolls should be blocked, but that is an admin function. I agree that trolls should be reported at WP:AIV (even if they don't exactly qualify as vandals, because reporting them at WP:ANI feeds them). But it is better in most cases to ignore trolls by ignoring them than by deleting their questions. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I am with Robert McClenon on this one.

We all have certain responses that worked well for our paleolithic ancestors but are poorly suited to dealing with Internet trolls.

There are other species that have the same problem; moths did fine for millions of years navigating by the light of the moon, but the same behavior causes them to beat themselves to death against electric lights (See Moth#Attraction to light). Deer did fine for a long, long time by freezing when danger approached, but this behavior is ill-suited when they are crossing a road and the danger is an oncoming car.

In like manner, humans in small hunter-gatherer groups or small farming communities did well by expressing disapproval when other humans acted certain ways. The target knew that if he/she didn't start following community norms they would face violence or be outcast. This same behavior is ill-suited for dealing with humans on the other end of an Internet connection posting under a pseudonym, and the trolls take full advantage of this.

Long, long experience, going back to pre-internet networks like USENET and FidoNet has shown us exactly how to deal with trolls: DON'T FEED THE TROLLS. Don't give them any attention, not even negative attention. Long experience has shown us that when they fail to get a reaction they usually get tired of shouting into an empty hall and go elsewhere.

Note that denying attention to trolls includes not responding when others feed the trolls. This will feel wrong. Your emotions will tell you that if you express disapproval they will stop feeding the trolls, but that is not what happens. Instead they debate whether this particular question was trolling, and they will discuss -- at length -- what our reaction to trolls should be. You will respond, others will jump in, and all you will have accomplished is to feed the troll a nice dish of Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam. This will attract more trolls. However, if you have the same conversation about feeding trolls on the troll-feeder's talk page you may influence his behavior without feeding the trolls. And, no, you should not post a link to that discussion on the Tea House. That would be feeding the trolls.

It may happen that a particular troll escalates his trolling and becomes more and more disruptive, hoping that someone will feed him if he behaves badly enough. If that happens, report him at WP:ANI with no indication on any Tea House page that you have done so.

Try it. It works. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

This is not feasible. You have to remove the post. That is still a denial of attention. I'm not sure whether I agree or not that in a perfect world leaving the post in place but making sure no one responds to it would be the best reaction, but it's not workable because someone else who does not know what you know about the post being that of a troll will respond, which will then inevitably result in someone else, if they know, responding about the post being troll bait ("don't waste your time because..."), which will in turn result in this kind of conversation all over again. Leaving out the revert part makes sure someone's time will be wasted, if not yours, and it is feeding the troll, because wasting someone's time is the point. You will just kick the can down the road to allow someone else to be the victim and guarantee troll nourishment. Do you remember that scene in The Social Network with the fictionalized Zuckerberg hitting refresh over and over and over watching for a response. That's your troll, with a leer, watching for someone biting. Unknowing victim, or enraged response because someone realizes what is going on: both are the point for the person. The most de-motivational thing you can do is when they refresh, their post is just gone.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:49, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Remover the post (if it was in itself legit, not disruptive) and expect to be reverted, along with a statement of who removed it and what their alleged reason was. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 13:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit, no, you do not "have to remove the post". Removing the post feeds the trolls. The responses criticizing and/or supporting your removal feed the trolls. The revert that will follow your removal feeds the trolls. What you have to do (and by "have to" I mean "do it this way or you will be warned, and if you persist you will be blocked") is to never attempt to remove a post other than in the specific situations outlined in WP:TPOC. If you think someone is being disruptive enough to have their post removed, report them at WP:ANI and let the admins decide. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit is right that just ignoring the question isn't a solution, because it's never going to be the case that every Teahouse host is aware that a poster is a sock or troll. That's why I responded to this case by trying to make everyone aware of the situation in a place that they would see if they were going to answer the sock's question. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

My answer is short and sweet -- the question could be of potential interest to other users, so answer it accordingly. Secondly, posting a response of "we're not going to answer your question because of X, Y, Z" could be seen as a turn-off to some new users who might not have an understanding of what is going on. That's not the environment that we want the Teahouse to be. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 13:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

You're assuming we will act like the reference desk and there WILL be a revert of the removal, followed by some internecine fighting over keeping that post. If I thought that would always happen I would agree with you. But I think we're a more reasonable bunch (I'm sorry for the aspersion against RD regulars but it's needs mentioning here for my point). The convention of removal to deny feeding works seemingly everywhere on Wikipedia but there because of some alchemy it's hard to pinpoint. Regardless, reverting is the convention because allowing a troll's post to stay, so that someone's time is wasted in a good faith response, is conclusively feeding, and a harm to that good faith answerer (which harm you are guaranteeing will occur, where the reverse is not the case), and further guaranteeing the troll's continued interest by making sure their gambit to waste someone's time is successful and so verifying their fishing hole has rich pickings. If a troll gets nothing but their post gone their whole purpose is foiled. Of course, if you make this a self-fulfilling prophecy by being the person who would revert that removal, then I don't know what to say.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

What you are suggesting is a direct violation of WP:TPOC, and will get you blocked if you do it and persist persist in doing it after warnings. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Guy, WP:TPOC is utterly irrelevant: 3rd exception: "Removing harmful posts" (nor are our policies and guidelines statutes).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:05, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

If an otherwise legit question is removed from the Teahouse, and I see the removal (and I look at the Teahouse history most days lately), I will revert that removal immediately and without discussion, using the vandalism rollback, and add a statement of who removed it and what the expressed reason was. In such a case I will at least consider blocking without further discussion for the violation of WP:TPOC. By "otherwise legit question" I mean one that is not inherently disruptive, but can only be construed as a problem because of the identity or alleged identity of the poster. The "Removing harmful posts" exception does not apply, because a legit question is by definition not harmful. I hope all this stays purely hypothetical, and that no one chooses to remove a legitimate question merely because the poster is, or is thought to be, a sock or troll. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 00:40, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

DES If we know a person is a troll or sockpuppet based on their behavior, and they ask a seemingly good faith question we know is not in good faith, and it's point is to waste our time, that is harm and the worst kind of feeding. So here's you opportunity. I've just removed the bad faith post by this troll and sockpuppet, who we fed last week at this thread where they asked the identical question. This is a troll and an abusive sockpuppet – conclusively. Do you really think reverting me here is the right thing to do, rather than extremely harmful? Do you think if you use vandalism rollback for that you won't be in grave error?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:21, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

ARRGH. I really really wish you had not removed that post, Fuhghettaboutit, and I still think it was the wrong thing to do. But given that it was an exact repetition of a post previously asked and answered, it was disruptive and therefore not a "legitimate post" as I defined it above. Had I seen it first I would have answered pointing out the previous answer, and requesting that questions not be repeated. I am still tempted to restore the question and give that answer. I do not think that reverting the removal would be harmful, let alone extremely harmful. But given the current block of the user involved there is limited point. I would say that we do not know that this question was asked in bad faith, at least I do not think there is sufficient evidence to conclude that, given that the original has been archived. I wish the archive-link bot, described in a section above, were already running, then one could be sure that a user was informed when a question and response was archived. I will think about this one, and not restore right away. But I do ask for a consensus that such removals are wrong, and should not be done in future, even when the user involved has been blocked. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 12:04, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

I really can't understand what restoring this question would achieve, given that it's already been asked and answered. The only rationale I can think of is if the editor who asked it hasn't seen the previous answer because of it having been archived, but given that the editor is blocked as a persistent sockpuppet, why would they need to know anyway? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:02, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Our sock is back. I have gone for this approach on this occasion, but would not object if someone else deleted the section. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I think your approach is exactly correct, Cordless Larry. Please do not remove this section, anyone. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs}

Thank you for this having this discussion, particularly as a reference for today. StarryGrandma (talk) 02:07, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

How to create a new wiki page..??

I see that there is some topic I don't​ find on Wikipedia, can I add it or create it. If yes how can I add..?? Imranalihbs (talk) 08:02, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello Imranalihbs. Welcome to the Teahouse. It's hard to give you a simple yes or no answer because it really depends on several things. A good page to read is Wikipedia:Your first article. I think you'll find it gives you the information you need. If not, please come back and let us know. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 08:19, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Suggestions for a Research Project for Wikipedia Newcomers

Hello all,

I am a Phd student from the University of Minnesota - Twin Cities. I am doing research in Wikipedia. Recently, we are preparing to conduct a study about WikiProject recommendations. The goals of our study are (1) to understand the effectiveness of different recommendation algorithms on recruiting new members to WikiProjects, and (2) to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention on engaging and retaining Wikipedia newcomers.

In this study, we will recommend related editors to the organizers of WikiProjects, and request them to approach and recruit the editors. We will measure the actions and reactions of the organizers and editors for evaluation. More details about our study can be found here on this meta-page.

While planning the experimental design, we thought to gather more thoughts and suggestions from the community since this study would involve the efforts of some Wikipedians, so we wanted to open it up. Also, if you have any suggestion, please let us know. Thanks!

Sincerely, Bowen Bobo.03 (talk) 00:21, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Archival bot (yet another update): trial is coming

Hello folks,

Just to let you know that I am going to post notifications (starting in about 10 hours) that look like the following:

Hi Editor name! You created a thread called Name of thread at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread. Delivered by Tigraan-testbot, an automated account. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Tigraan-testbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. If you received this notification by error, please notify the bot's maintainer.

Hopefully that is clear enough that you will not see any fallback, but if someone asks questions relative to the bot notifications, please redirect them to my talk page. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:42, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Something that we should perhaps keep an eye out is that users don't follow the link to the archive page and then start a new thread there, rather than back at the main Teahouse page. That strikes me as a potential issue given the wording of the template. Hopefully the lack of a "New section" tab on the archive pages will minimise this risk, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:28, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

• I linked the "create a new thread" part for future notices, it should help. BTW do not hesitate to edit the template if you catch anything else. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

What do you think about adding, just after "...please create a new thread." something like: "To provide context for your follow-up in a new thread, please refer to the prior discussion as best you can. If you know how, you could provide a section link to it, e.g., in the form Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 625#Exact Name of Section, replacing "625" with the number of the archive and "Exact Name of Section" with the section name. Too wordy? Something shorter but in that vein?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:48, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

I think that such a language will be either too wordy or useless - "name the WP page you are talking about" is one of the very few instructions that pop up before posting here and it routinely gets ignored; so how to link an archive is probably too complicated for those who need the instructions. However, I believe it is feasible to pre-fill the title of a new thread link - in which case making it default to Follow-up question to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive XXX#Exact Name of Section or similar would do the trick much more efficiently. I have no time to do so right now but will look into it shortly - if someone else knows how to do it, feel free to edit the template. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:50, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit:  Done by Special:Diff/789306121.

{{User:Tigraan-testbot/Teahouse archival notification|threadname=How to confirm socks puppet?|archivelink=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 632#How_to_confirm_socks_puppet.3F|editorname=O1lI0}}

now generates

Hi O1lI0! The thread you created at the Teahouse, How to confirm socks puppet?, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). ~~~~

Click the "create a new thread" link to try it out. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:40, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Question about referencing sources

Hello Team, I have two queries about reliable sources. Please clarify and help me. I am new to writing article.

1. I have few articles published in leading regional language newspapers. Those are still available on Web. The regional language is "Kannada". This is the scheduled, administrative official language of a state in India. More than 50 million people talk this language. "Kannada" has a wiki page. You can read more if you want. Can I create references to these articles?

2. There are some articles those were published in leading English news papers but those are no more available on Web. Because they are archived/removed. We have preserved those and published on our site https://sanchaaritheatru.wordpress.com. Can I create references linking to these sources? Nagaraj Kolara (talk) 03:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Nagaraj Kolara. This page is for discussing the operation of the Teahouse. The page for asking questions about editing Wikipedia is Wikipedia:Teahouse. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Signing

My article reviewer instructed in one the comments that "don't forget to sign your comments". Does it mean, I should login before adding comments? I am new user. Pls help me understand. Thanks. Nagaraj Kolara (talk) 03:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Logging in is a good idea for many reasons, like getting properly credited for your work. Signing your comment is best accomplished by entering four tilde characters (it's the key to the left of the number one at the top of the keyboard; hold down the shift key and press that key to type it). That way your signature is automatically applied. You can also enter it by clicking the four tildes on the bottom right of the edit screen, next to the words: Sign your posts on talk pages: Look at my signature at the end of this message. I will use the four tildes to sign it. It's also a good idea to put a very short description of what you did in the edit summary box near the very bottom of the edit page. It goes into the edit history and tells the rest of us what you're doing.

