Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 24

Video tutorials

 * I'd say we mostly just need someone to cough up the money to produce a series of video tutorials. But it's not as if I've put a lot of thought into the issue or anything.  G M G  talk  13:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Nice one! I think was doing some work along those lines a while back. Not sure what stage they got to. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd love to find somebody interested. I can do okay writing stuff that's mildly entertaining, at least a little better than the painfully boring tutorials most people put out on YouTube for WP. But I'm afraid I've not got any experience in video production since high school, back when we did post-production on a literal 6 foot cart with wheels that contained something generously referred to as a computer.  G M G  talk  16:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * well maybe Pine's your man/woman/person to work with. This is about the best my basic video production skills can manage. And finding the right voice for the narration is essential, or you just sound like this total idiot!. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I've actually seen the first video before, believe it or not. The second video, not to be offensive, is about on par for most of the WP tutorials I've seen online. It's good if you're really interested, but not necessarily if you don't have any buy-in already. They also tend to explain technical aspects rather than explaining broad concepts. What I would like to see, and what no one has been listening to me complain about for a long time now, is for every major P&G to come with a short "orienting video". Before you get into this two page-long policy, let's just orient you to what we're talking about.
 * Drop a few bucks on an actual small-time production company so the video and audio is well done. Pay a couple aspiring actors for a couple weeks of their time. Write everything very minimalist so you don't need excessive props and staging. Then use the close captioning function on Commons to translate all the things. Publish the scripts under CCBYSA so that anyone can make different language versions or dub the originals.  G M G  talk  19:58, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * No offense taken - both were pretty cr*ppy and rapidly thrown together as a bit of a trial - one more than the other! I have, in the past, worked with a couple of small video production companies (on things like this) and do appreciate how high production standards and acting/presenting are essential for good communication, but applying for and getting any funds out of WMF would obviously need a well thought out plan to achieve things we can't deliver better in other ways. It looks like ceased editing last year, and I've no idea where they got to, or who at WMF they were dealing with in their funded work. But maybe you and should pick up the baton and run with it, and apply for a grant. Or did you hit a brick wall somewhere along the line, already, I wonder? Nick Moyes (talk) 22:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Writing this was more of a way to demonstrate what I was imagining, and how it would be different than the tutorials that already existed online. As I said, with an emphasis on teaching concepts rather than teaching process, trying to do it at about a secondary school level, and doing it in a way that was illustrative rather than purely descriptive. I have not hit any wall, because I do not know enough about budgeting a video production to submit a detailed grant proposal. I'm not completely unfamiliar with grant proposals. I have a degree in non-profit administration, but no understanding of how to price something in this area. May as well be an oil pipeline for all I know how about the details of the price points.  G M G  talk  23:22, 30 March 2021 (UTC)


 * I get the impression dozens of intro videos have been published in Commons and in Youtube and perhaps a few other places. Is there a list, giving filename or URL, length, topic, year, form as screencast or narrated slideshow or talking head or panel discussion or whatever, and a critique of their strong and weak points? Perhaps we can get a better idea of what should be made and how, if we have a better idea of what has been made. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:07, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection § Wikipedia:Teahouse
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection § Wikipedia:Teahouse. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 00:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 1 April 2021
Wikipedia:Teahouse → Coffeehouse – Obviously the superior beverage. ~ Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 02:16, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to Coca-Colahouse and try to find a way to evade trademark laws. JJPMas ter 02:25, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Stop, as of Special:Diff/1015361449 the Teahouse has been superprotected, and thus any further edits to the page, proposals to make edits to the page, or merely thinking about editing the page while not employed by the WMF is a violation of Wikipedia policy. signed,Rosguill talk 02:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to WP:Mochahouse. JsfasdF252 (talk) 03:03, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose as unethical coffeehousing. Narky Blert (talk) 07:00, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose - we want people to get helped, not addicted. And I hear the rent is higher over there. Giraffer (talk·contribs) 07:37, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to WP:Waterhouse. Water is neutral. 217.117.125.88 (talk) 10:56, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose People go there for a civilised chat, not weed!  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 12:54, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose, instead Move to Wikipedia:Pub. Polyamorph (talk) 13:03, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to A-slight-bit-of-coffee-with-the-rest-filled-with-birthday-cake-flavored-coffee-creamerhouse for simplicity. Panini 📚 14:20, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Move to WP:Mr.T-House and replace all host images with that of B. A. Baracus. Zindor (talk) 14:28, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Support Finally someone brave enough to speak the truth. Estheim (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Help
Why can't I edit the Teahouse? I want to be a host? 64.121.103.144 (talk) 18:46, 5 April 2021 (UTC)


 * , You need to be logged in to become a host at the Teahouse. 2600:1700:6180:6290:51E7:4D10:BAD0:9DCD (talk) 18:48, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The Teahouse is not protected, so anyone, including IP editors like yourself, can edit it. Hosts are generally asked to be registered accounts that are extended confirmed, but that has no bearing on actually answering other people's questions. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:37, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

The Host page
I feel that we should build a redirect of the Host page: WP:TH/H or WP:TH/HOST. Anyone up for it? ~ Wiz  dzy  20:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree with both proposed redirects. bop34 • talk • contribs 20:57, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It sounds like you want to create a WP:SHORTCUT. Why do you think there’s a need for one? The banner at the top of the main Teahouse page seems more than sufficient, at least in my opinion. I also noticed that you’ve recently added yourself as a Teahouse host. Your account is relatively new and so far the vast majority of your edits seem to have been mainly in the user space. While none of those things mean you can’t be a host per se, spending more time improving articles in the mainspace will perhaps prove to be more useful in answering the questions of others. Some new editors become overly enamored with creating user pages, gathering WP:HATS, etc. which makes it seem as if that’s their primary reason for editing. Try not to become one of those editors. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:09, 12 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Ok. ~ Wiz  dzy  22:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I really can't see any reason or need for such a shortcut. It's an infrequently needed page for most people, and simply typing WP:TH and clicking 'Meet Your Hosts' in the Teahouse Header gets you there as quick (or quicker) than remembering and typing one of your suggestions. And I say that as someone who probably visits it more than most people, as I like to check out the editing experience of every new addition there, and would remove them if they fell woefully short of our host expectations and experience.
 * On that note, I do feel is right to question the wisdom of you adding yourself as a Teahouse host right now. Not that I'd want to stop you or anyonie else ever answering questions at the Teahouse when you know the answers. But do you have the knowledge right now to sign up as a Host and to welcome and help others? Your editing experience to date doesn't fill me with a lot of confidence on that score (just 72 of your 720 contributions here are mainspace edits, and 75% of your edits being in Userspace - mostly to your own, or just signing other people's guestbook pages.). Your userpage claim of 'being on Commons and Meta-Wiki', is rather empty, when you've done nothing there bar make a user page each. Here are your global contributions across all projects, limited to 20 edits per project. You might like to think about removing that Host entry for now, then adding it back in later on, once you've gained that broader experience of actually editing articles, rather than messing about in Userspace. But do feel free to welcome people and help out whenever you're able. You might find WP:THF will get you to the newest questions nice and quickly! Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:52, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Assistance requested

