Wikipedia talk:Dashboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Great idea. We've needed a public system like this for a while. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:35, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I took the liberty of announcing this on Wikipedia:Village pump (news) --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:45, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
That's great. I think this could solve a few communication (and spam) issues, and, for example, country-specific ones could be transcluded to the relevant notice boards. violet/riga (t) 12:47, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Very good idea! Radiant_* 13:39, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

Recent changes[edit]

I edited Wikipedia:Watch/policy to add a "recent changes" link to the bar at the top. This should work for a given watchlist even if you are viewing it transcluded form. If it doesn't work, fix it. If it's useless, delete it. If it works, please copy to other watchlists. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:59, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • That's a great idea! I'll put it on the others too. violet/riga (t) 14:17, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • There's a "gotcha". The censorship page contains a link to WP:IFD, but this in turn is a redirect (which is apparently how we implement shortcuts.) I think it's for this reason that the recent changes list for that watchlist is empty. It may be worth documenting this somewhere prominent. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:28, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • Hmm odd - it does it for that recent changes link, but not for the WP:W recent changes link. violet/riga (t) 14:37, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think all this code should probablt be in a template. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:47, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I was thinking that, and it would be nicer, but that would create a meta-template and that's being argued against at the moment. violet/riga (t) 14:50, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)


Wonderfull idea here Violetriga. However, I object to the Censorship title. Censorship is something imposed on a community from a position of power. Wikipedia isn't censored, and this word predisposes readers (besides being incorrect). Wikipedia policy on objectionable material suggests community discussion on a case by case basis. This is not censorship. The section needs to be renamed. Duk 14:12, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • I can definately see your point. I made it as just another example, perhaps it should be "controversy" or something similar. violet/riga (t) 14:17, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
With its current content, "Controversial images" may be a good name. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:24, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've changed it to "Hot topics" for the moment, at least until a decent focus can be decided upon. violet/riga (t) 14:31, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Deletion debates needing votes[edit]

Wikipedia:Watch/Deletion debates needing votes

I've created the structure of this page, which is designed to draw attention to Vfd/CfD/Tfd/etc debates that have had no or very few votes after several days. I would like comments on it, including suggestions for improvement, before I populate it. I have initially created it with the idea of it being a section on WP:Watch, but equally I suppose it could stand alone if people here think that would work better. Thryduulf 22:08, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think this is a great idea. While I don't want to make the scope too wide, it might be nice to have WP:RM debates with few votes included in such a watch as well. violet/riga (t) 22:12, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Looking at the page I don't think that WP:RM would fit in, so I think that'll have to be promoted in other ways. violet/riga (t) 22:16, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Since nobody was using it, I've removed deletion debates from the main watch page for now. Radiant_* 08:46, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Should this watch page be merged with similar pages?[edit]

In order to keep track of current affairs, at present a 'pedian would have to keep track of this page, and WP:CS, WP:RC, WP:GO, and probably some pages I'm unaware of, and likely the village pump. Thus, wouldn't it be a good idea to merge/redirect WP:W to one of the above, and see if further steps towards merging could be done, (or a combopage that transcludes the lot of them except for VP)? Radiant_>|< 09:02, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

I think that WP:CS should become a subpage of this one. The other two are a little separate, but if they are linked to from a general watch subpage then a recent changes click would show anything that's gone off. violet/riga (t) 11:32, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Did you mean related changes?
Yep! violet/riga (t) 08:30, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"keep track of current affairs" can't really be done, I think. (If it could, all you would need from your list is WP:RC, since all the changes to everything else in en.wikipedia will show up there.) Each wikipedian would have a different idea of what subset of things needs to be kept up with. (Myself, I rarely look at WP:RC.) There are an awful lot of pages one could keep track of; besides the above, also stuff on Community portal, WP:A, signposts, the 6 village pump subpages, any of the deletion, template, category, and project pages you might be interested in.

I suppose what this all is getting at is that this Watch page hasn't been working too well. Or at all, maybe. It seems like few updates are done. I think the advocate for an issue hits one or two of the main pages, e.g. pump(news), and that's as far it goes. I don't know if there's anything on WP:W as it stands that needs to be merged anywhere. -R. S. Shaw 00:41, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's not been working too well because people aren't using it - if it were in general use then it would. The schoolwatch is working well because people are updating it. If WP:CS were to become a subsection of this it might draw more attention to it, though that page is itself somewhat underused. violet/riga (t) 08:30, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, people have their own watchlists for what they consider 'current'. But there should be one central place where people can list new proposals and things like that. Currently a proposal needs to be advertised in 5-6 different places to get attention. WP:VP is nice but overcrowded. WP:RFC probably works best for getting comment. The others are somewhat redundant. Imho. Radiant_>|< 10:33, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Well I'm having a go at pulling relevant material onto this one page to see how it works. I'd agree that WP:CS could be merged here, and maybe even WP:RfC. I think there should be an attempt at one page where everyone can look, and since this is here it might as well be this one. Hiding 13:02, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure any merge is called for. Also please consider that that this page was only begun in April. 16:45, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

I think that especially this page and Current Surveys have two entirely different purposes, and I oppose the idea of merging them. I do agree that trying to keep up with changes on the Wikipedia is very hard right now, put part of that is because most people don't add stuff to the Current Survey page that should go there. I'm also working offline on another idea that might help keep track of things, but the idea is not ready for primetime. BlankVerse 18:02, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Also, the portals could help with tracking specific areas. Any centralization is mainly needed for wider issues. Maurreen (talk) 19:00, 7 August 2005 (UTC)