I hope this helps. Myk Streja (talk) 03:55, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

... just to add that if Nagaraj Kolara has a British keyboard then the ~ (tilde) key is on the right, next to "Enter". Dbfirs 07:06, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Subpage in the main page

Actually, I don't know how to add a subpage to the main page. What I mean is that, suppose, when you click on references, a drop down (subpage) opens. But I don't know how to add more of those drop down options. Can I please know how to do it? Sushn345wiki (talk) 03:25, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Adding pictures to articles

I have learnt that copying information, copying the specific words used in other sites violates copyrights. So, how do I add pictures (suppose about a chemical) into the page from the internet without violating any copyright? Sushn345wiki (talk) 03:28, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

@Sushn345wiki: Hello. It's OK for now, but in the future please ask any questions on the main Teahouse page(this page is the page to discuss the Teahouse itself). 331dot (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

New advice template available

I have created {{Steps to Article}}, a templated version of a post I have made in several variations to users here asking how to create a new article. The template parameters allow it to be tailored to the inquiry to some extent. Please take a look at it, and let me know if you have any comments or suggestions. Please feel free to use this if in your view it is helpful. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 15:24, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

• Looks good, especially the option to point to notability-specific guidelines. I can see two (small) possible improvements:

1. More paid options: the third step should in my view be completely omittable (even if not by default). (Replace "first", "second" etc by a numbering in # to allow this)
2. Adding the possibility of multiple indents. There should be a clean way to do it by passing a number as parameter, which I do not know; and if there is not, a quick-and-dirty way is to replace {{#if:{{{indent|}}}|:|}} by {{{startlinetext|}}} and to pass :, :: etc. to startlinetext. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:43, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions, Tigraan.

• On your first point, I don't want to provide the option to omit the third step. This is because so many new editors who ask about creating a new article do in fact have a COI, but haven't yet mentioned it, that I think it should always be mentioned. Sure there are cases where the posting editor can be sure that there is no COI, but that will be rare, and one can always edit the subst'd code in that rare case. Still, do others think that there should be an option to completely omit Step 3 (about COI)? I do prefer the spelled out numbers, but that could be handled.
• If there is a way to get a template to emit a number of characters specified by a parameter, I don't know of it, and Help:Parser functions doesn't mention it. Your startlinetext solution would do, but putting anything but colons in the parameter would produce a bad result. How often would this be wanted for an indent other than zero or 1? one could alwqays use {{od}} jsutr before it, after all. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I have now created two redircts to this:

• {{7STEPS}}
• {{SevenStepsGuide}}

Others could be added. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I don't think making the third point ommitable is a good idea. All editors should be made aware of the COI rules, whether it is relevant to their "current" editing or not. In practice most editors who get their first attempt speedied and then come to the TH asking why, do in fact have a COI. There's no harm in telling someone about the COI rules even if they don't have one. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:18, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

I'd keep the COI section - I'd rather tell someone and have them say "there's no COI issue here" then not mention it and see "well I didn't know". For new editors here, I'd think that it'd make more sense to point out the specific requirements up front, rather than spoon feed them piece by piece as they're trying to navigate the in's and out's of this place. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 17:45, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

• Suggestion: on "Seventh" it may be helpful for new editors to refer them to Teahouse (and Help desk) for answers to their questions. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 04:56, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
  •  Done DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure why it's necessary to mention the Teahouse on a template that is intended for use on the Teahouse question page. I'd omit that. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
    • It is available for use on the Teahouse question page. It is also intended for use on the Help desk question page, and directly on a user's talk page. I have already used it directly on the user talk pages of two users. DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 16:57, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Ah, I see. Perhaps the part about the Teahouse and Help Desk could be made optional? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
• It probably could. Or perhaps better, it should detect if it is being used on the Teahouse and omit the link in that case; ditto on the help desk. How does that sound? DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 18:20, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• That sounds perfect, DES. I was going to suggest something like that, but didn't want to create too much work for you. If it can be done relatively easily, though, I think it would be a good feature. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:26, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Promoting an article

How to prevent editors from boosting/promoting an article? 185.105.224.222 (talk) 00:58, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello, please post questions directly at WP:Teahouse, not on this talkpage. Also, are you asking about articles here on Wikipedia or external articles somewhere on the Internet? In general, all external promotional activity is prohibited anywhere on Wikipedia, but I am not really sure if that answers your question. It would be better, if you could link to a specific example of such a problematic article or promotion. If you need further advice, please post the specific question at WP:Teahouse. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 01:24, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

