Wikipedia talk:Teahouse

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Greetings: This page is for discussing the Teahouse; please direct questions about Wikipedia to the Teahouse Q&A forum. Thank you.
Wikipedia Help Project (Rated NA-class, Top-importance)
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.
 Top  This page has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Editor Retention
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Editor Retention, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of efforts to improve editor retention on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 

You can also talk in real time chat at Wikipedia's Help Channel, and participate in discussions at the host lounge, and most of all, Please do not bite the newcomers.

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

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

Hi, JoeHebda! I like your mobile Teahouse page! It does do a good job of showing everything on a mobile screen.
I have a few (purely aesthetic) suggestions, but I'm not sure how to add them. Here they are:
  1. I would like for the large blue word "teahouse" to be removed, as it seems to be somewhat redundant.
  2. I would prefer for all of the buttons ("Question forum", "Host profiles", "Guest profiles", and "Experienced editor? Become a host...") to go down the left side of the page. (Currently, the button "Guest profiles" is on the right side of the page, and the others say that they are in the center of the page, though they seem to be on the left side of the page.)
  3. I would prefer for the links to "Learn more about Teahouse" and "Question archive" to be either along the bottom of the box, or on the right side of the box.
  4. I would like for the box which is empty save for the Teahouse logo to be removed, as it seems to take up unnecessary space. If the link to the Teahouse is necessary, perhaps it can be moved to the icon in the top left corner.
  5. I would like for the text in the link "Learn more about Teahouse" to be changed to "Learn more about the Teahouse", as this seems to be more grammatically correct.
Those are all my suggestions for right now. I hope that they will help!
Once again, nice page!
Noah Kastin (talk) 06:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
It looks like this new header would solve the problem I see on some of my screens where the {{stb}} template's "skip" instructions overlap text in the header, so I like it on that basis. I also think it looks less cluttered. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 17:12, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
  • For the desktop view, i prefer the current header. I never use the mobile vuiew, so I have no opnion about how it looks there. DES (talk) 17:46, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
  • The Transhumanist, Cullen328 and Nettrom – If you could take a look at this proposed new Teahouse header, I would appreciate your insights and feedback. (The link for Header 2 is above in first sentence.) Thanks, JoeHebda • (talk) 13:57, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Joe, I like the theme presented in the title. It sounds cozy. Embellishing this theme with imagery to provide ambiance would be nice. A tea house is an establishment which primarily serves tea and other light refreshments. Sometimes the meal is also called "tea", and is funnest when served in a tea house. There is no better time and place to have a nice discussion with friends or new acquaintances than over clotted cream tea. I just have one question... Where are the tea and biscuits? The Transhumanist 20:27, 23 May 2017 (UTC) P.S.: Lose the exclamation point. Tea houses are supposed to be relaxing, not exciting. How about "Welcome to the teahouse..."
Thanks The Transhumanist, I made the change and agree that it is more welcoming. Cheers... JoeHebda • (talk) 14:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

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

It looks just fine to me, JoeHebda. My only suggestion is to increase the size of the Teahouse logo, perhaps 50%. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:50, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Cullen328, I changed title to "huge" size, and yes it looks much better. Cheers! JoeHebda • (talk) 20:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Is it just me, or is the Request list of articles to update link confusing? It's not really clear to me what it is from the piped text. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:06, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Cordless Larry, I changed the wikilink pipe text to "Articles to improve". Hope that clarifies. I also added that same "Articles to improve" as a page title on the Suggestions page. Regards, JoeHebda • (talk) 23:26, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Is there any reason why the "Question forum" button acts as a way to get to Wikipedia:Teahouse instead of working the same way the "Ask a question" button works? People clicking the button will already be on the page it leads to since this is (I assume) supposed to replace {{TH question page}}. Gestrid (talk) 03:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Good catch Gestrid, I had missed that while making this new "Header 2". Last night I added the "Ask a question" button and moved the "Question forum" button into the next group. Thanks for the feedback. Cheers! JoeHebda • (talk) 13:42, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Still, JoeHebda, what's the point of having a button that leads to the very page you're on? I would suggest simply removing the "Question forum" button all together. At the very least, it'll be weird to new editors to have a button like that. At the most, it'll confuse them into thinking the button's not working. Gestrid (talk) 14:05, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Gestrid Good point. I can "shade" the "Question forum" button for now. After this "Header 2" goes live, it can be "cloned" onto the header for each of the other TH pages linked to. Thanks. JoeHebda • (talk) 14:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Startup plan for TH Header 2[edit]

