Wikipedia talk:Help Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
  Main page   Discussion   Scope   Guidelines   Templates   Participants   Newsletter  
the Wikipedia Help Project (Rated NA-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of the Wikipedia Help Project, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's help documentation for readers and contributors. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. To browse help related resources see the help menu or help directory. Or ask for help on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you there.
 NA  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Template talk:Game guide[edit]

The template renaming request has been relisted. Please join in to improve consensus. --George Ho (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Template:Bibleverse[edit]

Template:Bibleverse needs to be edited by and admin. The source code links to http://bibref.hebtools.com. That website is no longer active. User:Atethnekos edited Template:Bibleverse/sandbox which links to http://tools.wmflabs.org/bibleversefinder/bibleversefinder.php

{ { Bibleverse|BOOK#|BOOKNAME|c:v–c:v|SOURCE } } John 1:1 Joel 4:2 1 Maccabees 2:1-5 are not working.
{ { Bibleverse/sandbox|BOOK#|BOOKNAME|c:v–c:v|SOURCE } } John 1:1 Joel 4:2 1 Maccabees 2:1-5 are working.
The source code of Template:Bibleverse needs to be changed in its entirety to:the source code found here
Can someone take care of this? Kind regards, --@Efrat (talk) 06:54, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Never mind It's been fixed. --@Efrat (talk) 07:43, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

The Closing discussions page[edit]

Hi. I put a question up on the Wikipedia talk:Closing discussions Talk page. Doesn't appear to be too active over there. Wonder if a couple of folks interested in the whole Wikipedia Help project might look over there and suggest a next step.

Here is the specific discussion: Wikipedia_talk:Closing_discussions#Requesting_a_close.

Thanks much. Cheers. N2e (talk) 15:24, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Since this page is not much monitored nor very active, I went on to ask my question at the Wikipedia Teahouse on 27 November 2013. It was quickly and helpfully answered by Fuhghettaboutit on 28 November 2013, and the discussion may be found here.
Yes check.svg Done So in early February 2014, I have updated the "Closing discussions" page to make it explicit on where such requests may be made. Feel free to improve or copyedit what I added to that Help page. Cheers. N2e (talk) 14:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

JavaScript edit requests[edit]

See template talk:JavaScript where a new edit request template has been proposed -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 06:59, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Editor review#Mark Historical?[edit]

Note there is a discussion at the talk page on whether to mark it historical, it hasn't received attention for months. KonveyorBelt 16:36, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

MediaWiki Help instead of Help:Contents/Browse on the Main Page[edit]

Getting a link to MediaWiki Help instead of Help:Contents/Browse on the Main Page. I really rely on the Help:Contents/Browse functionality, how do we get it back? Djembayz (talk) 20:23, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

I think this is one for the techies to look at - I've posted at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 124#Sidebar "Help" link broken. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Now fixed. the wub "?!" 23:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikipedia Help Project at Wikimania 2014[edit]

Project Leaflet WikiProject Medicine back and front v1.png

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 17:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Help MOS[edit]

Greetings! I'm glad to see this project. If done well, and I believe it will be, not many projects will have such a great positive impact on the overall quality/consistency of Wikipedia articles. I'm considering signing up.

One of the first things that should be done---before any changes are made to help pages---is a "manual of style". It would standardize things like exactly how to represent variables, the characteristics of tables, and so forth. It's a big area and it alone could take half a year or so to complete; but I think it's critical to do it first.

Is this already being done? I didn't see anything like it on your main page. It could be that I just didn't look deep enough.

On a different topic, is there a "project manager" here? I.e., someone doing high-level planning and coordinating the activities of the worker bees? Mandruss (talk) 12:06, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the project Mandruss! As seen at Help:Help the help system is a bit of a mess. This has happened simply because of the way Wikipedia is - that is anyone can create pages, plus pages are divided up by name spaces. We have Policies, Guidelines, Help and advice pages "Essay" in different name spaces (thousands of pages). We take care of "how to" and some "general info page" - not policies, guidelines or the manual of style. Our project has its own MOS at Wikipedia:Help Project/Guidelines but its a project guide not a real MOS. May be a good idea to expand the page to tell all more on how best to present help info to our readers....however most people who come to this project are generally aware of the main MOS and use that as a format/style guide. We also have to remember project members and non-project members have their own ideas on how to present the help info. For example Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia has the same basic info that can bee seen at Wikipedia tutorial and Newcomers training and The Wikipedia Adventure all in different formats/styles. The most pressing thing is consolidation of current pages that regurgitate the same info in the same format that can be found at Help:Contents/Browse/Site map and Help:Contents/Directory. We don't really have a project manager ..a few take care of things like this project pages and news...but we all do what we like where we feel things need fixing or expanding. Jump in be bold - got more questions just ask. -- Moxy (talk) 22:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia[edit]

I have completed making a parent article on how and where people can help Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia. User:Fuhghettaboutit has done a great job in helping with copyeditng and correcting some fine points (Thank you User:Fuhghettaboutit). Would love to get a third or even better yet a fourth set of eyes to go over the page. Would also be a good idea to mention this page in the next set of news letters. There is also a proposal to have the article linked on the left side of all pages ...see Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#‎Add "Contributing to Wikipedia" to main left hand side info links-- Moxy (talk) 23:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

WP:Co-op[edit]

Hi folks. I wanted to make a note that an Individual Engagement Grant proposal, Reimagining Wikipedia Mentorship was approved, and our team is through the first month of our grant. Our space will be called the Co-op, and I've posted some news detailing our first month's progress. Please check it out, as we intend for our planned mentorship space to complement and expand on collaborative efforts between editors that has already been established here. I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:35, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Article Assessment Within Help Project[edit]

Is there a link to how to assess Help Project articles? Also, since many of the help topics only require brief explanation, are we ruling out length as a major criterion for a certain assessment, assuming all other aspects are good to go? Upjav (talk) 03:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Answered my own question; put here for future reference in case anyone else has the same question - Wikipedia:Help_Project/Assessment — Preceding unsigned comment added by Upjav (talkcontribs) 03:53, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Assessment[edit]

Wow, WP's help/Wikipedia pages really are a complex barren of confusing advice. If there are any users here, I was wondering how we actually assess these pages? I mean, what does 'C-class' or 'B-class' mean in terms of a help pages? I think perhaps if that was clarified there might be easier to target editing to help improve this situation. Some of my own thoughts (this is more like a wishlist):

  1. Clear division between instructions for admins, technical details, and instructions for users
  2. Minimising links to irrelevant policies and use of unique fonts/formatting devices
  3. Minimising duplication between help pages
  4. Presenting instructions in a clear way without an excessive number of pseudo-steps
  5. Using language that isn't legalistic and can easily be understood

These certainly aren't measurable, but by stating a few I hope to start a discussion with other users about what things are? If there was a way to get from C to B or whatever, and that clearly reflected how to make this system easier to understand, I'm sure there would be at least some interested users. --Tom (LT) (talk) 02:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

See post abovbe -- Moxy (talk) 20:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Two office hours about the Bugzilla-to-Phabricator migration[edit]

Next week Qgil-WMF will host two office hours to answer your questions about the Bugzilla to Phabricator migration:

These will be on #wikimedia-office connect. Information about how to join is available at m:IRC office hours. The plan is to start the migration on Friday 21 November at 00:30 UTC. More information will be posted at mw:Phabricator/versus_Bugzilla. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:41, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Merge[edit]

We have Help:Category and Help:Categories. The latter ("Categories") is a small stub that describes itself as a "quick how-to guide". If that's the case it should be renamed -- in my opinion it's confusing to editors to have two help articles that appear to be about the same topic. Should they be merged? I'm asking here before formally proposing the merge as I haven't worked much in this area before. --Tom (LT) (talk) 21:12, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

My view is that, while Help:categories is poorly named, it is actually a cool idea to have a beginners version of Help:Category. One solution would be to have it renamed to Help:Categories for beginners, or something like that, with a redirect on the old page. --Mrjulesd (talk) 22:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

News letter for 2014[edit]

ping User:The wub

So I think its time for news letter ....been some time and we have a few new participates to the project.

What should we mention in the news letter??

Was thinking we need to mention Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia (A main page) has been completely overhauled - including Wikimedia Foundation brochure (also just updated) and videos (one even has Jimbo in it). What have others been upto that we should mention??? --Moxy (talk) 20:43, 22 November 2014 (UTC)

RfC about Referencing tutorial[edit]

Pls see Help talk:Referencing for beginners#RfC: What method first -- Moxy (talk) 15:46, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Bright City Lights Project[edit]

Music producer Onno "Manifestbeatz" Slinkert goes by the artist name Bright City Lights Project. First single "One Eye Closed" released on 23/04/2015 featuring songwriter Evan Jeffrey (Brooklyn, NYC) available on I-Tunes, Spotify and Shazam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onnoslinkert (talkcontribs) 13:36, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Two new navboxes[edit]

I've created two new navboxes:



{{Wikipedia community}} is a navbox of the main community-oriented pages on English Wikipedia. It is a superset of Template:Noticeboard links plus other community pages. However, it excludes, for the most part, help pages and rule pages.

{{Wikipedia technical help}} is a navbox of the main technical help pages on English Wikipedia. It is a superset of the Template:Wikipedia template messages navbox, and some of the links are also on various other help navboxes.

Any views on these? --Jules (Mrjulesd) 14:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tutorial[edit]

Wikipedia:Tutorial update is completed...would love a third set of eyes for a copy-edit for typos and grammar etc... . -- Moxy (talk) 17:17, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Well I looked over it and it looks good. 👍 Like. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 12:18, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Invitation to comment on VP proposal: Establish WT:MoS as the official site for style Q&A on Wikipedia[edit]

There is now a proposal at the Village Pump that WT:MoS be established as Wikipedia's official page for style Q&A. This would involve actively guiding editors with style questions to WT:MoS and away from other pages. Participation is welcome, especially from editors who have experience dealing with style questions or editors seeking help in general.

For the purposes of this discussion, "style" refers to things like spelling, organization, punctuation, capitalization and other types of writing mechanics. Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

VisualEditor[edit]

I probably should have thought of you all sooner, but perhaps it's better late than never: They're planning a short test of VisualEditor soon. (Tomorrow's the test for the testing software, which needed some recent work, but the actual test will be later—maybe next week, maybe next month, or maybe after re-re-writing the event logging software again ;-) Anyway, I think that some of the common help pages have a link to {{VE documentation}} or a similar note in text, but if you have "favorite" pages, it might be good to check them and see whether a link out to VisualEditor's user guide would be useful to some editors. VisualEditor passed the "million edits" milestone back in March (just at the English Wikipedia; I believe it's about five million across all projects), so I suspect that people who use it have taken care of a number of pages anyway.

Also, when I have a few hours free, I'm planning to update the user guide again. The central copy is at mw:Help:VisualEditor/User guide, and I'm always interested in ideas about what is confusing or written in a needlessly complicated way. Please {{ping}} me if you have questions or need anything.

And, finally, if you've put a lot of work into a help page, and it's got information that would be useful to people editing elsewhere (not just at the English Wikipedia), then I'd like to suggest that you have a look at Mediawiki's help pages, because many of them would benefit from some attention. Thanks for all you do, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Tutorial/Editing, Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Editing now all have links to Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide....but more could be said. --Moxy (talk) 22:40, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
I should have posted this update last week, but better late than never, I guess: The results from this test were posted last Tuesday at m:Research:VisualEditor's effect on newly registered editors/May 2015 study. Aaron's back from his vacation now, so you can ask him any questions you have about methodology, but my simple summary is that the group that had access to VisualEditor was slightly less likely to be reverted than the group without it, and everything else was the same.
There's also a related proposal at the Village Pump to give new users both editors. They would get exactly what you get if you opt in to VisualEditor via Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. Then they can choose which one they want to use for each edit.
Finally, if you haven't looked at VisualEditor for a few months, then you can have a quick look on a random article (requires Javascript/doesn't change your account settings). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Another navbox[edit]

{{Wikipedia editor navigation}}

Its a amalgamation of some of the main navboxes for Wikipedia navigation, into a single collapsible navbox. Might be good for things like user pages,

Any views at all? --Jules (Mrjulesd) 10:00, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Also {{Main Page topics}}

This should be self explanatory. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 22:43, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Looks good - any amalgamation is good ! Lee∴V 12:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
For Wikipedia editor navigation, I like the concept & grouping idea. As far as the sequence of the Navboxes from top to bottom, thinking of a different arrangement. I will copy the wikicode into my offline Notepad to think about it for a while before making a recommendation. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Following up on WP editor navigation, most is good, suggesting a few possible sequence changes, shown below in draft list.
  • General:
    • Wikipedia principles
    • Wikipedia key policies and guidelines
    • Essays about Wikipedia
  • Welcome:
    • Wikipedia community
    • Main Page and featured content
  • Help:
    • Wikipedia help pages
    • Wikipedia technical help
  • In depth:
    • Manual of Style
    • Wikipedia referencing
    • Template messages
Hope this helps. Okay to disregard the groupings that I put in, helps me with classification. JoeHebda (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done thanks for your feeddback JoeHebda. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 09:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Linking and page manipulation sidebar[edit]

{{Linking and page manipulation}}

Obviously a sidebar for navigation on these matters. Any thoughts on this? --Jules (Mrjulesd) 16:45, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Only one thought, for that See also, I would recommend a name change, to something like Additional. It would avoid any confusion since SA is also the exact name for article section titles. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
@JoeHebda: thanks for your comments. I will change the template as suggested. Regards --Jules (Mrjulesd) 15:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)