 * Special:Contributions/Jserranoq87

If you look at all of this editor's edits, I am thinking this is less vandalism, and more just newbieness. Would some kind person please reach out to the editor? I also have not reverted yet, though that prolly should be done as well. Thank you very much : ) - jc37 23:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Though I suspect this is not a newbie, judging by the esoteric pages they've edited, but will WP:AGF for now. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host landing
I mentioned something about this above and followed up in a little more detail, but I'm wondering to what degree Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host landing is being monitored. It seems that last three of four editors who added profiles are relatively new editors. This includes one editor who has added their profile three times. Is there a way to determine how many of these people have actually been answering or have answered questions at the TH, particularly more than a couple of times? Is there a procedure in place for removing editors who might mean well, but might just not be ready? Maybe you should need to demonstrate that you're a regular contributor for a set period of time in addition to the 500 edits and 30 days that are required according to the "Sign up" page. I'm all for anyone and everyone answering questions who thinks they can do so. Even if they make mistakes, there's almost always someone there to set things right. If, however, we're going to have "designated" hosts, then perhaps there should be a few more hoops to jump through before you get to become one. I guess it's no big deal, but then again I probably wouldn't be posting this here if I didn't think it was at least a little deal.FWIW, I don't think it needs to be something formal that requires WP:RFR, but maybe the recommendation or sponsorship of an existing host would be a good idea. Maybe a "trainee host" (like there are trainee SPI clerks) might be something worth further discussing. Pretty much anyone who goes through something like that probably is competent enough to be a good host, and exceptions could be made for highly qualified editors as needed; for example, it would be quite silly to require an existing admin or anyone with advanced user rights that aren't automatically granted to be a trainee host. One drawback would be that someone (perhaps the sponsor) would need to assess the trainee's contributions and try to guide when necessary, but the basic premise of the TH is not too hard to grasp. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * https://xtools.wmflabs.org/topedits/en.wikipedia.org/Marchjuly/4/Teahouse Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that tool . If I've used it correctly, then three out of the last four editors to add their profiles have 15, 14 and 0 edits made to the TH respectively. The editor with 0 edits is the same one who added their profile three times. I'm not sure whether it's better to pick a number of edits (like 500), a set period of time (like 30 days) or a combination of both, but you should have at least answered one question to be able to add your profile as a host. Brightline numbers will always attract someone who's focused more on reaching said number than actually the quality of their responses and the purpose of the TH. I also don't think it would be productive to make any "requirement" so hard to obtain that it makes prosepctives/trainees feel that they have to spend all of their time at the TH. The best way for them to answer questions would be to for them to gain experience editing in the mainspace and using what they learn (especially what they learn from their mistakes) to help others. At the same time, I think something more than a handful of edits or a few days is needed to require some effort be made. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

comment
 * FWIW I maintain a host spreadsheet, and every few months I go through and remove from the Host list those who, after 6 months or so, have never helped out here. I'm less strict if they have helped out in the past, but are currently inactive (e.g David Siegel), or if they clearly reflect a minority editing group. I also try to leave a welcome message to each new host, but have been too busy in the last few months to do that. I rarely remove an editor immediately, but monitor their activities, especially if they mostly play around in Userspace. I woudnt want a 'permission' before someone can add themselves to the Host List, but do wonder if we should seek a clear consensus on a minimimum number of mainspace edits we expect any editor to have before they add their name to that list. We must still welcome any editor answering questions at TH, but maybe not accept them on the host list if they dont meet a basic criterion of experience. I unilaterally increased the host expectation to 500 mainspace edits because of a few editors playing in userspace and getting well over that edit count, but with very few in mainspace. I apply it very laxly, but my question is "should we have a minimum mainspace edit count, below which we automatically remove anyone, or should we carry on as we are right now?" Nick Moyes (talk) 09:17, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I am in favor of a stated standard of 500 mainspace edits before an editor can become an "official" host. I find it disconcerting that new editors sometimes give incorrect or unhelpful answers. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  01:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
 * If someone's trying to help out in good faith but give an incorrect answer, then I'm OK with that because chances are that a more experienced "host" will correct them. If someone gives an "unhelpful" answer (e.g. rude, snarky, a no-answer answer), then I think that's more of a problem regardless of how new the editor is. My concern is that people might be adding their names to the host's page because they think they get something concrete out of it like an elevation in status or something shiny to add to their user page. So, their motivation is sort of like that described in WP:HATS except there's really no user right involved. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hostbot Inviting promotional users to teahouse
I've noticed lately that creators of irredeemable and clearly promotional articles (e.g. this example, if you have the rights to view the deleted article) get invited to the Teahouse by the HostBot, after the user has their promotional article deleted for G11. Is that desirable?--- Possibly (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Teahouse hosts may feel that "Your contribution was not welcome. Here's where you can learn how Wikipedia works" is more polite than "Your contribution was not welcome. Go away." The result is likely to be the same. Maproom (talk) 17:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

I’m operator of Wiww51 and they received an invite the other day. I think either GreenMeansGo? Or HostBot wrote the invite. (31.187.7.220 (talk) 20:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC))

Consolidating help venues
Regulars please see Village_pump_(proposals). AdmiralEek (talk) 23:32, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Growth Team features § Potential plan for experimental deployment
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Growth Team features § Potential plan for experimental deployment. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

No archive
The question list has crossed 200! Why no archival by our dear Sigmabot ? Is it infected by Covid-19 ? Parnaval (talk) 12:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Somebody vandalized the archive instructions. I have fixed them. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I was too much curious, so hunted down that edit but sadly it was IP😭😢. See . -- Parnaval (talk) 17:33, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Link to IRC help channel in header?
The header for the help desk has a link to the IRC help channel: IRC/wikipedia-en-help. That page says that the IRC channel is meant for our newest members. If that is the case, should we have a link to IRC in the Teahouse header also? RudolfRed (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree. IF that's true there should be a link to that in teahouse as you say. Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:48, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I completely disagree. The experience for a newcomer of trying to understand how IRC operates is not actually a pleasant one at all. I found myself getting blocked simply for lurking when I went there for the first time anonymously to get a sense of how IRC functions - and I was a new administrator at the time! There is no open record for everyone to see, and I feel that sending people there is pointless when we have an open, friendly and rapid approach to answering questions here at the Teahouse. Not only that, but we have enough in our Header already, and pointlessly signing people off towards the darker corners of Wikipedia just isn't needed. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:58, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * You were wrong to state "That page says that the IRC channel is meant for our newest members." It doesn't. See Help desk/Header. You nearly started a storm in a Teahouse teacup, LOL! Nick Moyes (talk) 23:22, 7 May 2021 (UTC)


 * The page I linked to (IRC/wikipedia-en-help) says "Because #wikipedia-en-help is specifically designed for helping (primarily, but not limited to) our newest users [...]". RudolfRed (talk) 18:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see what you were getting at now. I interpreted "that page" in a different way. But my view remains that routing newbies to the complexities of the IRC Channel would be counter-productive for the vast majority of people, and adding it to the TH Header definitely unnecessary. Thanks for the clarification. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:16, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That makes sense. I've never used IRC, so not familiar with it.  I'm fine with leaving the link out of the header.  RudolfRed (talk) 19:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
 * OK, but if you don't mind me observing: it might have helped a bit if you had spent a moment or two checking out the implications yourself before making the suggestion, especially for something you've never used. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:00, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

Fiona Graham section
I suggest moving Teahouse to WP:BLPN. (I'd move it there myself, if I hadn't already participated in it.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:52, 16 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I made the suggestion above when expecting that discussion/nagging would continue. This hasn't happened, and therefore I retract the suggestion. -- Hoary (talk) 21:36, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggest just Discussion toping that thread per WP:TPG. Enough information has been provided for the IP/Graham to figure out what to do if the students mentioned in the thread are really the primary concern; moreover, Graham should know pretty well by now what options are available to her if she has problems with the article content since this has been going on for quite some time now. Finally, unless someone personally wants to get involved in things over at Japanese Wikipedia, there’s not much more that anyone at the TH can do about that. — Marchjuly (talk) 23:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Yes,, good idea. However: (sez Template:Discussion top/doc) -- whereas I was involved in the minor kerfuffle in question. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * "Closing" the discussion was just a way of letting others know that it's time to move on now because there's nothing more here to do. I doubt the IP will be back which means that the thread will eventually be archived if nobody keeps it going. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thread now closed. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

Hey all...it's Core Contest time again (finally)
The Core Contest will be running again from June 1, in case anyone wants to flex their writing muscles :) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:52, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

Growth features and mentorship module
Hello Teahouse hosts -- I'm Marshall Miller; I'm the product manager for the Wikimedia Foundation's Growth team, which works on features meant to increase the retention of new editors. I last posted on this talk page about a year ago, to let you all know about a project page I started here on English Wikipedia. At that time, we got valuable feedback from and, who have been following along with the project since.

In the past year, we have found evidence that the Growth features have a positive impact on newcomer engagement, and this has led us to deploy the features to a total of 30 wikis, including some large ones like French, Portuguese, Russian, and Japanese Wikipedias. So far, so good! Because we've seen the features lead to good outcomes, we want to start the conversation around what it would be like to try them on English Wikipedia.

I'm posting here because you all are experts on newcomers to English Wikipedia, and because your work inspired an important part of the Growth features: the "mentorship module". The module is part of the "newcomer homepage", and assigns every newcomer a mentor from a list of users who sign up to be mentors. The newcomer can ask questions directly onto their mentor's talk page without using wikitext. This feature has created a simple mentorship program for many smaller wikis that had nothing like it before. But I know that English Wikipedia has many similar support systems in place for newcomers, like the Teahouse. In thinking about deploying Growth features to this wiki, we would like to hear from Teahouse hosts on whether/how the Growth mentorship features might complement or conflict with the current practices on the wiki.

I hope some of you can check out the project page and also the discussion where we are thinking about how to try these features on English Wikipedia. As we talk more about this, I can give additional details and numbers on how the mentorship module is used (here is some additional information). Please do chime in either here, or on that discussion page. If you want to try out the features, you can see these simple instructions for how to try them on Test Wikipedia. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 20:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi everyone -- I just wanted to follow up to note that I posted a plan for experimenting with these features on English Wikipedia. I hope some of you can check out the plan and weigh in with your thoughts!  In particular, we are looking for ten people to be "mentors" during this experimental phase, and I think Teahouse hosts will make great mentors.  Please reply here or along with the plan if you are willing to be a mentor. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 19:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello everyone -- I'm following up here to let everyone know that the Growth features are now available to test on English Wikipedia. They are not being assigned to any newcomers yet, but experienced users may turn them on in preferences to try them.  We hope you try them out on desktop or mobile and leave any notes here (or on the project talk page).  After a couple weeks, and after we iron out any issues, we plan to start giving the features to 2% of newcomers to get a sense of how they work on this wiki, and so that we can make plans for next steps.


 * To test the features, please go to your user preferences and then:
 * enable the Help panel in the Editing tab.
 * enable the Newcomer homepage in the User profile tab.


 * This will give you access to the homepage (Special:Homepage), and, from there, you will be able to:
 * contact your mentor
 * select your favorite topics and tasks to make some suggested edits
 * browse help pages
 * see your impact


 * You will also see the help panel being visible when editing, or when browsing help pages.


 * -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 01:50, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , I'm testing out the page now. As an experienced editor, should I clarify that to my "mentor"? Panini! 🥪 14:01, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi @Panini! -- thanks for trying out the features! No, a user doesn't need to contact a mentor unless they want help or to connect.  From the mentor's perspective, they will get hundreds of newcomers assigned to them, and only a few will reach out with questions -- the rest the mentor will largely ignore.  That said, we are thinking about ways to help mentors be proactive towards newcomers who seem to be excelling or struggling.  In that vein, we are building the "mentor dashboard", which lets mentors see the list of all their mentees, and sort/filter to see the ones they're most interested in interacting with.  Perhaps, for instance, a mentor might filter to see the newcomers who have only been around for a couple weeks or less, but have been making lots of constructive edits.  They would be able to filter out any long-tenured experienced editors.
 * What are your other impressions of the features? MMiller (WMF) (talk) 20:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment Just experienced this. Looks interesting to me. Nice idea and I hope it'll be helpful to newcomers. Doesn't it seem to be influenced from the WP:AAU? ─  The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  04:12, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking things out, @TheAafi. I'm glad it looks generally good to you.  Yes, we read about Adopt-a-user when building the mentorship component of the homepage (in particular, this research paper about the program).  I would say that the biggest things that distinguish the new mentorship features from AAU are: (a) all newcomers get assigned a mentor; they don't have to proactively request one, and (b) the relationship is meant to be a lot lighter-weight and casual, i.e. mentees can just fire off quick questions without necessarily feeling like they have to maintain an ongoing relationship with their mentor.
 * Did you participate in AAU? Do you have any reflections we should learn from? MMiller (WMF) (talk) 01:41, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Growth team feature test begins tomorrow (June 8)
Hello everyone -- in the past weeks, lots of English community members have tried out the features, and we've heard largely positive reactions and ideas. We also have 16 mentors signed up (we don't need more for this test, but we will need more in the future!) After discussing it with the most involved community members, we set a date to begin testing the features on this wiki. Our plan is to start giving the Growth features to 2% of newcomers starting tomorrow, June 8. This means that for all new accounts created starting tomorrow, 2% of them will have the Growth features and the rest will not. Because English Wikipedia gets about 130,000 new accounts per month, we expect this will amount to 2,600 newcomers having the features over the course of the month.

I don't think this deployment will affect the day-to-day for the Teahouse, except it's possible some newcomers may ask about the difference between the Teahouse and the mentors they get via the Growth features. If that happens, it will definitely be important to know, and we can talk about how to address that distinction (or maybe combine efforts) in the future. Edits from newcomers with the Growth features will be visible in Recent Changes and watchlists with the tags #Newcomer task, #Mentorship module question, and #Mentorship panel question.