Should this page become WikiProject:Schools? Hiding talk 10:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

I think that the school-related materials should be split out into a separate page...The general stuff is a useful resource, but more than half the content is irrelevant to users who aren't interested in the school projects. -- stillnotelf has a talk page 05:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
That was a pregnant statement. --Siva1979Talk to me 18:50, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Unless there's significant reasons not to, I'm going to change the schoolwatch transclusion into a link. I don't feel it's appropriate for more than half of this page to be about one narrow field of importance. -- nae'blis (talk) 14:01, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

The purpose of this page[edit]

I don't think a lot of people get this page. It's a bit geeky, so that isn't really surprising. This page isn't meant so much to be read on its own, it's to be treated as a target for related changes. and to provide a network of pages that can be used in a similar manner. I don't think there's anything else quite like it on Wikipedia. --Tony SidawayTalk 00:56, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Too few people have understood the way it works, and that's been the reason for it not really being successful. violet/riga (t) 18:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Dubious choice of shortcuts[edit]

Hmm, I must say I rather expected the Wikipedia shortcut WP:W (and the redirect WP:Watch) to point to Help:Watching pages instead of the present one. However, I am a little unsure as to whether a shortcut to Help:Watching pages is proper, inasmuch as it is a copy from the meta master page.

If a change of shortcuts is feasible and is actually implemented, perhaps WP:PWATCH would be a suitable alternative for the present page? (WP:PW is taken, and WP:PUBWATCH might not give the appropriate associations. :-)) --Wernher 23:17, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Very out-of-date[edit]

Is there any purpose in keeping this page any more? Carcharoth 15:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

It's a great link page. I think it could use some updating, and expanding, though. I wouldn't be against discussing a rename, as well. - jc37 18:40, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Centralized discussion template[edit]

Is it possible to tleft the CENT template so that it lines up with the other tables? YechielMan 17:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Yah. I was thinking the same. Done. :) --Quiddity 01:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I also added a category, and a header for the Recentchangestext template (feel free to retitle), and moved that section down (which I wasn't sure about, but it seemed unnecessary to have at the top of this page too. feel free to move it back up). --Quiddity 01:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism Information[edit]

Does anyone agree with me that Template:Vandalism information would go nicely here? Malinaccier (talk) 02:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm adding it. Malinaccier (talk) 03:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Open RfB's[edit]

The page does not show the open RfB's, maybe they sould be listed along with the open RfA's. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 09:27, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

  • Wikipedia:WatchWikipedia:Coordination — To keep the simpleness of the title while avoiding confusion with another website. —harej (talk) 06:24, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Addendum - If you can come up with a better name, please do. —harej (talk) 06:37, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
  • I have decided to move it. If any complaints come later, I'll heed. —harej (talk) 20:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Request for relisted non-AfD XfDs[edit]

This page is great. I do like the collating of relisted AfDs, although trying to go through them is exhausting, due to te fact that they tend to be relisted because they are non-trivial and difficult questions.

I think I would appreciate another section for relisted non-AfD XfD debates. Probably, one section for them all, because there are not so many. I suppose relisted DRVs could also go there, not that I remember ever seeing one. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Are the relisted AfDs broken?[edit]

The compilation of relisted AfDs doesn't seem to be refreshing? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:52, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

The most complete, everything-in-one dashboard[edit]

Am I missing anything? ;) -- œ 13:28, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

You're missing the Federal Register, the Congressional record, the Supreme Court docket, and the menu at UC Berkeley's cafeteria. Other than that, you're not missing anything. harej 02:43, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Dispute resolution noticeboard[edit]

I just noticed that the dispute resolution noticeboard isn't on the dashboard. I thought of adding it myself, but I have no idea how the code works. Would someone be willing to add it for me? Regards — Mr. Stradivarius 09:28, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request[edit]

Include redirect WP:W in "Shortcuts" box. (talk) 02:56, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

dashboard app[edit]

Perhaps this page should make some mention of the wikidashboard app? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 06:08, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions should be added to help section[edit]

For completeness, the teahouse forum should be added: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions (talk) 03:03, 1 October 2012 (UTC)


I boldly removed the following historical pages (here and here):

I'm leaving a note here in case there was some reason not to remove them (my apologies in advance if this 'breaks the code' or something), and in case any of them need to be readded (with the near-hourly automatic updates to the relevant pages, it seems like these edits will be buried beyond recovery deep in the edit history inside of a few days).

ʍw 12:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I also just added the The Teahouse, pursuant to the request above and as a replacement for the Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/questions, but I have no idea if I did it right. Anybody?

ʍw 12:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

And... Legobot reverted all of the above. Help‽ ʍw 13:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

@Mysterious Whisper: the script at needs to be modified in order to make those types of changes. I'll ping @Legoktm: to see if that's possible. (talk) 03:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion underway at the village pump. ʍw 11:55, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I've updated the code, except labs is down right now so I'll deploy the changes once it comes back up. I also added this page to my watchlist so hopefully I'll see future requests :) Legoktm (talk) 20:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! ʍw 22:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
There seems to be some issue with lab's job scheduling system, so I did one manual run which was successful, and hopefully once labs comes back to normal everything will work properly. Legoktm (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Looks good. One thing: the posts listed as the "Most recent sections" of a given page are the last three at the bottom of the page, right? That may work for almost every discussion page on Wikipedia, but at the Teahouse, the newest posts are actually at the top. ʍw 21:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
That's...silly. Luckily it's a simple one line fix :) [1]. Legoktm (talk) 16:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks again. ʍw 17:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC)