Wikipedia talk:WikiLove

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Essays
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.
 High  This page has been rated as High-impact on the project's impact scale.
News This Wikipedia:WikiLove has been mentioned by a media organisation:
WikiProject Department of Fun (Rated Project-class, Bottom-importance)
WikiProject icon This page is supported by the Department of Fun WikiProject, which aims to provide Wikipedians with fun so that they stay on Wikipedia and keep on improving articles. If you have any ideas, do not hesitate to post them to the discussion page or access our home page to join the Department of Fun.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the quality scale.
 Bottom  This page has been rated as Bottom-importance on the importance scale.


can we get a picture of John Lennon in bed with the "bed peace" sign for this page? ;-) -- Tarquin 08:53 May 11, 2003 (UTC)

Okay, but I don't see what a corpse has to do with love. *Grabs a flashlight and shovel* Where's he buried? :P--Kross 21:38, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

I am not sure what is meant by the term ordering. Surely this is much more a continual process of rearrangement which reflects life rather an approaching some abstract ideal of what an ideal might be if it were not an ideal. Harry Potter.

Right about now,[edit]

I could use some wikilove. I hope there is a good article about hangovers, but I am not up to editing it. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick 22:50 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Does love relieve hangover?! Or is Wikilove a gift unlike any other? --Menchi 23:02 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I don't know. maybe it travels the whole world round. Sorry, have to go barf now -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo stick 23:45 24 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Can we eliminate this faux-hippy ness from Wikipedia??[edit]

i'm actually trying to study and write papers off of this wonderful site and i really would appreciate it if it didn't adopt a cult-like status of wiki-love, whnich would undoubtedly interfere and corrupt its premise for the freedom of information.

thanks Elakhna 02:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. Simply because it is not a physical or well known concept, doesn't mean it should be left out. It would be like leaving out a concept of a video game simply because it doesn't really exist physically. Wikilove is in fact an aspect of wikipedia as determined by wikipedia and it's members, and should thus be treating as an aspect and given it's thread. If you don't like it, then simply don't refer to it, but many of us believe it has a place because it is portrayed by wikipedia as a viable aspect.

~Akiatu~ (talk) 06:33, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

I am obviously very late to this chat, but will add to it anyway in case others stumble across it like I have. Firstly, I agree with Akiatu entirely. I also have something else to add, though.
Elakhna mentions that this is a "wonderful site". An important thing to note is that this site is only made wonderful by the contributions of individuals, almost all of which are unpaid.
As a general rule, individuals hate to be taken for granted and to have their kind, freely-given efforts be unrecognized or taken as if they were owed. As another general rule, individuals love it when they have tokens of appreciation even so small as a little "Thank you" or something, since that lets the giver know that the the people who are benefiting are aware that the individual went out of their way to do something nice and are grateful for that.
So spreading "WikiLove", even in such simple ways as just thanking people occasionally, really helps to motivate people to continue contributing to Wikipedia. There are lots of people sinking a lot of time and effort into improving the site, for no tangible reward. Most of them probably feel that it is worth doing for the good of society and to support the ideal of spreading knowledge, and are thus basically motivated by philosophical, idealistic, and egalitarian ideas. However, that sort of thing can be eroded after a long time getting not just no tangible compensation but not even any gratitude.
I personally find that I edit Wikipedia for egalitarian reasons, but sometimes get quite sick and tired of putting in so much effort with what seems to be no recognition except reverts, until someone does something like send me a tiny little "Thank you" that keeps me not just editing but happy to be editing, and thus likely to edit much more actively.
So complaining about "WikiLove" distracting you from this "wonderful site" does not make sense because—even ignoring that one can just ignore "WikiLove"; it doesn't actually get in the way of anything—promoting the tendency to express gratitude (and similar things) helps maintain the community that keeps Wikipedia wonderful and even expands its wonderfulness. BreakfastJr (talk) 11:42, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

In praise of Wikipedia editors[edit]

(from the Wikipedia:Village pump)

Yesterday I wrote an article on Abdul Qadeer Khan, the Pakistani nuclear engineer. I uploaded it shortly before 8pm UTC. Only 16 hours later, it's already received a variety of useful edits from seven other editors. I think this is amazing - Wikipedia's editing community is incredibly responsive. It's a great tool, but it's the energy and enthusiasm of the contributors, so visible in this instance, which have made it so successful. Long may it continue. :-) -- ChrisO 13:01, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

It's a great job, by all concerned. If only Igor "The Beard" Kurchatov were as good. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 13:22, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Finlay, you shouldn't advertise this guy. His name almost outclasses yours.  ;) fabiform | talk 13:58, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Anyone for Great beards of the 20th century? I see a great need... :D -- ChrisO 15:09, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Here's a great starting point: [1] :) fabiform | talk 15:40, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Or here... - Woodrow 00:22, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I have been floored in my whole Wiki week here by several things--the wonderful wiki markup that makes it so easy to do the necessary work, the instantaneous way in which the links become real (ok, when the servers aren't struggling their little behinds off), the ability to go in and clean up stuff, even minor, that you happen to notice, the tools for monitoring what's going on in every concievable manner, and the awesome community that has been nothing but supportive of me and my novice questions. Wiki, I love you, man! (OK, that's a little overdone--) Elf

Wikipedia is simply the best![edit]

(from the village pump) Above all, if one needs mathematical or scientific information, Wikipedia is simply the best, which brought the Web out in the last years. There are to some extent understandable, clear and extensive explanations to (nearly) each topic. Still to it the whole is free. It is fascinating that also in the today's Spam and garbage and troll contaminated Web still another project instructed on voluntariness, self-check and co-operation survive can.

Further so, Wikipedia!

Thank you! :) --mav 11:07, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Oh, I can't have tea.[edit]

I'm just getting over my caffeine addiction. - Arthur George Carrick 01:42, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is a Beautiful Concept[edit]

I just learned about WikiLove. Is this an oldschool idea or a well known one? Swilk 08:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

The first version of this essay was created in May 2003. - Face 12:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, guys and gals =)[edit]

I love you all <333333333333 :) <3333 and a bit more of love <333!!!1 WikiLove FOR THE WIN! -- 15:11, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

:o) --www.doc 01:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


Just a brilliant, uplifting essay. That's all. -- Rob C (Alarob) 19:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)^, the hearts)???? O_o Blueaster 03:24, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


Ministry of WikiLove? 11:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, while obviously better than wikihate, wikilove sometimes looks over the top or even insincere. I prefer cool-headed, courteous bluntness to cloying, sugary affectation. (Except perhaps to new users) nadav 07:59, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I know this isn't an article....[edit]

but WP:OBVIOUS still applies IMO. As such, shouldn't the first sentence end with "among Wikipedians"? VanTucky (talk) 02:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

How about "among users", which could include other Wiki projects and people who are just starting too. Rhanyeia 16:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
sounds good to me. Maybe "among wiki users". Just to be even more obvious. VanTucky (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds even better. Rhanyeia 12:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the input. VanTucky (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2007 (UTC)


The poster of this thread seems in need some support. Please provide a word of encouragement to! Thanks. -- Jreferee (Talk) 05:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Please change this[edit]

to wiki friendship because it's quite ambarassing to say that you're promoting wikilove to a guy(just simply uncomfratable with that) thanks :| 18:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiLove Maxim[edit]

Maxim would benefit from some WikiLove. See this. -- Jreferee (Talk) 18:20, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

GA review[edit]

You are a truly nice person and a great GA reviewer. See the Larry Mullen talk page... --andreasegde 16:52, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I meant it as a real and honest compliment to you. --andreasegde 12:49, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Removal of WikiLove flowchart[edit]

A guide to applying WikiLove towards another editor.

I'm curious why this would be removed from the project page. As I see it, a picture of a heart with the Wikipedia logo on it has 0 utility while the flowchart I created has (albeit not a lot) some utility. Not only that, it's a good process, and if people followed it Wikipedia would be a less stressful place. Additionally, this is an essay, and not a policy page, so what's the deal? Triddle 15:15, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

The chart is very well done. :) However, it concentrates on how to deal with negative things and WikiLove is not just that but how to deal with everyone. When I think about WikiLove it's not disruptive users or sock puppetry I first think about, and they are the first things to notice from the chart. The image on this essay now is already widely associated with WikiLove, and I think it includes exactly what WikiLove is about: WikiLove is not complicated, it's simple just like the image. But I also think the chart shouldn't be on a policy or guideline because it's not that exact, if you think about sock puppetry arrow it's not possible to know whether someone is doing that before the report, and overall, usually there are more than two yes/no options when a person acts. There may be some more suitable essay than WikiLove where it could be on. Maybe Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot which has no picture at all. :) Best regards Rhanyeia 08:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't understand this point of view. First, I made an attempt to label the chart as not official policy (the caption was "A guide to applying WikiLove towards another editor." vs "THE guide"). Second, why would someone need to go around and spread the words of Wikiquette, Wikipedia policies, NPOV, forgiveness, etc, in the absence of conflict? Third, you seem to be comprehending things from this essay that I"m not; does the essay need to be updated to reflect a more "spread Wikilove" all the time stance? I really only see it talking about conflict. BTW, these would have been great objections to note when you reverted. Triddle 14:46, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I don't know what to say. What I wrote is how I think. I looked at many essay pages thinking where it would be best. I still think it's very well done, and looks great on Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot. Best regards Rhanyeia 14:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

FL Main page proposal[edit]

You nominated a current WP:FLC. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual main page will resemble either an excerpted list format or an abbreviated text format. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. Right now debate seems to be among support for the current selective democratic/consensus based proposal, a selective dictatorial approach like that used at WP:TFA or a non-selective first in line/calendar approach like that used at WP:POTD. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 16:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Promote WikiLove![edit]

I want to promote WikiLove, but do not know how to do it. And I want to practice WikiLove on any ocassion; can anyone show me the way, please? -The Bold Guy- 15:02, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

The ultimate sign of respect.[edit]

Could you please show me how to use this? I would truly appreciate it. M5891 23:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I got the same question as you; welcome at the club! :) -The Bold Guy- 17:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)


I just recieved a stamp. I don't understand why. Could Some help? Do I keep it on my talk page or pass it on or what?Black Dalek (talk) 14:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

The name of this kinda has an Orwellian feel[edit]

Just saying. This and similar things could be seen as negative.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 16:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

...Thank you!!! Somebody else thought that! I thought I was so weird being the only one thinking that, but I guess now I have backup (or am his back up, since he spoke up before I did) --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 05:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
That's because it is Orwellian. Mostlyharmless (talk) 22:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Yup. An alternative title could be Civility Über Alles. Raymond Arritt (talk) 22:24, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey Everybody![edit]


Can I ask what people think of this idea

Bam123456789 (talk) 16:05, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Rename from WikiLove[edit]

Shouldn't it be renamed to...WikiFriend? WikiLove sounds too mushy. --Encyclopedia77 (talk) 15:07, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

NOTICE: For some reason, this post keeps getting caught in the WikiHandshake thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Encyclopedia77 (talkcontribs) 15:08, 15 November 2008 (UTC) Fixed.

New template[edit]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by DougsTech (talkcontribs) at 03:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I like fried chicken, but others may not. And you should not give this template to a vegetarian Wikipedian. - Face 15:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Here's a kitten for you guys <3

Policy / Guideline[edit]

I would like this page or something like it eventually become official wikipedia policy/guideline. What do others think? Cazort (talk) 17:52, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it reads like initiation into a cult. I would prefer wikipedia espouse values such as freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, and most importantly freedom of participation. Basic 21st century values. Sure it can get ugly in discussion pages but anything less is antithetical to the human condition. Mutual respect should be exalted as a practical value. Not wikilove. Better wiki[pedia] culture be a role model to societies at large (or better yet, other quasi-public internet venues) than a cult.-- (talk) 01:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
I can see why people wouldn't want this page to be a guideline's a bit corny. Maybe it just needs some editing to make it sound less new-agey? Wikipedia could not operate without "a general spirit of collegiality and mutual understanding among wiki users". When discussions don't have that general spirit, they quickly balloon into nasty arguments. I also think that this is what WP:Assume Good Faith is about, and that's a guideline. Cazort (talk) 03:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Worst pickup line ever![edit]

"Hi, thank you for your comments on my edit, which you reverted. I would appreciate it if you would please look at this version (...) Again, thank you for your time – maybe we could discuss this further over dinner this weekend?"

Thparkth (talk) 06:41, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Ha! I completely agree. Honestly, I can't tell if this is vandalism that no one's picked up on, a joke, or if it's really encouraging you to ask someone to dinner over Wikipedia! I'm all for WikiLove, but dinner? Really? xD --SwarmTalk 04:33, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi, everyone![edit]

Hello, fellow Wikipedians! I am so, so happy and honored for this chance for us to talk. If you need anything, or if you simply want to chat, I am right here for you, pal! Also remember, to spread the joy! Wikipedia may not be the most cheerful place to be, but YOU can help make it more cheerful! Have a fantastic day, and God bless! ^_^ Celestialwarden11 (talk) 19:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC) this article sucks it cites no sources and is totally irrelevant someone delete it pls. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:21, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

New template?[edit]

Hello all I made a mini template for {{cookie}}, what do people think? {{Subst:User:Captain-n00dle/cookie}}

Regards, Captain n00dle\Talk 16:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


Re: "It was coined over time": I don't believe a word or concept can really be "coined over time". It might "evolve" or "be accepted" over time, but "coining" implies the moment of creation. NB: I am almost certainly not a linguist. Phil wink (talk) 03:38, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I believe that I coined it, but I may be mistaken. It would be interesting, since the Foundation is now promoting the term more, to search the mailing list archives to try to find the first instance of it.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:38, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
I have no idea how valid this search is: [2] but 2002-10-09 seems like a good starting point to search for earlier uses.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:48, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

News from WP:CONTRIB[edit]

Hi guys! Just to let you know that the contribution team has made some holiday cards to help spread WP:WikiLove. You can find them at: Wikipedia:CONTRIB/Holidays. Hope you guys enjoy and feel free to add to them! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 14:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)


Since my comprehensive edit of Food Wikilove templates was undone. I created another template Template:WikiLove_Templates and added it to the "See Also" section. Hope, that's okay? Because the name Template:WikiLove is already taken. Prapsnot 2.0 (talk) 08:07, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

when javascript is disabled[edit]

Currently, when javascript is disabled in one's browser, instead of the icon one sees a full link called "Wikilove" in the menu. However, clicking the link does nothing. it is perfectly fine is WL will never work with JS disabled, but please do something to recover the space in the menu, i.e., do not show the "Wikilove" link in this case.

Thanks, קיפודנחש (talk) 21:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Opt out[edit]

Is there any way of opting out of receiving these irritating messages?—An  optimist on the run! 16:56, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


Just a little hint for the narrow minded editor: There is but one country on this fine planet where conservatives and liberals are considered opposites - and that one has a thoroughly twisted political mindset. -- (talk) 21:58, 3 October 2011 (UTC) The United States? Yes my country has more to worry about then China or the EU. Sadly that "more" happens to be a worthless Government that would believe 2+2=1 if thats what the ol' book said. ~Akiatu~ (talk) 06:39, 16 November 2011 (UTC) i dont like hippies... --Sistemx (talk) 19:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

What the...?[edit]

Didn't we go through this madness once (if not several times) before? This is a website for writing an encyclopedia, not for making friends and socializing. If you really want that, go to Facebook (or Myspace, as we said the last time this insanity prevailed. That ended in tears. And let's not even mention the Great Userbox Wars.

In short, this is a bad idea. Kill it ASAP.

Zocky | picture popups 00:51, 5 April 2012 (UTC)


But I want to be hurt.-- (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

There is enough hurt out there for everyone. Perhaps you seek challenges? RonPotato (talk) 18:11, 5 May 2012 (UTC)


  • The first words on the page are "Click here to skip straight to the templates to share!"
  • While this may be convenient for experienced well-wishers, one of the main problems with "WikiLove" in the past has been:
    • Are canned messages the first priority of WikiLove?
    • Why are knowledgeable experts and responsible professionals deterred from Wikipedia by proponents of WikiLove?

Signed, Former Hater of Esperanza, RonPotato (talk) 18:40, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikilove also on Dutch Wikipedia[edit]

Is it possible that Wikilove gets 'imported' into the Dutch Wikipedia? So Dutch users can give barnstars, food, kittens, whatever..., to each other as well? Ycleymans (talk) 13:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

abuse filter 423[edit]

I tried using the wikilove button a few times, and noticed that the action was recorded in the filter log for my account.

the filterrybec 06:40, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Could we have chocolate here too?[edit]

A recent event made me think that it would be nice to have chocolate included in the list of templates too. I am nil at writing templates, os....any takers? Pretty please? Lectonar (talk) 08:21, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiLove seems broken[edit]

If you look at File:WikiLove issue.png, you'll see what I am seeing. The WikiLove interface is showing something wrong. A close up of a selected WikiLove template shows that even link formating is not working. I have two scripts that I am using to add the ACC and Badges sections. The first is User:Technical 13/Scripts/Teahouse WikiLove.js (which hasn't been edited since 20 January 2014) and the second is User:Technical 13/Scripts/ACC WikiLove.js (which hasn't been edited since 18 February 2014). Both were working fine as of 19 February 2014. I will also post a note on VPT pointing here. Thank you. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 20:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

There was a new version deployed that changes many bits, mostly about style. It's likely that your local configuration script needs to be modified to work with the new code.--Jorm (WMF) (talk) 21:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Jorm, can you point me to these changes so I know where to start looking to make these scripts work correctly again? If it's just the ACC welcome script, that's not a big deal, but the Teahouse script is almost identical to Ocaasi's User:Ocaasi/WikiLoveinstallscript.js script used by all of the Teahouse hosts. Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 22:00, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • I've pinged some people and hopefully they can point you to the gerrit change. I am about to head out on the road for the next four hours, so I'm going to be incommunicado during that time. Sorry I couldn't be more immediately helpful! --Jorm (WMF) (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

It looks like this is just a design issue as the code still functions. When you go to WikiLove using the Teahouse custom install script, the icon is way misformatted. That is coded by

icon: ''

It should be easy to figure out what the new custom image code requires, or I can just remove the icon. Ocaasi t | c 22:09, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

  • Ocaasi, using a defined size thumb works to fix the immediate display issue, although I still think this should be fixed in the extension to disallow this kind of error. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 19:42, 26 February 2014 (UTC)