While the test is running, the Growth team will monitor newcomer activity to identify if anything negative is occurring (like an increase in vandalism) -- if something goes wrong, we'll be able to quickly make changes. At the end of about four weeks, we'll reflect on the data and ask mentors about their experiences to decide how to proceed, in terms of whether to increase the number of newcomers who receive the features.

I hope this sounds good to everyone here -- we think we've planned this carefully with community input, but I definitely want to hear if anyone has questions or concerns. I'll plan to post again tomorrow to confirm that the test has started. -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 18:48, 7 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me! I'm super excited to see how this goes and I'm looking forward to mentoring these newcomers!  Bsoyka  ( talk &middot;  contribs ) 00:09, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Addressing the constant problem with generic questions
Hey all. I have already attempted a fix to address the headlined problem. I'm glad to expand on the reason and depth of the problem and how much it will benefit both questioners and answerers if we can get some real change on this, but I think most of you are likely already excrutiatingly familiar with the problem, and just how constant it is. That fix I attempted can be seen in this diff – a change to to the pre-load text users see directly in the editing interface when they click on the ask-a-question button on the project page. That diff also shows the revert of that addition by. I think my edit summary accompanying the change is self-explanatory, and I stand by the magnitude of the problem and of how much fixing it will help by the language I used in that edit summary. Regarding the reversion edit summary, the problem I see is that, whereas placing this at the preload text right at the point where people are apt to almost ineviteably see it will get it in front of the eyes of a lot of our questioners, not only is it obvious that far fewer will see it at the remove of the edit notice, but I truly believe that only a miniscule number of people ever even glance at them. Placing it there is probably barely worth bothering with. I think the gravity of problem calls for this much more effective change. What say you?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)


 * As I said in my edit summary, I absolutely agree that generic questions are a big problem, having encountered plenty myself. But I also maintain that the editnotice is the appropriate place for instructions, not the preloaded text. provided some compelling screenshots in this discussion about the problem with having the preload text get too long—especially on mobile, it just turns into a giant block of text that completely fills the area we're hoping people will actually be writing their question in. It's impossible to add any sort of formatting to wikitext itself, so we're left with just ugly all-caps, as opposed to the editnotice where we can use color, font size, etc.
 * The broader issue, as I see it, is that the Wikipedia editing interface is just not intuitive enough. That forces us to provide instructions both on technical process (e.g. type your question here, don't sign, etc.) and on question-asking process (e.g. give us a wikilink, etc.). If we had a better interface, we could get rid of all the technical instructions (e.g. signing would be handled automatically behind the scenes), which would give us space to be bolder about the question-asking stuff without making the instructions so long people don't read them. Hopefully the technical improvements are coming soon from the WMF (I know several projects are in the works), but until then, there's no silver bullet. And even if the instructions were perfect, the Teahouse is always going to draw some level of CIR posts—even if we screamed to give specifics in 100-point bold red, some editors still wouldn't. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 23:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The broader issue, as I see it, is that the Wikipedia editing interface is just not intuitive enough. That forces us to provide instructions both on technical process (e.g. type your question here, don't sign, etc.) and on question-asking process (e.g. give us a wikilink, etc.). If we had a better interface, we could get rid of all the technical instructions (e.g. signing would be handled automatically behind the scenes), which would give us space to be bolder about the question-asking stuff without making the instructions so long people don't read them. Hopefully the technical improvements are coming soon from the WMF (I know several projects are in the works), but until then, there's no silver bullet. And even if the instructions were perfect, the Teahouse is always going to draw some level of CIR posts—even if we screamed to give specifics in 100-point bold red, some editors still wouldn't. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 23:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I fear that 's edit was a bit too much of a blunt instrument, but I really sensed their frustration in every word. I can certainly relate to it, but it was right to revert it and to discuss it further here. As pointed out, mobile users see screen after screen of instructions and odd characters before they can find a place to ask their question. We do need to remain - first and foremost -  friendly and welcoming to new editors, and not take our frustrations out of them when they innocently fail to provide the information we so desperately want them to give us. Just like the last questioner and the one before them, too. It's likely we shall soon get more posts once WP:TH is added to the Main page. So, maybe Fuhghett. could consider proposing the wording of a simple templated response we could apply, should they so wish, to those questions that are so vague that they are impossible to answer without more details? A personal touch is always better, but a pragmatic solution could be such a template. Here's a hasty first stab before I get my last coffee and head off to bed:
 * Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid your question is a bit too vague to be answered properly immediately. So could you supply us with some more details, please? If your question relates to an article, could you link to it or give its url? If it's about adding an image, is it your own photo, or can you link to the page containing the one you want to add? And what Wikipedia page do you want to add it to? The more specific your question, the more likely we are to be able to help you. Thanks, ....
 * Right, coffee calls. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:06, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Can you explain why "the editnotice is the appropriate place for instructions", and "not the preloaded text". Appropriate and inappropriate for what reasons? And I don't follow the relevance of your raising of the issue of technical barriers (I understand what you're saying, I just don't see its relevance. On this issue, what's involved is no additional technical barrier at all. People go to the Teahouse; see a big blue button to ask a question, are presented with preloaded text that is designed to lower the technical barriers, and the message I am adding is an entirely straightforward request in plain English to please try to be specific in what they ask rather than general. We are not overwhelming anyone with that one sentence following "place you post below". There's nothing technical about it. Again, adding to the edit notice would likely be a mostly empty gesture. Effectiveness is what's key. By the way, I have no hard statistical evidence but I'm not just guessing; they do seem to be largely ignored in my observational experience (I just did a quick search. Though it's anecdotal: "Edit notices are largely not worth the pixels they are printed (from here); "Edit notices are annoying and largely ignored anyway" (from here); "It's true, no one reads the edit notices -- they're just part of the blur" (from here).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:13, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * A template notice is after-the-fact, and we know how often users respond after their first post. It will also be another form of empty gesture because someone will always attempt to answer the generic question in good faith. It would solve nothing. I disagree there is anything, whatever bitey about adding that neutral request to be specific. And you seem to be also agreeing there's something technically complicating about adding this (that on balance, outweighs its utility), but I don't get that for the same reason as in my response post above. If mobile users see screen after screen of nonsense before they get to the button, that's an issue before they get to the button. How does adding the (again, straightforward non-technical, direct instruction about being specific rather than general) as the last thing the user sees before writing their question, add to any impediment? (The impediment removed is that their specific question will get a far more graspable, specific answer!)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:23, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * To boil it down, the editnotice is the appropriate place for general instructions because it can be formatted to present them better, and since that's what editnotices are designed for, but not what preloaded text is designed for. Regarding the issue of technical barriers, it's relevant because every line of instruction we add makes it more likely that people will just go "oh, that's a giant wall of text, I'm not going to read all that" and skip it entirely. Wikipedia has a bad habit of responding to failures to follow instructions by adding more of them, when really what we need to do is respond by simplifying them to make them shorter so that editors will actually read them. And yes, editnotices are often ignored (particularly if they're overlong), but I don't think moving instructions to the preload would make them ignored any less. There's already a line in the editnotice advising Help us to help you: Give the full title or URL of any page you're asking about. I think the most we can do is to rephrase that line a bit or make it bolder. I hope that helps explain my overall view. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 00:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm, sorry but I have yet to hear anything non-circular about why preloads are not well designed for this or inappropriate for the purpose. They are a tool to serve whatever need we see fit for our purposes (and I can pull up gobs of preloads that are used for all manner of instructions). Saying something else—that you agree will be largely ineffective for the purpose—is better because it is more specifically made for this is another snake eating its tail. The pragmatics don't seem to be coming across. It's so self-evident that after clicking on the button, people's eyes go to where they will be typing (in fact, here, explaining where to type), and that accordingly the instruction there will be seen by a vast number (and an order of magnitude more than just about anywhere else), that the point needs no gloss.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:36, 30 April 2021 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I have to agree with, but I never said what you added was WP:BITEY; it just sounded frustrated. But what you probably see as half a line on a desktop monitor is already a complete screen load for mobile users. Adding more preload text would completely outweigh its utility, and to demonstrate the point I have inserted the image from last year's mobile screenshot above to show how it looked then. Although it has since been messed around with further, it would be even worse if it contained another sentence as you proposed, and read as this:
 * ...I really don't think more shouty capital lettering is going to get much more of a message across, or change behaviour. We can always tweak the existing edit notice wording or its colour, but definitely not expand it further, please - especially the 'preload text'. I'm a bit surprised you fail to see why all that preload text just doesn't work. Just look at it from the perspective of a complete newbie asking a question here. They get a reasonably attractive header, a nice shiny blue 'Ask a Question', then an edit notice, then Chevron Exclamation point, Hyphen, Hyphen SHOUTY SENTENCE, another SHOUTY SENTENCE, then Hyphen, Hyphen Chevron, then three lines of blank space in which we hope they'll post their question before the misery of Chevron Exclamation point, Hyphen, Hyphen SHOUTY SENTENCE, then Hyphen, Hyphen Chevron, starts all over again for them. Let's turn this around - why on earth would you think all that and then your extra bit is ever going to be helpful, especially to mobile phone editors? My point, which I fear you have failed to appreciate is that these poor benighted souls don't even see the place on the mobile screen where they have to type their question because of all the crap we put in front of them in the preload. Adding more crap and more SHOUTY TEXT ain't going to help no-one. In a world of UX, we currently offer them a total fail; let's not make it even worse. Maybe an after-the-fact response is something you and I will simply have to accept as the price for being hosts, for welcoming newcomers and for inviting them to post questions about editing Wikipedia when they don't yet know how we roll, or what a tilde is. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:02, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Generic questions don't seem quite such a burden as repetitive questions. "Can I write a page about myself?" "What can I write on my talk page?", that kind of thing. I'm happy answering generic questions, which can sometimes be very interesting. If a question needs more specifics in order to be answerable, it's not hard to ask for them. Some sort of prominent FAQ might reduce the repetitive questions, though that needs to be balanced against the atomising effect of pointing people to help pages rather than offering human engagement. In any event, I don't like the use of capitals for emphasis so I wouldn't want to see this change made as-is. It comes across as short-tempered and a little hostile. &rsaquo; Mortee  talk 13:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Generic questions don't seem quite such a burden as repetitive questions. "Can I write a page about myself?" "What can I write on my talk page?", that kind of thing. I'm happy answering generic questions, which can sometimes be very interesting. If a question needs more specifics in order to be answerable, it's not hard to ask for them. Some sort of prominent FAQ might reduce the repetitive questions, though that needs to be balanced against the atomising effect of pointing people to help pages rather than offering human engagement. In any event, I don't like the use of capitals for emphasis so I wouldn't want to see this change made as-is. It comes across as short-tempered and a little hostile. &rsaquo; Mortee  talk 13:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Navigation
I sometimes pop over to the Teahouse page to see what questions are being asked. However, navigation is somewhat difficult due to the right float of the TOC and its length. The latter is the bigger problem of the two and could be alleviated by filing questions by date, as is done at WP:HD, WP:RD/M etc. Mjroots (talk) 11:36, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I would welcome splitting down current posts into days, as per WP:HD. It's a good suggestion, and I'm sure it would make it an awful lot easier for newcomers to find their own posts, and the answers they've received. The archives would then probably also have to follow that same logical structure - something I would also really welcome, and have mentioned here before. But I'm not sure how other hosts would feel, or whether it's even possible to change our system after such a log time doing it a different way without breaking so many links. I'm interested to hear what others feel, or how changes could be brought about. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I'd support a further division of questions by date. Sometimes people forget the exact title of the question but remember when they've asked it, so this proposed method help locate it in the archives. I guess that means that archiving would have to be split into two portions: before the change and after. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:29, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

- no need to break any existing links. If this was introduced it could be done by using level 1 headers for the dates in much the same way as I organise my talk page. The archiving bot's instructions may need a tweak though. Mjroots (talk) 06:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd support it, in that case, providing others agree, and that someone skilled in archiving makes the technical changes, moving forward, and that the transition between the old and new archives doesnt cause problems. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:22, 3 June 2021 (UTC)


 * General support, this seems like a logical way to structure things. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 07:08, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Support the use of dates, as at the Help desk where it makes it easier to find particular questions. Maproom (talk) 08:20, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I support this, as long as it doesn't add any complexity for people who are asking questions (especially, perhaps, if they're the first person asking a question that day). I'm not sure how best to make sure that happens. › Mortee  talk 12:59, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a bot could add a new header at the start of each day.  Bsoyka  ( talk &middot;  contribs ) 13:08, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that's a logical means. Certainly I'd support this. As an aside, what's the reason for the right-float? I use it as a quickhand way of knowing I'm on TH not HD, but is that the general reason? Nosebagbear (talk) 13:11, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , good thought › Mortee  talk 13:12, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Reducing the repetition
Teahouse is a good example of something we should try to avoid. Someone asks a question, and myself and another editor jump on it; we edit conflict and give two solid answers. But then another two editors respond to the same question, and their advice is basically the same. Now the OP has four duplicate answers to their question, and a lot more to read through than if they'd just gotten one. Let's try to get better at reading prior responses so that we're not repeating ourselves. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 19:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case you linked to, I don’t think there’s too much repetition. I think overall because it’s such a complex subject it’s good to understand the different aspects, including seeing links to policy. TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  20:59, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I have to really disagree about that—COI got linked four times, which is absolutely excessive repetition. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:13, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Part of it may involve the use of the Discussion Tool beta feature. I'm using it right now and it submits my response after doing a quick refresh of the page. If someone responds before I submit, their comment appears right above mine and no edit conflict is generated. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:35, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's what happened with me. But the final two comments were 20 minutes apart each, so I don't think that's the case for them. The discussion tool should probably start adding edit conflict tags; I'll suggest it there. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 22:43, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Whilst I tend to agree with you that, in this instance, there was perhaps a bit more repetition than was absolutely necessary, none of it was unhelpful nor unpleasant 'pile-on'. I might respectfully suggest that the best approach is not to rant about it here, but to check the editors' contribution histories and then perhaps approach them with thanks for their helpful contribution, possibly inviting them to consider signing up as a host, and to gently suggest they be careful not to 'over answer' so as not to put off an editor. I'm a fine one to talk - I can take an hour to draft a long, carefully worded response and still want to put in an note so as not to waste all my hard work in replying. I note that not one of the responding editors thought to use Teahouse Talkback to leave a message for the OP, something I think many people forget to do, especially with IP editors. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:56, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Teahouse using Jitsi Meet
Hey fellow Wikipedians, I was wondering what you think of creating a version of the Teahouse using Jitsi Meet. The link would be at. I think it might help people get the help they need especially that there's a barrier with communication using only text. Interstellarity (talk) 12:54, 14 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Personally, I would be opposed to something like this; newbies are already generally too willing to give out personal information, and I don't think encouraging a forum where they would also give out their face and voice is wise; this is triply true for new editors that are underage. I understand the appeal of having a forum not mediated by Mediawiki software, but I don't think this is it; something like the IRC channel is more the mark. (I've never been on the Wikipedia Discord, so I don't know if there's a dedicated Teahouse channel there, but even that is a little too close for comfort.) Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 13:53, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Personally, I agree. And if somebody finds they have "a barrier with communication using only text" then I have to wonder whether Wikipedia is going to work out for them - using text is pretty much what Wikipedia is all about.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:15, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with the above- any software such as speech-to-text software that can be used to enable editing will also work for the Teahouse. I don't see what benefit Jitsi Meet would give. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:38, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
 * As someone who uses jitsi for several hours each day for work, and hosts multiple instances of it, my initial thought was "that would be cool," but upon reading each of the more thoughtful contributions above, I have to say that they're all compelling arguments, which far outweigh "that would be cool." Bill Woodcock (talk) 11:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)


 * To be fair to, the use of Jitsi (which I'd never heard of before) was raised in this now-archived, but recent WT:TH discussion initiated by . I remain of the view that there is definitely potential for some form of face-to-face interaction or support, but definitely not on a 24/7 or regular basis as might be expected as part of our normal free service to new users. Personally, I like the ability to stop and think before answering a question, rather then being put on the spot and having to not only think about one's answer, but also deal with the person on one's screen, and all the biases, preconceptions and distractions that that might elicit. The two situations where this might work would be A) where we have pre-arranged for one or more Teahouse volunteers to be available online during an organised WP:EDITATHON-type event somewhere in the world (either in real or virtual space), or B) where a handful of Teahouse hosts want to get together to discuss general Teahouse operations in an informal, face to face manner, rather than by text-typing. But, in both situations, I'd be wary of uncontrolled and widely advertised open public access, as it would be too open to abuse by Zoombombing unless there was some form of gatekeeping put in place. I'm going to be cheeky and ping as he has done an awful lot with Wikipedians and video conferencing tools over the years and might have some thoughts that could bear on this idea. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:27, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the ping. Yes, I also do worry about the safe space considerations for live interaction when it comes to first contact with newbies. I would encourage folks to perhaps ping the Telegram group we have - Conference Remote Options for Wikimedians - which is not just for conferences, but talking about video/audio/interactive platforms in general for the Wikimedia community. They may have some good insights. It's a fairly active group with a high signal/noise ratio, where you could ask this as well. Page with the Telegram link: WikiProject_remote_event_participation -- Fuzheado &#124; Talk 13:47, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

I've heard of Jitsi Meet; however without wishing to pour cold water on it, the world in general has gone for Zoom or Microsoft Teams. If my mum can use those (and she does), she won't be interested in Jitsi at all. Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  16:39, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
 * That does make sense, . I recently co-presented a Zoom webinar, bookable via EventBrite, and many of us are certainly familiar with that platform now. I think it's all about finding the best tool for the job and determining whether that tool really is needed or useful in meeting those needs. I, for one, am still wondering how any face-to-face video app would be useful for routine Teahouse work. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:09, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * It can vary dramatically depending where in the world you are. In Australia (where I am) it is mostly Zoom - even my 90+ year old neighbour shows all her friends from church how to use it.  But different tools have more presence in different countries.  There are dozens of them: see Comparison_of_web_conferencing_software.--Gronk Oz (talk) 05:44, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I still feel our first focus should be on whether video functions are needed or useful for the Teahouse and, if so, under what circumstances that might be, and how to make them safe to use. The actual platform of choice comes in later - but that's a helpful list. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Adding photo
Hi, where is the part of the Teahouse Hosts page where I can change the photo on my Host profile? I want to include a photo of myself. Cheers, Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 19:27, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Rubbish computer At Teahouse/Host landing, set the  parameter to the file name. &#8213; Qwerfjkl  talk  19:39, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 19:50, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Please take a look at the pretty pictures
Hello, all. The Editing team's been thinking more specifically about newcomers recently, and I wanted to give you all a quick update.

First, please take a look at the pictures in T274832. These aren't the final designs, but even 20 seconds spent glancing at them now will give you an idea of what a red-linked talk page might look like in the future. These are designed mostly with newcomers in mind (and mostly not for the English Wikipedia, which has fewer empty/red-linked talk pages than nearly any other wiki); experienced editors already know what to do on those pages.

Second, Talk pages project/Notifications (aka "topic subscriptions") is in Beta Features at Meta-Wiki. If you have enabled Discussion Tools in m:Special:Preferences at Meta-Wiki, then you'll get a [subscribe] button (over there. It may be a long time before it is offered here). I'd like you all to be thinking about the future, and how we might want to handle default settings. On the one hand, I suspect that you'd like all newcomers to be automagically subscribed to every section they post in on this page. On the other hand, I'm not entirely sure that you'd like to get Echo/Notifications for every section you post in on this page. So please be thinking about what you'd like – different prefs settings for newbies vs. old hands? A pop-up that encourages newcomers to subscribe the first time they edit a talk page? Something else? If you know your preference, you can post it at mw:Talk:Talk pages project/Notifications (or ping me).