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  1. Why is the header copy pasted all over the place ? This is what we have templates for isn't it ? (Then you also don't need to 'look for more pages that need the new TH header' the next time)
  2. There's some important problems still there. Some clearing problems.. lack of margins.
  3. An horizontal list that isn't an list...
  4. That button is not exactly in the middle. Is that intentional ? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:53, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Pinging JoeHebda. Gestrid (talk) 02:16, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

New TH Header 2[edit]

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

"Add a question" opens a box with "Write out your question in the textbox below" instead of a normal edit window. That is an intentional Teahouse feature for users with the default setting Enable the Teahouse "Ask a question" feature at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. But I think there also used to be a normal "New section" tab. I don't see one now. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks PrimeHunter - That's exactly what is was. When I un-ticked in Gadgets Enable the Teahouse "Ask a question" feature, the Question box shows full page. Cheers! JoeHebda • (talk) 16:13, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
  • I don't see that there was anything approaching an RFC to install this new header. I certainly wasn't aware that plans to implement it were in progress. I call for it to be reverted spending a fuller discussion of its merits and demerits. DES (talk) 15:58, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Greetings DESiegel - Sorry I'm not familiar with RFC. I thought above discussions would be adequate. I knew that based on the huge number of daily pageviews for the TH main page, there will need to be follow-on conversations. From the feedback above, there are some who like the new TH header page as well as some who do not care for it. Also, I did not know of any way to test it out, so I just built the "Header 2" page, then cloned it into some of the TH pages. Based on those updates and some expert help several changes where made to improve both look and content. Regards, JoeHebda • (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Purely as a matter of aesthetics, if possible, I think the ask a question button should be centered underneath the two lines of centered text above it. It looks cockeyed to me with the current lack of alignment between them.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:29, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Fuhghettaboutit - I did a bit of "tweaking" on that "Ask a question" button to bring it closer to center. It may not be perfect wikicode but it does look better. Thanks for the feedback. Cheers! JoeHebda • (talk) 00:44, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi Fuhghettaboutit - The above change messes up the mobile view. I tried a few things without any luck. Will look at it again on Monday. Regards, JoeHebda • (talk) 01:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't if you made another attempt after leaving the message above, but it is displaying as centered with the text above now (and looks much better because of it). Thanks--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:40, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi! I like the new mobile Teahouse header!

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

Welcome to
the

Teahouse...

I hope that this feedback will be useful!

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

Greetings Noah Kastin, At the bottom line of pages, there should be a line that says "Mobile view" or "Desktop". Try using your browser with Desktop & see if that helps. I know of a few editors that only use a mobile device & Desktop combo, and that works best for them. Also you might have a better view experience with Landscape mode. Regards, JoeHebda • (talk) 14:07, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestion, JoeHebda! I will try those other options. Noah Kastin (talk) (🖋) 23:06, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion: TH Archive index[edit]

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

Greetings Gestrid, I took the liberty of adding a subsection title to your above feedback. Yes, I agree about that page being dated. The link to it existed on the previous TH header so it was brought across to the new TH header. To get the bot working again, should that be taken to Village Pump-Technical? Regards, JoeHebda • (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
That's probably where the people who know about this kind of stuff are, so we should do that, JoeHebda. I do wish I knew who made the modifications. (I would assume Legoktm, but you never know.) It seems the one who made the request for the change is no longer active on Wikipedia. Gestrid (talk) 06:22, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedia article[edit]

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

@Barrythevet: As stated on this page, this page is for discussing the Teahouse itself; questions should be asked on the main Teahouse page. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
As an aside, this question was also asked on the Teahouse page yesterday by Barrythevet, and was responded to. I'm not sure why it's now showing up over here. - NsTaGaTr (Talk) 19:20, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

  1. I propose to name the bot "MuninnBot" (as in Huginn and Muninn, plus cropping Munin from the Commons 2016 POTY would make a sympathetic picture for the bot's page). But please propose other ideas if you have interesting ones.
  2. More serious question: should we apply its functionality (posting archival notifications to user talk pages) to IP editors? The obvious problem is dynamic IPs, meaning that notifications can miss their mark (if the target editor changes IPs, they will miss the notification, and someone else (who took the IP address) might get it instead (which is spamming)). What do you think? (Also, if we do want to notify IPs, there will be a second round of debate during bot approval.) TigraanClick here to contact me 15:49, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Re question 2: excuse me for being dense, but could you clarify what you mean by "archival notifications"? Is this about people who don't make it back here to look for an answer to their question before the thread is archived? RivertorchFIREWATER 16:29, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
@Rivertorch: Well, sigmabot just archived the previous discussion. See here. Yes, the idea is to post a note to people whose post gets archived, explaining what happened and where to find the archive.
The bot is going to refrain from notifying certain editors. I would propose not to notify an autoconfirmed or blocked user (the former because they are supposed to know about archival, the latter per WP:DENY); the exact criteria for the first one can be debated, but I think it is pretty clear that some form "don't notify the regulars" is needed. (Maybe we could add an opt-in list for those who want.) But IPs, things are more complicated and that is certainly going to come up at WP:BAG, so I would better have a discussion beforehand. TigraanClick here to contact me 09:51, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Question 1: I still think we should just add the archiving functionality to HostBot. It already posts to users' talk pages. But, as long as it does what it's supposed to, I don't really care if we create a new bot or add on to an old one, and I don't really care what we name the new bot.
Question 2: Yes, I believe we should notify IP editors. Many IPs aren't so dynamic that they will change between the time they ask the question and the time they check back for an answer. In addition, we could have the bot use {{subst:shared IP advice}} (or something like it) on IP talk pages if that's possible.
Gestrid (talk) 07:24, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
  • I for one don't care about the bot name, or whether it is part of the existing HostBot or not. I do care about whom it notifies. i think autoconfirmed is far too low a threshold. If you must have a threshold, use extended confirmed, but even that is rather low in my view. Anyone asking a question at the teahouse is likely to find such a notification helpful. Even those who understand archiving can find it tedious to search for the exact archive involved: frankly i wish ANI notified every poster of archived posts, except those who op-out. Why not make this just notify everyone who starts a section unless they opt out? And I agree with Gestrid, notify IP editors. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:33, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Agreed, DES. Personally, I think it should notify everyone except blocked editors and those who have some form of the {{nobots}} template on their page or talk page. Additionally, the message the bot leaves should have instructions on how to opt out, and it should let editors know that it's a bot because many new editors have no idea what a Wikipedia bot is or that they exist. (I recall one particular time when someone posted to WP:TH back when it was still a splash page thanking GaiaGirl for her help. GaiaGirl is a part of The Wikipedia Adventure.) Gestrid (talk) 19:51, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
{{U}|Tigraan}} does that give you something to work on? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:32, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
I don't think I would have much trouble implementing any threshold that is decided on as long as it doesn't take esoteric invokations of the API. I agree autoconfirmed is too low, I meant ECP but somehow mixed up the two when typing the above.
I take it that unless otherwise instructed at bot approval, I will make no difference between IP and logged in editors. (That's marginally less work, yeah!) So the only check I will put (in the test version at least) will be the blocked editors thing.
I have no issues with merging my codebase to HostBot if Jtmorgan (ping) agrees, but this would require either that they take up the maintenance of the bot, or that HostBot gets multiple maintainers. I am not sure that is possible. TigraanClick here to contact me 09:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
@Tigraan: I'm happy to add you as a co-maintainer of HostBot. It would probably be a good thing, for long-term stability, to have another HostBot maintainer around. There would be two steps involved: adding you as a collaborator on the GitHub repo so that you can push your local code changes there, and then adding you to the HostBot project on ToolLabs so you can pull those updates into production and edit the crontab. This will take a little coordination to set up... the good news is that it can happen at any point; e.g. you can write your code, file your bot request, run a trial, and then we can merge the functionality into HostBot at a later date (I'm sure BAG won't mind). So perhaps it makes sense to run your BAG trial from your own bot account, and we can follow up on merging after it's approved. Let me know what you think, J-Mo 13:27, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
@Jtmorgan: I intended to make the BAG request for a semi-automated trial run for a week or so before going full auto, so we are on the same wavelength here.
Before making me co-maintainer of HostBot though, you must realize that (1) I am going to need some serious tutoring about the ToolLabs etc. and (2) while I would be happy to maintain the task at hand, I am certainly not going to commit to being co-maintainer of other HostBot tasks (at least before I become familiar with bot maintenance without me screwing up big time). But we can talk about that after the initial testing. TigraanClick here to contact me 14:10, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Sounds like a good plan, Tigraan. Cheers, J-Mo 15:01, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion[edit]

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

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

There's no specific need for such rule. Pinging involved and mentioned users is standard practice on all discussion pages, the Teahouse is not an exception. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Apparently not [1]. Artw (talk)
(edit conflict) Eh? I could probably count the number of occasions there's been a substantive discussion at the Teahouse of a named editor (other than the OP of whatever the thread in question is) on the fingers of one hand; this is a help page for brand-new users seeking advice on Wikipedia policies and the technicalities of wiki markup, not a Wikipedia administrative page. Can you give any examples of the sort of discussions here that you have in mind? ‑ Iridescent 19:10, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
I am pretty sure any users responding to such threads would be more than capable of pinging if they put their minds to it. Artw (talk) 19:19, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

How to deal with socks/trolls asking Teahouse questions[edit]

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

Pinging the SPI clerks from this case, Vanjagenije, DoRD and Nthep, in case they have a view or advice on what approach is best. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
User:Cordless Larry - First, thank you for reporting any sockpuppets at WP:SPI. When I report sockpuppets, I do not notify them of the report, or say anything to indicate that I have reported them. WP:SPI is different from other noticeboards such as WP:ANI, in that there is no rule that you should notify editors. Second, the previous discussions had to do with repetitive asking of questions, such as repetitively asking the difference between oversight, revdel, and deletion. (The difference between oversight or suppression and revdel or redaction is a technical one with who can do it, how definitive it is, and when it is justified. Deletion can be done by anyone.) I don't think that there is any benefit, and there is a downside, to deleting one-time questions only because they are from sockpuppets or trolls. I will have to go back and look at what DES wrote, because I don't recall anything to the effect that deleting the question is immoral, only that it is unwise. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Just to note that while today's sock has not been asking the same question repeatedly, they have asked a number of Teahouse questions. I sort of understand your logic, but I think the bigger risk is if we continue to answer questions from clear socks, they will keep coming back with more questions. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:34, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict)I think that I would revert such deletions from the Teahouse on sight and without discussion, if I became aware of them, unless the question itself was disruptive. And what I intended to say was immoral was the entire concept of WP:DENY. If there is no rule requiring notification of an SPI, there should be. The current SPI system not uncommonly works injustice, in my view. One of these days some editor is going to be sued for declaring another to be a sock based purely on behavioral evidence. But that is a bit off the topic here, i am sorry. In any case I think deletign questions from the Teahouse because the asker is, or is alleged to be, a sock is both unwise and wrong, and also against policy. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I would not knowingly indulge a troll. But when a username unknown to me asks a reasonable-looking question, I try to answer it. If I were obliged first to form a view on whether he was a troll, it would take me too long; instead I would just give up on The Teahouse. So your reprimand, or so I read it, of me and Gråbergs Gråa Sång seemed misdirected (whereas I have a lot of respect for your work here). If you maintain somewhere a "list of known trolls", I can check it before answering questions. I see now that there is such a list at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations. I'll use it in future, though the need to do so will make me generally less inclined to try to give help. Maproom (talk) 21:45, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm very sorry if my comment came across as a reprimand, Maproom. That was certainly not my intention. My aim was simply to alert you and Gråbergs Gråa Sång that your time was likely being wasted. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:53, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Cordless Larry That was how I read it (not as a reprimand). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:08, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Also, I don't think this is a regular enough issue for anyone to need to check any list of suspect editors before answering questions here. That would waste even more time that could be spent answering questions. I just recognised this one from previous Teahouse questions and when I checked their contributions, it was clear that they were socking. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:55, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. In general I support the approach of answering questions that appear to be reasonable regardless or not of whether the OP is shown to be a sock, on the basis that the question and answer may help someone else out. My exception to this would be if the questioning is disruptive e.g. repeatedly asking the same question, or just trolling with completely off-topic posts at which point I consider removing the questions to be a reasonable action. In this particular case from one of the user pages I believe we are dealing with a young editor and the socking is competence based not malicious. Nthep (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
Back in the good old days before Teahouse was overrun with paid editors expecting us to train them for free so they could make money, I learned as much from reading others' questions as I did from the ones I asked. So if the question can provide an answer that is useful for anyone, then it shouldn't be removed or hatted. However if it is obvious trolling or WP:SOAPBOX, them stick it under a hat. And our "laundry" should be here, not on the Q&A page. If any host has a problem with another host, it should go to User talk and if wider discussion is needed, here. John from Idegon (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
In response to Cordless Larry's ping above: I don't know much about the Teahouse, or the conventions here, but if I saw a question from an account that is an obvious sockpuppet, I'd probably remove their question shortly after blocking them. I'm not going to go in to detail as to whether suspected sockpuppets should be notified (they shouldn't be) or whether WP:DENY is moral (?) or not as those are topics for their respective talk pages. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 01:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Many people come here after getting a teahouse welcome. Perhaps people could exercise a little restraint in inviting editors whose first edits don't look like a goodfaith but inexperienced newbie? ϢereSpielChequers 12:22, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
  • As to changing notifications, that's done en masse by hostbot, and I don't know that there's an effective way to vet those notifications effectively on the scale that they're happening. Overall, we should err on the side of AGF in answering apparently genuine questions, both to fulfill our core purpose (being basically a monument to AGF), and for bystanders as other's have pointed out. The Teahouse averages about a thousand views per day, which is entirely more than can be accounted for by those actually asking questions. One that note, what the actual hell happened on 31 May? Is that a bug or did we get mentioned on the cover of the New York Times? TimothyJosephWood 12:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
What's the hubbub bub? This is an extreme rarity. But if we know a troll is a troll, block, deny, ignore. Of course we AGF until we know. This has happened what, five times? As mentioned above, we seem swamped with paid editors. I think it would be great if we could focus on refining the notifications system to change whose questions we are answering, even a ten percent change. I am clueless on the tech side of that, but would gladly help if someone told me something I could do on that front.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:16, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
I would like to add that the Reference Desks have become a toxic corner of Wikipedia largely because some editors are so concerned about trolls and inappropriate questions that they increase the severity of the problem by arguing about what to do with the trolls and the inappropriate questions, and that just encourages the trolls. I think that only very very rarely is it appropriate to delete or hat a question. If someone knows that an editor is a troll, the best response is almost always to ignore then completely (not to delete the question). Questions should be deleted if they are inherently offensive, but I haven't seen questions at this Teahouse that are inherently offensive. If a question is merely repetitive, having been asked before, is there any harm in just ignoring it? I agree that trolls should be blocked, but that is an admin function. I agree that trolls should be reported at WP:AIV (even if they don't exactly qualify as vandals, because reporting them at WP:ANI feeds them). But it is better in most cases to ignore trolls by ignoring them than by deleting their questions. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
I am with Robert McClenon on this one.
We all have certain responses that worked well for our paleolithic ancestors but are poorly suited to dealing with Internet trolls.
There are other species that have the same problem; moths did fine for millions of years navigating by the light of the moon, but the same behavior causes them to beat themselves to death against electric lights (See Moth#Attraction to light). Deer did fine for a long, long time by freezing when danger approached, but this behavior is ill-suited when they are crossing a road and the danger is an oncoming car.
In like manner, humans in small hunter-gatherer groups or small farming communities did well by expressing disapproval when other humans acted certain ways. The target knew that if he/she didn't start following community norms they would face violence or be outcast. This same behavior is ill-suited for dealing with humans on the other end of an Internet connection posting under a pseudonym, and the trolls take full advantage of this.
Long, long experience, going back to pre-internet networks like USENET and FidoNet has shown us exactly how to deal with trolls: DON'T FEED THE TROLLS. Don't give them any attention, not even negative attention. Long experience has shown us that when they fail to get a reaction they usually get tired of shouting into an empty hall and go elsewhere.
Note that denying attention to trolls includes not responding when others feed the trolls. This will feel wrong. Your emotions will tell you that if you express disapproval they will stop feeding the trolls, but that is not what happens. Instead they debate whether this particular question was trolling, and they will discuss -- at length -- what our reaction to trolls should be. You will respond, others will jump in, and all you will have accomplished is to feed the troll a nice dish of Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and spam. This will attract more trolls. However, if you have the same conversation about feeding trolls on the troll-feeder's talk page you may influence his behavior without feeding the trolls. And, no, you should not post a link to that discussion on the Tea House. That would be feeding the trolls.
It may happen that a particular troll escalates his trolling and becomes more and more disruptive, hoping that someone will feed him if he behaves badly enough. If that happens, report him at WP:ANI with no indication on any Tea House page that you have done so.
Try it. It works. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
This is not feasible. You have to remove the post. That is still a denial of attention. I'm not sure whether I agree or not that in a perfect world leaving the post in place but making sure no one responds to it would be the best reaction, but it's not workable because someone else who does not know what you know about the post being that of a troll will respond, which will then inevitably result in someone else, if they know, responding about the post being troll bait ("don't waste your time because..."), which will in turn result in this kind of conversation all over again. Leaving out the revert part makes sure someone's time will be wasted, if not yours, and it is feeding the troll, because wasting someone's time is the point. You will just kick the can down the road to allow someone else to be the victim and guarantee troll nourishment. Do you remember that scene in The Social Network with the fictionalized Zuckerberg hitting refresh over and over and over watching for a response. That's your troll, with a leer, watching for someone biting. Unknowing victim, or enraged response because someone realizes what is going on: both are the point for the person. The most de-motivational thing you can do is when they refresh, their post is just gone.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:49, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Remover the post (if it was in itself legit, not disruptive) and expect to be reverted, along with a statement of who removed it and what their alleged reason was. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 13:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Fuhghettaboutit, no, you do not "have to remove the post". Removing the post feeds the trolls. The responses criticizing and/or supporting your removal feed the trolls. The revert that will follow your removal feeds the trolls. What you have to do (and by "have to" I mean "do it this way or you will be warned, and if you persist you will be blocked") is to never attempt to remove a post other than in the specific situations outlined in WP:TPOC. If you think someone is being disruptive enough to have their post removed, report them at WP:ANI and let the admins decide. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:28, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Fuhghettaboutit is right that just ignoring the question isn't a solution, because it's never going to be the case that every Teahouse host is aware that a poster is a sock or troll. That's why I responded to this case by trying to make everyone aware of the situation in a place that they would see if they were going to answer the sock's question. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
My answer is short and sweet -- the question could be of potential interest to other users, so answer it accordingly. Secondly, posting a response of "we're not going to answer your question because of X, Y, Z" could be seen as a turn-off to some new users who might not have an understanding of what is going on. That's not the environment that we want the Teahouse to be. - NsTaGaTr (Talk) 13:57, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
You're assuming we will act like the reference desk and there WILL be a revert of the removal, followed by some internecine fighting over keeping that post. If I thought that would always happen I would agree with you. But I think we're a more reasonable bunch (I'm sorry for the aspersion against RD regulars but it's needs mentioning here for my point). The convention of removal to deny feeding works seemingly everywhere on Wikipedia but there because of some alchemy it's hard to pinpoint. Regardless, reverting is the convention because allowing a troll's post to stay, so that someone's time is wasted in a good faith response, is conclusively feeding, and a harm to that good faith answerer (which harm you are guaranteeing will occur, where the reverse is not the case), and further guaranteeing the troll's continued interest by making sure their gambit to waste someone's time is successful and so verifying their fishing hole has rich pickings. If a troll gets nothing but their post gone their whole purpose is foiled. Of course, if you make this a self-fulfilling prophecy by being the person who would revert that removal, then I don't know what to say.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:06, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
What you are suggesting is a direct violation of WP:TPOC, and will get you blocked if you do it and persist persist in doing it after warnings. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:26, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Guy, WP:TPOC is utterly irrelevant: 3rd exception: "Removing harmful posts" (nor are our policies and guidelines statutes).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:05, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

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

THANK YOU[edit]

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

Thank you fr the Inviting into Teahouse[edit]

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