@GermanJoe:, I can't see the "new section" link. Thus, I have posted the question here. My question is promoting an article through external links and see also sections. Because an user has created an article yesterday and added it to the see also sections of many articles with a little relevance. It seems boosting to me. Should we add "every" article to the see also sections or external link sections, even though they have "somewhat" relevance? If not, please link me the relevant informative page about it. 185.197.72.215 (talk) 09:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Regarding "new section", there should be a blue button labelled "Ask a question" in the top message box at WP:Teahouse that should start a new edit window. Regarding your question, WP:SEEALSO has some general guidance about this aspect, although it's a bit vague and up to editorial discretion. If you believe a specific "See also" section is too large, or an added link isn't likely to be helpful or not relevant enough, I would simply remove extraneous links with a short explanation of your rationale in the edit summary. But as mentioned: there's no hard definitive "rule" about this aspect. If the other editor disagrees with your removal, please start a discussion with them to find a consensus. GermanJoe (talk) 09:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

I suggest we add __NEWSECTIONLINK__ to make a "New section" tab. The current system forces people to find the "Ask a question" button which activates the Teahouse gadget but the gadget is not essential and some users may prefer to avoid it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:05, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Agree. Of course the blue button is a nice feature, but it can be a bit confusing and has had some minor bugs in the past. No reason not to have both options available (imo). GermanJoe (talk) 10:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Failure to collapse in mobile view

In Template:Tone/doc § Templates that might be a better fit than this one, the mobile view includes this paragraph on a light blue background, followed by a very long list that should be collapsed but isn't.

• Template:Unreferenced for articles with zero references (use {{refimprove}} for articles with insufficient or weak references)

Wikipedia's tagged articles: backlog by template's category

Wikipedia:Backlog lists tasks that should be done to improve Wikipedia (assuming the cleanup templates were placed correctly). Helping reduce backlogs is an important issue, so please feel free to help out.

[Long list commented out]

generated by this wikicode:

* [[Template:Unreferenced]] for articles with zero references (use {{tl|refimprove}} for articles with insufficient or weak references) {{Wikipedia template messages|state=collapsed}}{{divhide|Wikipedia's tagged articles: backlog by template's category}}<!-- Copied from: Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup#Open_tasks —Geekdiva, 2016 -->[[Wikipedia:Backlog]] lists tasks that should be done to improve Wikipedia (assuming the [[WP:TC|cleanup templates]] were placed correctly). Helping reduce backlogs is an important issue, so please feel free to help out.{{Backlog status}}{{divhide|end}}

@Thnidu: you are best raising questions like this at WP:Village pump (technical) or the relevant template talk pages than here. Nthep (talk) 15:39, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@Nthep: Thank you, I will do so. Should I then delete this section? Or is there a way to collapse it? --Thnidu (talk) 15:47, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

It's ok, leave it and it'll archive itself. Nthep (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

@Nthep: Reverting your subsectioning of my second question, and taking out my initial "and". These are two separate questions that are about the same article but are not otherwise connected. --Thnidu (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

To subst or not to subst

Template:Tone/doc has the following sequence at and just after the end of the top section:

Note: This template is a self-reference, and should not be substituted.

Usage

{{subst:Tone}} or {{Tone|{{subst:DATE}}}}

Those can't both be right. On the assumption that the explicit instruction is correct and the {{subst:Tone}} example results from an editing error, I'm deleting the latter. But since I don't know what, if anything, is supposed to be in its place, I'm bringing the question here. Thnidu (talk) 14:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Did you mean to ask this on the Teahouse question page, Thnidu, or is it somehow about the operation of the Teahouse? Cordless Larry (talk) 20:58, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Cordless Larry Oh hell, so I did. I'm sorry. But see Nthep's last comment at the end of the next section. (I wrote these two sections at the same time, about the same page. Nthep merged them, with an === instead of my ==, but I undid that because they're entirely separate except for being prompted by the same article.) Might as well leave them to be archived, eh? Please {{Ping}} me to discuss. --Thnidu (talk) 21:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

You also forgot to sign your post in the section below, Thnidu. I suggest that you either leave this to be archived, or copy the question to Wikipedia:Teahouse if you're still looking for an answer. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Cordless Larry: Sorry. I've already copied it, w/ signature, to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). --Thnidu (talk) 21:14, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

I meant copy the question in this section, Thnidu, not the one below. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:23, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Help needed

Hello.!! Actually I had a doubt while creating a page about a famous personality ot has been rejected I ve inserted in references a link to a newspaper , while re editing shall I also insert tge link for fb profile . I don't know why it has been rejected . Anonymous17576 (talk) 18:57, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

@Anonymous17576: Questions should be asked on the main Teahouse page(this page is meant for discussion of the Teahouse itself) but to answer you, the person that rejected your draft gave a reason with their rejection(The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations.). If you click the links in that message, it will take you to pages that will explain how to put correct citations) 331dot (talk) 19:25, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Can the add sourches and that these meet the guidelines?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LemonGrass_(music)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemongrass_(music) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anymoustly (talk • contribs) 13:25, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Questions about editing Wikipedia should be posted at Wikipedia:Teahouse, Anymoustly. The current page is the Teahouse talk page, which is for discussing the operation of the Teahouse itself. You might also want to explain your question in a bit more detail. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Is the archiving at the Teahouse working correctly?

Not sure if this is the correct place to report it... all of the current questions at the Teahouse are from July 18-20, while more recent questions have already been archived. What gives? –FlyingAce^✈hello 06:41, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

The history shows that there was an edit conflict with the archive bot, and that this has now been resolved. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Jumping the review queue

Now I've done it. I made the remark here to say I consider it somewhat impolite to ask here at the Teahouse to jump the queue. Unless you guys disabuse me of this notion, I may well say it again, always accompanied by the very generic advice I gave this time.

Still, the long review queue is a problem. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:53, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree that editors shouldn't be allowed to assume that they can jump the queue by posting at the Teahouse (although in some cases they might not realise the size of the backlog, and that this is effectively what they are doing). Cordless Larry (talk) 09:06, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I disagree with that. Two things. First, I don't view an editor coming here and asking for a review to be them asking us to go to AfC and run the helper script against their draft. They're new, remember? They don't know the jargon. That's a very typical real world way to ask for help. Keep in mind that many, maybe even most, of the hosts here are not AfC reviewers. Second, that being said, sometimes I do actually run the review script. 90% of the time, it's to decline it. That way, they can either come to the understanding that they're wasting their time on that particular subject or they can get started on getting it right today, rather than two weeks from today. Them being proactive enough to come here and ask deserves us being supportive enough to get them help. And in those cases where it's a pass, the encyclopedia is improved. Why does it matter? I don't really understand. Fairness? Sorry, our goal isn't to be fair, either community wide, or particularly at Teahouse or AfC for that matter. Community wide, the goal is to improve the encyclopedia; at Teahouse our goal is to educate and encourage new editors; at AfC, the goal is to assist editors creating new articles to get a deletion-proof article into the encyclopedia. Fairness isn't really a consideration. I totally disagree with your use of that statement but I'm glad you brought it up here. I disagreed with it and thought it out of place when I saw it. John from Idegon (talk) 09:15, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

"I don't view an editor coming here and asking for a review to be them asking us to go to AfC and run the helper script against their draft" was sort of what I was saying in the brackets - apologies if that was not clear. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:23, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Additionally, it's not like the que is linear. Editors pick and choose which articles to review anyway, either based on their academic comfort with the subject or the ease of review. I'm not however, being naive here. I realize that the advertorial crowd we deal with so much try to game the system. In that case, a quick decline denies them, and after several declines, a CSD is much simpler. Win win. And Larry, we edit conflicted. I was replying to the original poster. John from Idegon (talk) 09:28, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Well, I guess a certain amount of incoherence is not unusual on Wikipedia, but please allow me to outline the conflict I see: We have the AfC process to act as a gateway on new articles so that some relatively uniform standards are in place on new articles so that we can decline substandard articles with individualized counseling as a better path than having to delete them via CSD or AfD after they've made it to mainspace. These latter processes are likely to be interpreted by new editors as more adversarial and discouraging and tend to waste more volunteer time. The decline message does not direct the creator of the article to the Teahouse, but to the reviewing editor or to the IRC channel #wikipedia-en-help. The Teahouse bot then comes along and says "Oh, I see your article was declined, come visit the Teahouse".

If there were just a small delay in the reviewing queue, this process would all work fairly well (I'm still watching what happens on the IRC channel with some dismay). We would be offering multiple paths for editors to get help understanding how their articles could be improved to meet minimal requirements.

As it stands, though, there is a considerable delay (on average) between when an article is submitted for review and when the editor is informed of the results. When informed of the delay, the editor is dismayed and understandably desires a more rapid result. They sometimes discover the Teahouse and ask us for a review.

What happens next is the problem. Teahouse helpers can either A) ignore the request; B) provide a proper review, if they know how, resulting in a decline or accept; or C) provide an informal review, using whatever their experience permits. I view the B result as "jumping the queue". Editors doing A or C are just doing whatever they want to do, but editors who do B are feeding the problem.

But I don't want to just complain. I'll make a suggestion: Any time we see a reliable Teahouse helper providing an informal review, we should drop a suggestion on their talk page for them to enable the AfC helper script and start helping to reduce the backlog. Check first to see if they've already received the suggestion or already have reviewer permissions, of course. This will also be a not-so-subtle way to tell them we've watched their work and think they're doing a good job. But we need them to step up, so the review backlog is not dismaying and discouraging new editors. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 11:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Bengali Translitteration

This is an important issue, on wikipedia all the translitteration of bengali words, songs, poems and names are translitterated in to a different form to what Bengali's pronounce the word to be for example যট্র is translitterated as Yatra while is it pronounced and it is phonetically written as Jatro. Can we correct all wrong translitterations such as that? Ahnaf.AR.2106 (talk) 16:51, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Ahnaf.AR.2106, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are talking about transcription, not transliteration, as the article Romanisation of Bengali explains. Wikipedia's guidance on transliterating Bengali seems to be here: Wikipedia:Indic transliteration – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:54, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Archives

The "question archives" link on the Teahouse page header is pants. It hasn't been updated since 2015 so is highly unlikely to find what I am looking for. SpinningSpark 16:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I concur. I have no idea how it could be repaired. Maproom (talk) 18:49, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

The instructions for using the bot are at User:HBC Archive Indexerbot. I am guessing the problem is that the Teahouse archives have grown too large for the bot to handle Very long sets of archives such as Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive<#> will not archive due to timeout errors and maximum page size. I suggest removing the facility altogether if it cannot be made useful. The archive search box works fine. Better to have users go straight to that than waste time finding out the index page is useless. SpinningSpark 23:36, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Agreed that it's non-functional and is worse than no button presently, but how about re-pointing it to something like an advanced search page for the archives (except done more elegantly... I'm sure one of our code gurus can do something like that with say greyed out text or similar).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:48, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

The search box below the table of contents and archive links already does this. It adds prefix:Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive and this means you don't have to enable a checkbox to search the Wikipedia namespace. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

It would therefore seem sensible just to remove the pointless link from the page header to the obsolete incomplete archive? --David Biddulph (talk) 12:21, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm aware of the archive search presence, I just thought it would be a "good redundancy".--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Investment

Any editor , new or experienced, is needed/welcomed to this project:

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

{{User investment}}

Cheers! WikiEditCrunch (talk) 11:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

ACTRIAL 2017 - Teahouse edition

Just a quick heads-up, since it doesn't look like anyone's brought this to Teahouse's attention yet: WMF is working with New Page Patrol on a new WP:ACTRIAL experiment. The goal is to understand the impact of preventing non-autoconfirmed new editors from creating articles in the main namespace on things like...

• rate of new article creation
• page patroller workload
• new editor retention

Teahouse Hosts are the front line of new editor support, and the trial will probably have some impact on your work here. Your input is very welcome at the ACTRIAL talkpage and on the talkpage for the ACTRIAL research plan on Meta. DannyH (WMF) and Kaldari are running the trial on the WMF side, and Nettrom is the lead researcher. I'm consulting a bit on the project in my staff capacity, but mostly I'm just an interested observer. Please notify any other new-editor-focused teams you know of: the broader the discussion, the better. Thanks, J-Mo 22:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

New subpage about color contrast

This new subpage shows the contrast-against-white ratio for all 148 CSS colors, in descending sequence, dividing the colors into "recommended" and "not recommended" groups. By reducing the learning and effort required, the subpage aims to facilitate compliance with the signature appearance policy at WP:SIGAPP. It has been linked from SIGAPP and from WP:SIGTUT. Because the information applies to all uses of text on a white background, not only signatures, it is a subpage of WP:Manual of Style/Accessibility and has also been linked from WP:Manual of Style/Accessibility#Color (WP:COLOR). Thank you. ―Mandruss ☎ 16:32, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Disease and epidemics control

Hello my name is mohd aftab , l I live in lucknow uttar pradesh. In india there are a number of epidemics in a year for example there is a swine flu epidemic going on, a number of people dies as a result, tell me what can we do to fight against suct dangerous diseases. Please help us to save india. We can save innocent children and people from dieying a horrible death, please help us!. God will help us. Thank you. Mohd aftab11 (talk) 05:53, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

@Mohd aftab11: I'm very sorry to hear that, however this page is for discussing the operation of the Teahouse, not a general discussion forum or a place to request aid. You may wish to use an alternative outlet to spread your message, click WP:OUT to find one. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

User boxes

How do you add user boxes, the ones that have the achievements in them, to your user page? Lookis (talk) 20:02, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hey Lookis. First, you find one. A good place to start is Wikipedia:Userboxes/Gallery. Then you add it to your userpage by clicking edit and copy/pasting the markup for it, which should look something similar to this: {{User:Saoshyant/Userboxes/User oops}}. Which gives you this:

This user tries to do the right thing. If they make a mistake, please let them know.

Also, for future reference, this area is for discussion about the Teahouse and questions should really be asked at Wikipedia:Teahouse instead of here. TimothyJosephWood 20:07, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

How can I create a bio page?

I have created a bio page of a MMA promotion from India. I have shared all the media links and genuine data. Nothing is fake but the editors told me that it's marketing and deleted my page but I have checked some other promotion page which are in wiki full of marketing articles but they are still active this is the third time my page got deleted. Why? Boommmaipfl (talk) 07:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Boommmaipfl. This page is for discussing the inner workings of the Teahouse. The questions page is Wikipedia:Teahouse. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:43, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

If you tell us what those other pages are, Boommmaipfl, they will be checked and also deleted (or at least edited) if they are too promotional. On such a huge project as Wikipedia, some inappropriate things do manage to evade the rules (for a while), but that's not an excuse for allowing other things that do so. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.61.201 (talk) 01:00, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

"Ask a question" box too big for screen

With ACTRIAL coming up, the Teahouse is likely to experience higher traffic from brand-new users.

I wanted to point out a graphic design issue with the Teahouse. The "Ask a question box" runs clear over the left-hand side of my screen (desktop, Monobook, Firefox current, Sagittarius, Colgate). It looks as if this file needs tweaking. If needed I'll send a screenshot to someone's email on request. Thanks: Noyster (talk), 10:41, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Question on paid editing

Do editors get paid for editing? Correctinfo5555 (talk) 18:09, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

There are editors who take payment from people/companies for editing. Most editors get paid nothing for editing Wikipedia. ~ GB fan 18:15, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

@Correctinfo5555: Hello and welcome. Just so you are aware, this page is not the Teahouse itself, but is meant for discussing the operation of the Teahouse. WP:TEAHOUSE is the actual Teahouse meant for asking questions. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask them there. 331dot (talk) 18:28, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

@Correctinfo5555: I would add that paid editing is governed by the paid editing policy, which you can read by clicking WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 18:29, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Madam secretary season 4

Could Madam Secretary address the Obama care? Blyons9 (talk) 21:16, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

This page is for discussing the operation of the Teahouse, not a general discussion forum. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 21:44, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

ACTRIAL 2017 live - new article creator landing page points to Teahouse

Following up on my previous post. The 2017 ACTRIAL is starting today. Non-autoconfirmed editors who try to create a new page in article space will be redirected to this landing page, which contains two links to the Teahouse. I suspect that this will lead to an increase in question traffic. Questions and comments welcome here.

Fortunately(?), HostBot is offline as of today, while I resolve a technical glitch in invitee selection. So... who knows? The overall question volume might not change much in the immediate future. J-Mo 23:37, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

J-Mo, can you at least also link to the help desk also? TJW^talk 00:08, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Not my call to make, but you can raise the issue on the ACTRIAL talkpage. J-Mo 00:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)