Finally, the Reply tool will eventually be turned on for everyone here. This should reduce the amount of time you spend fiddling with incorrect indentation and unsigned messages. However, it may be a couple of months. Ops has invoked their Don't worry about performance escape clause, and Editing can't deploy it any further until some technical problems have been fixed. Once that's underway, the English Wikipedia will probably be one of the last communities to get it by default (because size matters; OTOH, because of the nature of the problem, converting this wiki might actually be part of the solution, rather than the riskiest deployment). Please put Talk pages project on your watchlist if you want to keep track of this. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:37, 30 June 2021 (UTC)


 * I've looked at the page you link to, and I still have no idea what a "red-linked talk page" is. Maproom (talk) 08:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Surely, that's just a talk page for a new user where that talk page has yet to be created, but would be if someone posted there. Hence it's red-linked. e.g. User talk:Mapropst (which is the next account alphabetically after yours.) Nick Moyes (talk) 13:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I think it's all red talk pages and how they should appear for the benefit of new user. In fact the phab says it's specifically about talk pages that are not user talk pages. Instead of being an empty page, it's going to be pretty, filled with instructions on how to create the page per their particular need. And it needs discussing what kind of pretty it should be to be more useful and less obstructive and annoying to experienced users.
 * The second one seems to be about watchlisting talk page sections, which I would find more interesting and important and urgent. In fact, it looks kinda important. So, I wanted to learn everything in detail before commenting here, which is why I hadn't replied to the post yet. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:58, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Usedtobecool, the notifications system uses Echo/Special:Notifications, not Special:Watchlist. But I'm pretty happy with it so far.  It only notifies people if there's been a new comment added (and not, e.g., every time someone fixes a typo or changes the section heading – that's what the watchlist is for).  If you want to try it out on this page, then https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Teahouse?dtenable=1 will give you a temporary [subscribe] button.
 * They are looking at having people auto-subscribed to sections they start or comment in (if using the Reply tool). That'll be months in the future, but I think it would be helpful for newcomers to the Teahouse. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you, WAID! As long as it's one notification per thread, not one notification per comment (I sometimes come back to half a dozen notifications about my talkpage when it's just one post and five type corrections to it), I think, auto-sub could work. I'll probably disable it though; what I want is to choose to sub some select threads in select pages. Obviously can't know before trying it out for real.I wish the reply tool would start with a ping for whomever it is a reply to, like Enterprisey's used to do. You get a button to add, but it's the ugliest format ( @user:username) ; I'd rather it gave me just the username, so I could click it after typing in my favourite template. (Now that I typed its favoured method of pinging, it's giving me a list of participants to this thread; if only it did that with the templates that I like). But I am rambling at the wrong place. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:57, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Usedtobecool, have you tried the visual mode in the Reply tool? You don't have to look at the wikitext that way. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 05:55, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Whatamidoing (WMF) A nicer format would be . &#8213; Qwerfjkl  talk  07:05, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Qwerfjkl, I think that wikitext might be more confusing to newcomers, though. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Last I recall, the pipe trick causes it to expand into  after rendering the response, so there'd be no difference. — Tenryuu 🐲  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
 * So when you're reading the diff, you still see the full wikitext, and when you're typing (in wikitext source mode, which might not be typical for newcomers), you'll see something that you're unfamiliar with. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * (It expands to  when saved.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Whoops, that's my bad. I haven't done a pipe trick like that in a long time. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Okeh, I looked at the page (for more than 20 seconds), and I have no idea what is what on it.Kdammers (talk) 15:31, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Mostly I wanted to make sure that the idea of an empty talk page that had a picture on it wasn't going to freak anyone out. Thanks.  :-) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

A little suggestion to teahouse
Hi, Sorry to interrupt here. Now there are so many article in teahouse about different subject, which are all listing in the main page. I'd like to suggest that if it will be better when they are split into different subject in different pages? Pavlov2 (talk) 11:39, 3 August 2021 (UTC)


 * @Pavlov2, I think you're suggesting that there should be multiple teahouses for different types of questions? We do have several different help desks on Wikipedia, which you can find links to at Help:Contents. The teahouse is for brand-new editors who don't yet know how to find those or even which one is most appropriate for their question. —valereee (talk) 11:59, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Sorry for interrupting. I'm sorry for confounding teahouse and helpdesk. Pavlov2 (talk) 12:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Pavlov2, not at all! The Teahouse is a help desk! It's just intended to be a place where new editors can go and get help from people who are good at helping new editors. Wikipedia is a gigantic maze, and for new editors it can be very difficult to even figure out where to go to ask your question, so we often invite new editors to the Teahouse as a first step. —valereee (talk) 20:36, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Request for new mentors
Hi all,

After the first stage of the Growth team beta, which some of us participated as mentors (and we had more volunteers - we just had to cap it at 19), the project is looking to expand to 5% of new accounts getting a mentor. That means we need 150% more mentees - 50 mentors.

Currently we haven't formalised the pseudo-perm we're discussing, but please make sure you have some experience before joining.

Sign-up is done at Growth Team features/Mentor list - it explains how to add yourself. Cheers and thanks!

p.s. if it looks like there are already 50 please consider holding back so each mentor gets a reasonable number of questions. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:49, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Help at TH
Hello everyone, I just want to ask if it's possible for me to answer questions at The Teahouse. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparklestern (talk • contribs) 00:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your enthusiasm, but I suggest you (and any other new editors) wait until you have much more experience editing articles before answering questions at Teahouse.   GoingBatty (talk) 00:29, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Can I at least look out for new people and see if I can help them? I once helped @LENIE25. out with the basics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparklestern (talk • contribs) 00:36, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I suggest you please wait until you have mastered the basics, such as creating proper wikilinks and signing your posts. GoingBatty (talk) 00:45, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
 * No, not yet. You yourself have not understood the basics. You haven't indented your reply. You didn't sign, despite the reminder to do so. You haven't understood how to link correctly, for example TH and The Teahouse are not the same as Teahouse, and @LENIE25. is not the same as User:LENIE25.. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:46, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay… Sparklestern (talk) 00:51, 16 August 2021 (UTC)


 * While you are technically free to answer questions (there's nothing that's restricting you from answering questions), I would recommend not doing so until you have become more experienced like what GoingBatty and David Biddulph said above. Blaze The Wolf &#124; Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 14:23, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

c:User:Jack who built the house/Convenient Discussions
Would it be worth listing this as a Teahouse helper script? @Tenryuu &#8213; Qwerfjkl talk  19:59, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * @Qwerfjkl: I find it very useful to check for new comments on any talk page; I don't need to check the page's history to determine if new comments have been added in older discussions further up the page from the bottom. It also helps demarcate comments on the same indentation level from each other, which has irked me for quite some time. A big limitation I'm running into so far is that it only works properly if everyone signs their posts, which has been neglected a lot (I might start another discussion about that on here later) with a fair share of newcomers' follow-up comments. What do other hosts think of the script? — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:51, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * For unsigned posts, I typically use User:Anomie/unsignedhelper, though I'm not sure how helpful that would be in the Teahouse, due to the large number of revisions. &#8213; Qwerfjkl talk  06:32, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems like a useful tool, but I think I'll forego it, as it seems to conflict with all the editing modes I use. — Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:03, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Pinging @Cullen328 @RudolfRed @Celestina007 @Rubbish computer @ColinFine @Gråbergs Gråa Sång &#8213; Qwerfjkl talk  07:10, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn't personally use a script to answer a question here. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 07:14, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Time to ping some more people... @Fuhghettaboutit @Mortee @Nick Moyes @Bsoyka @Panini! @TheAafi @Hoary @Marchjuly @Mjroots @Maproom @Mortee @Nosebagbear @Interstellarity @Bwoodcock @Fuzheado @Gronk Oz @Joseph2302 @Ritchie333 @Writ Keeper @Sdkb @Timtempleton &#8213; Qwerfjkl talk  07:13, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * NFM Not for me, thanks. I have enough trouble reminding myself of the tools I already have if I don't use one for a while; I don't need another one to get me even more confunsed.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:38, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I hadn't heard of "Teahouse helper scripts". I started reading about this script, but what I read didn't excite me, and I confess that as I continued to read I soon tuned out. -- Hoary (talk) 08:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't personally find "Convenient Discussions tool" convenient (for me). So, I don't have any opinion. I'd go with what the other editors think is better. ─ The Aafī   (talk)|undefined  09:18, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I'm in the same boat as Gronk Oz... I have enough trouble remembering that add-on tools exist and staying on top of how they work that it's almost invariably easier for me to just do everything in default-newbie mode. I have to use so many different platforms that any added abstraction layers in any of them immediately get forgotten.  So, if the tool helps you, more power to you, but I don't have any useful suggestions. Bill Woodcock (talk) 03:45, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't use any tools or scripts when I edit and, thus, am unable to speak from first-hand experience on the matter. I will state that I think if an editor feels they need to rely on a script to answer a TH question, then perhaps they don't really have the experience to be answering questions in the first place. FWIW, I think for the most parts scripts and tools are quite helpful and do save time; however, I'm not sure that time saving is such a huge priority here at the TH as it might be in other types of editing. In addition, some newish editors tend to see tools and scripts as a way to establish their Wikipedia credibility (WP:HATS); they mostly mean well, but sometimes things unintentionally go awry. So, maybe if such a tool/script was created, it would be best to set it up so that some sort of WP:PERM is required to make sure editors don't mistake it as quick and easy way of becoming a de-facto TH host. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:56, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

To add to my previous comment, I do regularly use tools such as AWB, HotCat, Twinkle etc but for either minor edits, repetitive edits, reverts or capitalisation. I don't tend to use them for a longer discussion: it'll hardly save much time. I prefer to edit the Teahouse manually. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 11:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Looks potentially useful, but not something I plan to use. Teahouse replies aren't that difficult, and so for me I don't see the need to use a tool for it. May be useful for other though. <b style="color:#0033ab">Joseph</b><b style="color:#000000">2302</b> (talk) 17:28, 24 July 2021 (UTC)


 * I've enabled all three options (including 'Quick Replying') in the 'Discussion Pages' section in my Preferences. I do rather like this new reply feature, which I'm still coming to terms with. I'm now fairly happy with how replying currently works, so won't be spending time assessing this tool, I'm afraid. So I feel the consensus here is that, as useful as it might potentially be to some, it simply isn't a 'killer tool' that needs to be offered to every new Teahouse Hosts. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Small edits with specialized tools
Hello, Teahouse hosts. If you haven't signed up yet, please do! Today's the deadline. I think that some of you might be interested in Wikimania:2021:Submissions/Editing the Wiki Way: software and the future of editing, which is about small edits with specialized tools, and several of the other sessions. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:00, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this. I signed up to Wikimania a couple of weeks ago and hope to attend a whole range of presentations, including this one. I've not added my name as an attendee to any specific talks as I didn't think that was necessary. Is it? Had my Remo intro yesterday - quite looking forward to being able to attend Wikimania for the very first time. I've long felt that major subject conferences often attract the top speakers from big organisations to give the presentations and only the top activists in their field from those organisations can afford to attend. The 'joe averages' in that subject rarely get a chance to benefit or attend. This year looks a whole lot different. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:32, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * As you've doubtless figured out by now, you don't have to sign up for anything in advance.
 * The session notes and a link to a recording are available on the Wikimania page linked above. I believe that all of the presentations were recorded, so even if you couldn't attend "live", you can watch the videos at any time.  They're on YouTube now and will be uploaded to Commons later.
 * @Nick Moyes, if you like traveling, then in future years, I suggest that you apply for a scholarship. The worst they can do is reject your application, right? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * @Whatamidoing (WMF) Thanks for that, though figured it all out in the end. I spent a fascinating four days on Remo, listening to presentations and participating in the unconference spaces. Great to chat with some of the WMF staff (PPelberg et al.), and recordings were a great way to catch up on things I missed. (Programme here for anyone who wants to check them out.)
 * I guess you're right about applying for a travel scholarship to attend in future, though with the meta:Sustainability Initiative coming to greater prominence, I feel that we should be minimising face-to-face meetups and developing virtual meetups to reduce our environmental impact. I think I picked up along the way from 's talk that the WMF servers consume around 12GWh of non-renewable energy each year in servicing user searches, so adding kerosene-based global travel to our carbon footprint doesn't seem the right thing to be doing from now on. (To that end, I've switched my default search engine on Chrome to Ecosia, and I hope other Wikipedia users and WMF staff might consider making that small change, too. Will you?) Nick Moyes (talk) 22:49, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I've been using DuckDuckGo as my default in Chrome and Firefox. I wonder how it compares with Ecosia. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

What order should the hosts be listed as?
I cannot find an obvious order for the hosts at Teahouse/Hosts though the script adds newer people at the bottom by default, whom have lower possibility of being discovered then. One solution could be to implement a random generator, another is to push the more active people on top. Were there past guidance around this issue? I mainly joined, since it's something I have been regularly doing and enjoy. ~ Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:00, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, . The Host list is in chronological order of signup - at least it has been sorted thus since I joined in 2017, and feel it should stay that way. I find this very helpful as it allows me to manage the names of those who have signed themselves up but have never really contributed, and thus warrant removal after 6 months or so. (The reality is that quite a few newish editors think that adding their names to the Host list without ever helping out here confers them sort sort of credibility or status - which, of course, it doesn't.) I would really not want to see random sorting each time I visit the page, and (apart from the now-redundant badge icons) I feel it perfectly adequately serves its purpose as a list of Hosts, and that there's no need for a 'solution' as you call it. We do of course, also have a randomly-shown list of some of the most active Hosts in the Teahouse Header, and it is extremely easy to find any host name by simply copying it and searching the host list (Ctrl-F) on a Windows PC.
 * Oh, and thank you for adding your own name to the host list today - so, welcome! Nick Moyes (talk) 18:15, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Could someone help me with making templates like the ones on ED.
I just wanna make good templates like those ones, and if someone could help me with that, that would be nice.ht 21:49 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * This might help Help:Template <b style="color:#7F007F">TimTempleton</b> <sup style="color:#800080">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  21:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Proposal to expand trial of Growth team features
Hello Teahouse hosts! I'm Marshall Miller; I'm the product manager for the Growth team at the WMF, which works on building features that help newcomers make productive edits and learn their way in the wiki. I last posted here in June, when the trial of Growth features here on English Wikipedia was beginning. We've since completed the trial, and we saw strong results. In discussion with community members, we decided to propose at Village Pump to increase the trial such that 25% of new accounts get the Growth features. I wanted to get back in touch to invite you all to check out the progress so far, since you are experts on the newcomer experience, and especially around mentoring newcomers. Please do weigh in on the proposal! -- MMiller (WMF) (talk) 00:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC)