Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15

Note to all hosts

Hi. I've noticed that lately a few hosts are linking to very lengthy and technical pages such as (WP:NPOV, WP:NOTE, WP:RS, etc.) without attempting to really explain these pages simply. Can everyone try to minimize this behavior, please? The Teahouse is supposed to be a newbie-friendly board, but 5,000-word policy pages aren't really newbie-friendly. It's also quite possible that many of the people asking questions here have already found their way to these and failed to understand them. Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host lounge/Expectations, especially points 3 and 4, also explain what I'm trying to say here. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying we should never link to policies. Presenting them as further reading after explaining the relevant parts in newbie-friendly language is fine. So is linking to guides that were specifically made for newbies (such as Yunshui's series of "for beginners" essays). Just linking to policies and/or regurgitating the contents of highly technical essays should be avoided. On a related note, just welcoming newbies who come here (as I've seen some hosts do once in a while) also isn't as likely to be helpful as just answering the question. Perhaps a way to fix this would be to make the page on host expectations more prominent. What are your thoughts on any of this? --Jakob (talk) 00:59, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder, Jakob. You are correct that it is always best to write a brief one or two sentence summary of a policy or guideline, but it is also useful to link to the longer guideline. As for the presumption that someone already found a lengthy document and was confused by it - well, yes, that's always possible but shouldn't be assumed. If someone says, "I was confused by this page", then of course, we should try to simplify that specific page. As for greeting people, a greeting without a substantive answer is not a good idea. But adding a friendly greeting to a helpful answer is always a good thing. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:37, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Jakob (talk · contribs): Where do I find the "Yunshui series of "for beginners" essays" of which you speak? "WP:Yunshui" and "WP:For beginners" meets with no success. The link to help pages at the bottom of your Project Page doesn't point to any pages by that name, either. Thank you for your time and help, Wordreader (talk) 02:41, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
@Wordreader: See User:Yunshui/About#For_beginners. --Jakob (talk) 22:45, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, Jakob. Finding what I want on WP's technical side by searching what I think the topic might be called is THE biggest problem I have here at this site. I appreciate your time, Wordreader (talk) 17:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Talkback script now obsolete?

Since we can now use the {{ping}} function to let people know we've answered their question at the Teahouse, should we deprecate the use of the "talkback" procedure, and instead recommend that people use "ping" instead? Just an idea. --Jayron32 20:18, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jayron32: User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/autoping.js may be more to your liking, then. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 22:14, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2014

Kaitybah (talk) 17:54, 3 September 2014 (UTC) Thanks for the warm welcome

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 18:13, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Flow

The people from WMF who are creating WP:Flow are considering to use Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions as one of a handful of pages where Flow may get enabled this month (as described in the roadmap on the Flow page). I thought it would be best if people here were aw<are of that possibility before it is actually definitely decided, and can give their input about whether having a different unfinished talk page format for this page is helpful for users with problems and questions. Fram (talk) 09:06, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

The current talkpage system is not confusing and bizarrely counter-intuitive. Flow is. Therefore, flow should be avoided at all costs since this page is newbie-friendly. --Jakob (talk) 11:30, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
This is not the place to test Flow. IMO, no place is, but definitely not this newbie-friendly page. --AmaryllisGardener talk 12:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Fram posted some similar announcements in other places, I think? Not sure when Fram started working on behalf of WMF to post such announcements, but in one of the other places Fram posted such an announcement, someone from WMF popped up clarifying the situation and making clear that it was not as Fram described. Fram, are you informing the relevant people at WMF of everywhere you are posting these announcements? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:19, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Any diffs for your rather malinformed statements? I don't work on behalf of the WMF, never pretended I did. I did not post in other places, I posted in one other place, Wikipedia talk:Co-op, where I got a reply from a non-WMF editor; no one from the WMF "popped up" there. Nothing I posted has been shown to be incorrect, what has been said is that the roadmap posted by the WMF is at best a few months off. Can you please take your nonsense somewhere else? Fram (talk) 06:52, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
So you really want to split hairs? OK, good. Then, no, you only posted in multiple places of which this was one, not multiple other places. And no, no-one from the WMF appeared to correct you, but someone funded by the WMF to improve the editor experience appeared instead. Nor did I say you had implied you work for the WMF; in fact I questioned why you were apparently issuing WMF announcements without being such an employee. (This is common English usage for native speakers, btw.) How many angels can dance on a pinhead?
As for your other suggestion, that I should "take your nonsense somewhere else". I've been involved in helping out at the teahouse since soon after its inception (the Teahouse project was also financially supported by WMF, I think). I've made well over 300 edits to Teahouse pages, mainly to help new editors. I don't know how many you've made, but your statement here, that your aim is to do things that the WMF "seriously dislike", gives me an idea why you are here at the Teahouse. I am not going anywhere. You need to read up about the Teahouse and learn that it is aimed at encouraging friendlier communication and a spirit of working together - across all Teahouse pages, not just the Q&A one. Then, as Lennon said, I hope someday you will join us. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:27, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Flow test page

Hi everyone --

I'm Danny, a Product Manager at WMF, and I'm working on the new discussion system, known as Flow. I've been talking to Heather about the Teahouse for a little while, and there was a conversation about it here in June. I'd like to see if you'd be interested in checking out at the current version of Flow on a test page, and helping us to shape the new system into something that's worth using on Teahouse/Questions.

The goal for the feature is to make wiki discussions more accessible for new users, and more efficient for experienced users. The Teahouse is a really important meeting point for new and experienced people, and there are some features in the system that I think could help both groups.

We've put up a test board on Teahouse/Questions/Flow test, so you can try it out and see how it works. I think the biggest advantage for both new and experienced users is the notifications system, where users can just follow the conversations that they're a part of, and tune out the discussions that they're not interested in. Each individual discussion has its own watch star, and you can choose which conversations you want to subscribe to. When there's a reply, you get a notification in Echo that brings you back to the conversation, with the new messages highlighted.

Now, the feature is still in active development, so there are a lot of pieces that we haven't built yet. For example, we're working on a Table of Contents for the Flow board, and an in-page Search feature. We're also revising some of the elements that currently exist -- for example, right now you can't edit other users' messages. That's not really the wiki style, so we're going to make everything editable -- with a clearer signal when somebody's edited a message, and a link to the history.

So I'm not actually expecting everyone here to say that it's perfect, and we should put it on Questions by the end of the day. :) My goal right now is to find out what you think about the system so far, and what changes you'd want to make. Teahouse hosts know a lot about where new people trip up, and how to make them feel comfortable. What do you think? DannyH (WMF) (talk) 21:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm in two minds about it, personally. Well, I'm quite strongly against the Teahouse being used as a test page for Flow. Flow needs to be finished before it's deployed to something as newbie-sensitive as the Teahouse; guests need to not be confused by software that's not of production quality.
As for adopting Flow once it is finished, well, again, I'm in two minds about it, but overall, I think I'd be for it. The controversial "top posting" feature that the Teahouse has is not supported at all well by the standard Mediawiki structure, so certainly there's a technical advantage to adopting Flow in that respect. Having an interface that a new user might be more familiar with, rather than the standard Mediawiki editing mode that can be a bit daunting if you don't already know what you're doing, is also a plus. I do have reservations about having the Teahouse be fundamentally unlike editing the rest of Wikipedia, top-posting notwithstanding. Users are going to make mistakes while using Mediawiki for the first time, and perhaps it's better that they make their mistakes at the Teahouse, rather than in an article proper. Still, all in all, I think a finished Flow would be a net positive for the Teahouse. But only once it's done. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:58, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Danny, in RL I am a programme manager with several software development projects within the programme so I'm comfortable with MVP and beta releases and the knowledge that there are several iterations before a final product. So in that respect I don't have too much of an issue with the proposal. However I'm not seeing an MVP at the moment. When Flow is still lacking basics like the button that says post to lodge comments then its not something I could currently support being used here. Nthep (talk) 07:12, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I've fully protected the page (since we don't have the rights to delete it, good going WMF!), since this was implemented without consensus and without even an attempt to get consensus (note my topic about Flow above, which was the first most people here heard about this). The WMF has clearly not learned anything from all their recent fiasco's, and has no plan at all to work together with the editing community. They get wat they want. Fram (talk) 07:36, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, that'll calm things right down. Y'all need to chill about this whole thing; the creation of a Flow test page that isn't linked from anywhere else in the Teahouse, much as I disagree with it, is not the end of the world as we know it. When the WMF replaces the actual question page with Flow, or even if they did anything to actually direct newbies to Flow, then we can get incensed. Until then, I don't think that escalation and brinkmanship is a good idea. Perhaps a nice cup of tea, instead. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:03, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
A cup of tea would be great, thanks. Like you said, Flow isn't ready to replace the Questions page, and I put up the test page so that we can talk about what's most important to the Teahouse hosts. There's a long list of features that we need to build, and changes to make. So I think it would be great to talk about which of the missing pieces are most important for you.
It looks like the test page we put up here has been spiked, but you can check out the current version on Wikimedia.org Talk:Sandbox. What are the most important features that aren't there, or don't work properly? DannyH (WMF) (talk) 17:19, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
This seems like a tempest in a teapot (no pun intended). These are clearly limited test pages.--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 17:55, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Erik Moeller (WMF), DannyH (WMF) I guess you are right, but in the current situation (and anytime else really) it might be better to leave some days time between an announcement and the actual deployment of something that hasn't been specifically and explicitly (i.e. in a diff you can point to!) asked for beforehand, just to keep spirits calm. --HHill (talk) 20:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Totally. There's no urgency here.--Erik Moeller (WMF) (talk) 20:39, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
  • For what it's worth, I don't see any harm in having a space where hosts can tinker around with Flow and better understand what concerns we have if it were ever to be implemented for the Q&A work we do here. Some of those ideas have been offered already above, but I figure we would probably be able to give better feedback once we have a dedicated and local space to engage with the system. That said, other hosts who contribute here like myself have to want to do that, and if they don't want to test it then we need to lose the testing page. Personally, I think Flow is conceptually pretty interesting even if it's not really ready right now, and I like the idea of being able to test it and improve it with other hosts. I, JethroBT drop me a line 07:49, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Does "WP:SOAP" also apply to the Teahouse?

The Teahouse is set up to be "a friendly place to help new editors become accustomed to Wikipedia culture, ask questions, and develop community relationships". Questions of all types from all types of people are asked, and help is provided whenever possible. Occasionally something inappropriate may be posted, but, for the most part, the Teahouse seems to be the friendly place it is intended to be.

Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's most important concepts, so being able to properly cite sources per current Wikipedia policy is important. However, how to do this can be hard to get used to at first, especially since the style used on Wikipedia might be different than the one an editor is used to using outside of Wikipedia. That is why I feel the question "References and punctuation" asked by Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau was an excellent one. The answers given by Theroadislong, Fuhghettaboutit and ColinFine were also very good not only because they pointed out which Wikipedia policies were applicable, but because they also pointed to the page where a more detailed discussion on this topic should take place. This, in my opinion, is exactly the kind of thing the Teahouse is intended to do.

From that point, however, things seemed to get off track and the thread changed from a "question" to a "forum post". Topics completely unrelated to citation style such as the Nazis, the genocide of the American Indians, aid to Israel, Aids, breast-feeding, etc., etc. were introduced. All of these things may actually be worthy of discussion somewhere on Wikipedia, but they seem really out of place in a Teahouse question regarding the best way to insert an inline citation.

WP:SOAP says "Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a battleground, or a vehicle for propaganda, advertising and showcasing. This applies to usernames, as well as articles, categories, templates, talk page discussions, and user pages." I believe that also applies to the Teahouse which is why my initial instinct was to {{collapse}} some of these comments per WP:TPO#Off-topic posts. I wasn't sure, however, which is why I left these comments near sentences that I felt were contrary to "WP:SOAP". I left these comments as an hidden text simply to avoid any further disruption of the Teahouse page and flag some potential problems. I felt this was in accordance with both WP:HIDDEN#Appropriate uses for hidden text and WP:COMMENT; It was not an attempt to game the system or to censor any particular editor. In hindsight, it would have probably been best just to bring this straight to this talk page for proper discussion in order to avoid any misunderstanding. So, I have removed the "hidden text" and started this thread to discuss this matter. - Marchjuly (talk) 01:57, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

WP:SOAP applies to the teahouse, but enforcement of an interaction style on newbies would be counter productive. If established users need bringing into line, I suggest you try their talk pages rather than the teahouse, so as not to scare the newbies away. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:12, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
@Stuartyeates: My intention is not to bite any newcomers or discourage anyone from participating in Wikipedia. The rules do apply to us all, however, so I guess the difficulty is how to make those rules known to new editors without making it seem as if they are being single out for criticism. - Marchjuly (talk) 08:04, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

If the 1st ammmendment of the American constitution does not prevail in your "tea house", then it is not a "tea house" or "café du commerce" but a "tea party house" or its "WIKIPEDIA" peculiar avatar. Indeed, since I had brought the topic of "American biases", then, indeed, I couldn't do less than quoting those that came to my mind. As very sensibly written by Stuartyeates, I will never come back there if I may not write whatever comes to my mind, unless you find a non-hypocrite name to it and frankly call it "Manipulation house", as it stems from "March in July" :-) user. Now, as she or he emphasizes, in this discussion, I have been repeated the WIKIPEDIA footnote editing rule by three different persons insistingly pointing out that the rule is the rule, which is stating the obvious. But since all my point was precisely to change the rule, all these persons really were boring me out, and away as Stuartyeates gently underlines. Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau (talk) 05:45, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution places restrictions on the GOVERNMENT's power to restrain free speech, Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau. It does not apply to private businesses or other private entities such as WMF websites. The First Amendment does not give a paid employee of McDonald's the right to stand in the food service line shouting "McDonald's sucks! Meat is murder!" and also to keep their job. And I dislike McDonald's personally. Disrupters like that are summarily fired. Neither does it guarantee a right to start a thread about, essentially, punctuation, and swerve into the Nazis, the suppression of the Native Americans and circumcision. That, in my view, is disruptive, confrontational, tendentious editing. Please do not continue to engage in that style of discussion on this PRIVATE website. Especially at the Teahouse, which is not a place for rambunctious protests. If you continue to do so, please do not be surprised if your editing privileges (which are not rights) are restricted or removed. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:38, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
@Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau: I believe in freedom of speech, but even such a freedom can and has been limited before in certain respects. Moreover, the First Amendment to the US Constitution applies to the Federal Government of the United States, its entities, and US state governments; It doesn't apply to Wikipedia, private organizations or companies, or private individuals.
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines determine what is acceptable on Wikipedia. These policies/guidelines are based upon the consensus of the entire Wikipedia community, not just editors from one particular country. As I stated above, your original question was a good one. The answers given were also good in my opinion because they were based upon existing Wikipedia policy and not someone's person bias. Are Wikipedia's policies biased? Perhaps to a degree, but a little bias is probably unavoidable regardless of who is writing the rules. The Teahouse is intended to be a place where any Wikipedian can come and ask questions about pretty much anything related to Wikipedia. Most of the time, the answers are very helpful, but it's hard to please everyone all of the time. The Teahouse, and Wikipedia in general, is not intended to be an online forum for discussing one's personal views and opinions on various matters simply because they come to mind. Wikipedia is not a social networking site such as Facebook and Twitter, or a personal website.
I am not trying to discourage you from participating in Wikipedia. I am also not suggesting that your claim of some American bias being prevalent on Wikipedia is wrong. I am only saying that I don't think the Teahouse is the appropriate place to discuss such things. The Teahouse is not a user talk page where pretty much anything goes. The Teahouse is for all Wikipedians. Just as it would be really wrong for me to post something on the Teahouse that might lead you, a new editor, to leave Wikipedia and never come back, it would also be wrong for you to post something that might also lead some other new editor to leave and never come back. Wikipedia's rules apply to all editors; they don't just apply to the other guy. Anyway, I really hope you decided to stay and continue contributing to Wikipedia as you have been doing. Wikipedia really needs all the help it can get. - Marchjuly (talk) 08:06, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

I've said before that, as indicated by a helping person, I've raised my question in the proper place, so that the above is pointless and, having been harassed through being repeated the same thing by four different persons quite enough, I do not wich to discuss it any longer. Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau (talk) 07:59, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

@Michel Hervé Bertaux-Navoiseau: I don't believe anyone has been harassing you at all. Both my comments and Cullen328's comments were, in my opinion, entirely civil and made in good faith; They were just intended to simply point out how your post may have been contrary to certain Wikipedia policies that you might not have been familiar with. You are free of course to feel differently. If you feel that my comments were out of line, then there are options available for you to pursue listed at WP:CIVIL#Dealing with incivility. Before doing so, however, it might be a good idea for you to carefully read through WP:AOHA, WP:HA#NOT and WP:OUCH. Wikipedia's policies regarding harassment and personal attacks are quite clear and strongly enforced. Accusing other editors of improper behavior without providing evidence supported by Wikipedia policies or guidelines is considered to be a personal attack, so I suggest you consider things very carefully before continuing down that path.
No one is trying to discourage you from editing on Wikipedia. Your contributions are just as valued and important as any other editor's. However, we are all equal and, therefore, all subject to same policies and guidelines. Our common goal is make constructive edits in collaboration with other editors, so that together we can make Wikipedia the best that it can possibly be. This means we have to strive to adhere to Wikipedia's rules at all times in order to ensure we accomplish this goal with as little drama as possible. - Marchjuly (talk) 10:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

I asked the question "how to link to project gutenberg inside a reference"

and after getting an answer I wanted to reply again, I clicked the "Join this discussion " link at my question , but my comment ended under an other question.

So at the end I just added it by editing my question, but am wondering is the join this discussion link not working properly or how should i add my comment?

Thanks in advance WillemienH (talk) 17:20, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Warrenkychu

Is there any particular reason why an alias for a blocked sock-puppet has its username prominently displayed at the top of the main WP:Teahouse page? Rojomoke (talk) 12:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

  • @Rojomoke: Those profiles are randomly assigned from the guest page, so it wasn't intentional. I definitely wasn't aware that the editor was a sock until you brought it up; that said, I've removed it from the guest list and manually changed the featured guest list for now. I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:03, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks @I JethroBT:. I've been seeing that user for at least a couple of months. Is it supposed to rotate regularly or something? Rojomoke (talk) 08:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
@Rojomoke: I think HostBot is supposed to mix it up, but I'm not sure it's done so in several months. I don't maintain this bot, but Jtmorgan does, so I'll ping him to this discussion. I, JethroBT drop me a line 03:32, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. The script was taken offline for some reason. I'll run some checks and start rotation up again tomorrow. Cheers, - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 04:10, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Fixed! Lemme know if the bot hiccups. Cheers, - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 01:23, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Missing people. Not like on milk cartons, but still missed.

Hello teahouse founders, awesome founders, maître d', hosts, Senior Wranglers, fellow Junior Wranglers, and other interested parties. I was alarmed recently to see an entirely reasonable query from a university student, Skylerd23, go completely unanswered on the teahouse questions page.

While I am aware that these days see use of MLRS systems in both Eastern Europe and the Middle East, and some of us have suffered personal losses or are on raised alert status as a result, I would still hope that we could give at least a simple answer to good faith questions within a few days - or perhaps refer the question to someone with more knowledge. Let's all try to work together to help everyone that comes to the Teahouse needing help. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

To arms, to arms! I'll monitor the Q&A page more closely. Thanks for the prompt. Always good to be reminded what this is all about. Cheers, - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 01:27, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Sockpuppet host User:MirrorFreak Comment

Can I suggest that User:MirrorFreak be removed as a Teahouse host, in light of his recent block for sock puppetry [1] Using 13 different accounts to abuse us and waste our time here. Theroadislong (talk) 20:05, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Support, a sockpuppeteer should not be a Teahouse host, obviously. --AmaryllisGardener talk 20:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
 Done since he also requested it on his talk page. For the record, the block is not indefinite, though. --Jakob (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes...I'm absolutely astonished at the undue leniency regarding User:MirrorFreak's block of one week for using 13 different accounts to abuse and waste other editors time here over the past months, his edits have been extremely disruptive and unhelpful to the project. Theroadislong (talk) 20:52, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Bottom posting

All recent questions seem to be bottom posted. Problem with the script or is it being bypassed? Nthep (talk) 16:53, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

And there's also been very, very few questions of late – so few that it implies the ask a question feature is broken... Yep, I just attempted a few test posts of the script: keyed in a section header, a post, placed the four tildes; hit ask my question and bupkis. The ask-a-question box disappeared with no posting at all and no log in the page history. We should attempt to fix this fast. I have no idea if it's related, but there's an unanswered question at the help desk about a script suddenly not working (here); maybe there's a common origin java script problem? I'll go post to VPT.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:26, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Okay: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 131#The Teahouse's ask a question script is broken--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:41, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
I think that it shouldn't be "fixed". This is a good opportunity to bring Teahouse in line with the rest of Wikipedia, where new threads are always added at the bottom of discussion pages, see WP:BOTTOMPOST. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:05, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah maybe we should have that conversation again—you won't get any disagreement from me over whether we should be bottom posting, I've stated my opinion before that doing so here provides a disservice to new users and should be reversed—but meanwhile the Teahouse is broken; we haven't had a regularly scheduled new post in three days and that takes precedence over any needed consensus process as to bottom posting. It's not as if we can just leave the Teahouse as it is while that debate happens: with a header telling everyone how to post, which when they try does not work. That status quo has obviously turned away many people and in a way that would leave me with a very bad view of the competence of those running things if I was a new user with a question. And we can see that had a serious chilling effect just by noting grossly that there were 100 edits to the question forum on October 8 and only 18 from October 10 through right now. We need to either get the script fixed or make a change to the {{TH question page}} soon, giving instructions on how to post.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:01, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

I have put in a temporary fix by changing the ask a question button in the header (which conflicts for the moment with the instructions in the page notice it should be noted [fixed]), to a button that links to a new section. Per above, even though I prefer bottom posting, I am not attempting an end run to bottom posting without consensus. We need a temporary fix because the Teahouse remaining broken is untenable. If I knew how to make that link do top posting I would have, but the software's new section function defaults to bottom posting.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

One more thing, I'm not sure if many regulars are aware there been a problem so I'm going to ping a whole bunch, just by looking to see who's answered in the first page of the edit history: @Timtrent, TEB728, Nthep, Arthur goes shopping:@ColinFine, PrimeHunter, ChamithN, Yunshui:@Theroadislong, Cullen328, EuroCarGT, Dthomsen8:@Mark Miller, Vchimpanzee, Howicus, McDoobAU93:@W.carter, Marchjuly, MadScientistX11, RockMagnetist, Philg88:--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

I have certainly noticed the lack of new questions in recent days, but don't have the technical skills to figure it out. Last night, I noticed that the contents only lists about 14 recent questions. Normally, there are about 40. This is a big problem.
Let's keep the top vs. bottom of the page issue separate. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:45, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
I have reached out on Facebook to WMF programmers Brandon Harris, Oliver Keyes and James Alexander in the hope that one of them can get the ball rolling on a fix. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Great, thanks Cullen! My post at VPT has gotten nowhere (though it is the weekend). Oh, and a facepalm: I should have pinged @Kaldari: immediately, as he seems to have done a lot of the original coding and some other regulars with coding chops: @Technical 13, Writ Keeper:.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:26, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Oliver Keyes (Ironholds) suggested asking for help from Werdna and MZMcBride. I have emailed both of them. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:40, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

A lot of things seems to be broken, since I did not get the abovementioned ping. I only found this since Aftabbanoori mentioned it (thanks!) at the Teahouse when I came to check. And the top/bottom thing: It seems like prior to the total meltdown posts from computers ended up at the top and mobile edits at the bottom. So maybe check if mobile q:s are still a go. w.carter-Talk 17:42, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

I did not get the ping either. I noticed the conversation on my watch list. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:47, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Pings from other pages seems to be working. Fuhghettaboutit maybe you should repeat the all-ping from your talk page to get hold of the others. w.carter-Talk 17:52, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Pings only work if several criteria are satisfied simultaneously. It's not enough to satisfy one now and another later - it all needs to be done together, so Ironholds will not have been notified about this edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:21, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip, Redrose64. I have learned that Heatherawalls was involved in the original Teahouse programming so I have emailed her. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:00, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Jtmorgan was also involved in the beginning, and I have emailed him too. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @Heatherawalls, Missvain, and Jtmorgan: are the heads, and there was WMF research that wen into deciding that it should be top posted. I'm not convinced we should be going against the research and the foundation's wishes without a thorough discussion first. I'll look into fixing it to be top post again probably on Wednesday (busy until then with school). @Werdna, Amalthea, and Writ Keeper:, and myself are the editors I'm aware of that have done any work on the script. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 23:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Yes, this is supposed to be TOP POSTED. There is obviously a problem. I am unable to provide support technically, as I did not design the technical side of things, but, Heather and Jonathan hopefully will stop by and take a look soon. Please be patient - and yes, it should be TOP POSTED (this is how the rest of the internet works, and if the Teahouse system ain't broken, don't change it...just fix it :) So please be patient! Missvain (talk) 23:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi everyone (and thanks Cullen328 and Technical 13 for the pings). I'm looking into the script breakage now. I may or may not be able to suss out the cause... will post updates later today. Regarding top-posting, it was my decision to implement top-posting way back in 2012, and it does not seem that Wikipedia or its newcomers have been unduly harmed by that call :) But if people want to change things, I suggest someone start a new thread and we can have a poll. Let's get the gadget fixed first, though. Cheers - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 00:14, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Update: I haven't figured it out. My best guess (based primarily on timing and cryptic warnings in my browser console) is that it has something to do with last week's MediaWiki 1.25 updates, and specifically with the deprecation of certain jQuery methods. Some information here. I'll follow up with a post to WikiTech & email a few WMFer's directly, and see if we can get someone to address this as soon as possible. - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 01:52, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
I added a few links to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Question-form2‎. I'm pretty sure gerrit:118733 is to blame here. MediaWiki:Gadget-teahouse/content.js seems to be using the now-removed "ok"-type logic. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Jtmorgan: Okay, with Krinkle and Brion's help, I copied over the Teahouse infrastructure to the test Wikipedia and fixed up testwiki:MediaWiki:Gadget-teahouse/content.js. The English Wikipedia edit request was made here. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict earlier that went unnoticed...) Hi Cullen328, et al. I'm unclear what's supposed to be fixed here. There seems to be agreement that users should use the default &section=new behavior. Can't we just use the built-in "new section" tab for this?

In any case, I enabled the Teahouse gadget for my account and tried just now using Wikipedia:Teahouse/Question-form2 and it's definitely not working. I'm not sure why off-hand and it will take some poking to figure out. (It looks like Jtmorgan has now tried.)

While I understand that this issue is frustrating, I agree with the call to be patient. While you certainly have good intentions, many of the people you're pinging will be of no help to you. If we can avoid unnecessarily pinging people, that would be good. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 03:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

The Teahouse was effectively out of business for a couple of days until the recent temporary fix, so this doesn't seem to be a situation where "patience" is the appropriate response, MZMcBride. I am a content creator and Teahouse host, not a coder. I pinged people that those with coding skills suggested that I contact. How else should I have proceeded under the circumstances? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
If the Teahouse had relied on the standard, built-in method of adding talk page sections, this would not have been an issue. Using a custom JavaScript gadget that implements custom behavior was the issue here. The Teahouse is not a mission-critical or high priority project, as I understand it, so I'm not very worried about it being effectively out of business for a couple of days.
If you take a look at wmf:Template:Staff and contractors, you can see that Brandon Harris, Oliver Keyes, and James Alexander aren't really programmers. Neither are some of the others pinged here (not necessarily by you). These are all wonderful people, to be sure, but not quite the people whose attention you really needed to get. Not a big deal, just saying. I replied above with a quick fix for this specific issue. It'll require updating MediaWiki:Gadget-teahouse/content.js and undoing the changes to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Question-form2. Hope that helps. --MZMcBride (talk) 04:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
And when/where I said Wikipedia:Teahouse/Question-form2, I really meant Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions and Template:TH question page, of course. :-)
The issue should be mostly fixed now with this edit and this edit. Fuhghettaboutit will need to update Template:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions as it's a protected page. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
I contacted Brandon, James and Oliver not because I thought they would fix the problem, but instead because I know them personally and thought they might know who might be able to help. Oliver suggested you, MZMcBride, for what it's worth. Now you are expecting me to read their job descriptions before asking for a suggestion as to who might help? As for me, I consider the Teahouse "high priority" because new users are invited to ask their questions here, and we have a really good team ready, willing and able to assist them. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Right. I liked Fuhghettaboutit's approach because he mitigated the issue (by switching to the supported &action=edit&section=new interface) and he posted to the technical village pump, which is probably the only appropriate venue (other than m:Tech) for this kind of issue. For better or worse, there are limited shared on-wiki venues for reaching technical people.
I'm not blaming you for seeing the issue as urgent as a Teahouse participant, but we are (Wikipedia is) failing here on multiple, interconnected levels and I'd like to see that addressed. Ideally we should use the built-in, supported interface for posting new talk page sections. This would eliminate the need for a JavaScript gadget. If we want to use a custom JavaScript solution, it needs a clear set of code maintainers (people) who can be contacted when code becomes deprecated or gets removed, as was the case here. A modern-day phone tree for sudden issues is a nice idea (quaint, even), but I think we can do better. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I actually never got a ping here, I wouldn't have noticed if it wasn't on my watchlist. I'm guessing that someone forgot to sign or something happened that broke the pings for that edit. This was the only diff that pinged way more people than needed, and it was not Cullen that did it, it was Admin:Fuhghettaboutit (I don't even see that as too big of a deal). As far as using &section=new or the add new section tab, we don't do that because the foundation has done research and dictated that the Teahouse must be top posting. So, if we want to change that, someone will need to start a proper discussion and get the WMF to contribute to the discussion to ignore the research (or do new research to see if what they found still holds true) to get that changed. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 14:48, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm not aware the Foundation has dictated any such thing, unless you can point to evidence that they've done so. Nor does "this is how the rest of the internet works" sound credible (just Google "Top posting" and read your way down each of the opinions from the rest of the internet). Maybe lots of new users top-post in the same way that some users type in all caps for emphasis as MissVain does here, but that doesn't mean it benefits them to encourage doing things differently to how it's done throughout the rest of Wikipedia. This has been questioned repeatedly by old and new editors alike. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 15:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
  • I remember reading it somewhere in the mess of pages attached to Meta:Research:Teahouse. You can take my word for it, read though all the pages and find it yourself, or listen to what Missvain (WMF project leader Meta:User:Sarah Stierch) has written in all caps above (for a reason). Your choice. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 16:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Clicking that link gets me 'User account "Sarah Stierch" is not registered.' More to the point, there is a big difference between the Foundation publishing some research, and the Foundation dictating (your word) that the community must make new editors use the Teahouse facility in the exact opposite way to how new editors will have to use the rest of Wikipedia. I'm happy to believe the first has happened. I don't currently believe the second has happened. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:46, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Meta:User:SarahStierch accidentally added a space. The Foundation created the Teahouse as top posting. By creating it that way based on their research, I consider that dictating how it will be. The Teahouse heads have said, it will be top posting. You want to change that, I really don't care either way, but do it right and start a proper discussion (this thread isn't the place for it) and get the project leaders from the WMF to contribute. Seems simple to me. Anyways. Have a wonderful day. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) — Preceding undated comment added 20:12, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
Great, looks like it's fixed. Thanks to all involved. I will go revert my changes to the page notice. Meanwhile, I find the idea fixing this was not a high priority matter incredible, as one of our premier first contact forums with new users. I stand by my (and Cullen's) contacting of multiple users as eminently proper in the absence of omniscience and must say find the mild reproach distasteful. On another matter, this is and was not the forum for a new discussion of bottom versus top posting but I do think we should have that discussion again at some point.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:34, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for getting on this so quickly. Especially Cullen328, Fuhghettaboutit for temp fixes and outreach, and MZMcBride for fixing the gadget. I think it was wise to ping widely. I'm sure that no one minded getting the alert--most of the Foundation staff who were pinged are big fans of the Teahouse :) And while TH might not be a "high priority initiative" in that the Foundation isn't throwing money or developers at it, it's a pretty critical piece of our new editor support infrastructure, linked to all over the place. In future, if anything needs fast fixing and you don't want to cast such a wide net, you can contact me through any of the contact channels listed on my staff account userpage and I'll happily canvas on your behalf. - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 20:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

To be clear, if the ability to add new talk page sections to a page were broken across Wikimedia wikis, that would certainly be a high priority. But one forum on one wiki being broken generally isn't, even if it serves new users. And, again, I understand that people more involved in the Teahouse day-to-day will view this as higher priority than people who are less involved day-to-day. That's perfectly all right. :-) Other ways in which we failed here, as I see it: (a) not having Flow or some other reasonable talk page system (I looked into the talk page archives a bit last night and the past discussions about Flow were a bit bleak...); and (b) related to the above comment about contacting maintainers, we should have a clearer process for reporting bugs/filing technical issues across Wikimedia. Phabricator may help with this, as Bugzilla apparently scares people. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:14, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I already have an account. Why should I have to open another account to report a bug? As for Flow, let's wait until it is thoroughly debugged before implementing it here. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
That is one of the reasons that we are moving from bugzilla to phabricator - as I understand it, phabricator will use your existing Wikipedia login ID and password. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Is there anything that I can do to help?Mirror Freak My Guestbook 13:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I feel stupid asking this, but…

I was reviewing the Teahouse host page and noticed that hosts have posted their profiles randomly, I think. I assumed that the guidelines suggested that new hosts or hostesses post their profiles at the bottom of the host page. What has happened (she said with a red face) is that I have ended up at the bottom! Who wants to be at the bottom? I must be vain.

  Bfpage |leave a message  13:04, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Not stupid at all Bfpage, and welcome to the Teahouse. Most new hosts post their profile at the bottom of the page, the reason they may look randomly placed is that based on activity (or lack of), HostBot (managed by Jtmorgan) moves profiles to and from the break room. There have been issues in the past where it has moved people incorrectly or has failed to complete the move (leaving the user in both places causing subsequent edits or whatnot), and if you notice that, contact Jtmorgan or myself (and I'll try to get him through other channels if needed) and he'd be happy to get it fixed up. :) — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 13:13, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah, the profiles are re-sorted on a weekly basis. The most active hosts at the top. The bot is no longer moving profiles back and forth between Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host_landing and Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host_breakroom though; there was a weird intermittent bug that caused some profiles to accidentally removed during that process. So now, the profiles are just moved up and down the same page. Cheers, 16:54, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey, I was pretty okay with your answers until I decided, based completely on my own misguided sense of importance, to actually examine the number of edits done in the Teahouse by some of the hosts who are listed. For some of these Teahouse hosts I've never seen them make even one reply. Of course I assume that they have and I'm not going to go look at their editing history just to prove something to myself. I realize you can get your name put into a project or talk page or for a portal or anything without a hitch. I have made an actual commitment to participate in the Teahouse and, if the hosts and hostesses are sorted by their activity level, well I guess that just means everyone that is listed above me (remember I'm on the bottom) is more active… Or perhaps the sorting thing isn't working. I am now making a promise to myself that I will drop this issue completely and forever. No matter how or where I'm listed as a Teahouse hostess. I still consider it a wonderful way to encourage people to continue participating in Wikipedia. Best regards, and suffering from misguided vanity,   Bfpage |leave a message  23:44, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

The bot never recorded the fact that you were a host, because there were some extra words in the edit comment when you created your profile. When HostBot sees a profile, and doesn't recognise it as belonging to a "known host", it shuffles it towards the bottom. It doesn't count your edits and rank you, it only ranks hosts it recognizes. Now HostBot recognizes you :) Cheers, - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 21:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
  • J-mo, now I'm curious why it's set up to get hosts names from the edit summary field instead of from the editor field in the history. I can understand it looking for "new section" (in case the editor is removing someone else profile for whatever reason and it's their first edit there), but it still seems odd that it wouldn't take the name from the editor list where it is much less likely to find a typo or case error... I don't know. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 23:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Answer: it's old code written by a newbie coder. ;) - J-Mo Talk to Me Email Me 00:21, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Teahouse and Wikiprojects

  • Recently I posed m:Grants:IEG/From_large_world_to_small_communities, suggesting to actively "catch" new editors based on their topic of interest and suggest them to join Wikiprojects, and to let editors who have similar interests (e.g from the Wikiproject) to help the new editors in their first steps in Wikipedia. The idea is based on observations (mainly in hewiki but also in enwiki), that editors who edit in specific topic can have much more helpful dialog with new editors (not solely technical suggestions). I would like to have your positive/negative comments or general feedback about the idea here or in m:Grants talk:IEG/From large world to small communities.
  • And in general, what do you think on "matrix management" of Teahouse across (large enough) Wikiprojects, e.g. having defined place in each Wikiproject for hosting new editors?

Thanks, Eran (talk) 08:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Hey Eran. To speak to your first point, I think it's an interesting idea. I can definitely see how getting people together based on topical interests could make for some productive results. I'm not sure that many WikiProjects are equipped with active editors who are willing to spend time working with new editors though, but I could be wrong. Have you engaged with many WikiProjects to see if there are editors there who want to help out in this manner? Places like here, the Teahouse, do have those kinds of editors, since that's the main purpose of the space, even when folks are not matched on topical interests. My main concern is whether you have evidence that people in these larger WikiProjects actually have editors who are willing to work with new editors. As for your second point, I think having localized help spaces like the Teahouse for different WikiProjects would be helpful if they were answering questions that were somehow different or couldn't be addressed well by the main Teahouse space. I, JethroBT drop me a line 08:55, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
At AFC reviewers often request help from relevant WikiProjects to review draft submissions in their topic area, only some projects really respond apropriately. Referring newbies to projects is another side of the same issue but it would require that the projects create a suitable mechanism for helping them. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:39, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
I like the idea of sending editors to WikiProjects. The larger/most active WikiProjects are the ones best suited for this. You could compare WikiProjects vs Teahouse: half of users to one and half to the other. I suspect that some WikiProjects would be more successful at dealing with new editors than others. It would be interesting to discover whether any of them are as good as the Teahouse.
I don't like the idea of matrix management. Part of what "works" in a WikiProject is helping everyone know what the other people are doing, which is hard to do if everything's on multiple talk pages. (I'm not watching this page.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
My concern is that many WikiProjects are not very active, and may not be able to answer newbie questions on a timely basis. Is there any tool for evaluating how active various projects are? As a Teahouse host, I might be inclined to link to WikiProjects more often, if I knew that a given one is active and functioning smoothly. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:33, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Cullen328, the reports in Wikipedia:Database reports/WikiProjects by changes (excl bots), (Wikipedia:Database reports/WikiProject watchers with active watchers) are useful measurements. Eran (talk) 21:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much, Eran. Those are useful lists. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:59, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Technical glitch

This morning I entered a question at Teahouse and the pop up window for drafting the questions was off center and I could not see the first few words of each sentence I was typing. I could enlarge the pop up window but I could not reposition it to page center to correct the problem. Someone may want to look at this.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 19:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

We need a template

We keep answering the same questions over and over regarding those who are creating publicity pages for their companies. I keep repeating myself over and over. I will volunteer to come up with the text for a response template, but someone will have to help edit it so that it can be inserted as a response right after the editor asks for help with their company page article creation. I still believe in being kind, courteous, encouraging and greeting everyone with a personal hello. I will try to come up with one on my own and will test it here when I think it is working properly. I came up with a personalized welcome template once. I think the only thing I won't know how to do is grab the user name from the original post and insert it right after the word, "Hello User, and welcome to the Teahouse...."

  Bfpage |leave a message  00:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

sample: template message follows:

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have asked a question that will certainly interest others with the same questions. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and so it is not the right place to tell others about your company's products or services. Since it is designed to be an encyclopedia, information on a company must be neutral and non-promotional. Advertizement-like language can't be used either. Anything copied and pasted from a company webite will cause the article to be deleted. An article about a company must be written by someone who is not an employee, owner or even affiliated with the company. If a company article is created, it must have references that are also not affiliated with the company and prove that the company is notable. Social media sites are not usually considered good references. If this doesn't help to answer your questions. Please come back to the Teahouse.

testing the template...

  Bfpage |leave a message  01:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I oppose use of templates to answer questions at the Teahouse. I think that personalized answers are one of the best things about the Teahouse. Yes, we get a lot of questions regarding writing articles about companies. Or non-profits. Some questions mention the entity by name, and some of those are clearly notable, others seem almost certainly non-notable, and others are borderline cases. Often, we don't know which company the editor has in mind. Some of these new editors display a humble, inquisitive attitude, while others are a bit pushy and demanding.
Also, each Teahouse host has their unique personality including variations in emphasis, wording and the relative importance of the various policies and guidelines we discuss.
In conclusion, each question and each host has unique characteristics, and in my view, each good faith question deserves an individualized answer from a human, not a template. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:30, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
I can see both arguments here. On the one hand my first reaction to reading the suggestion for a template was "yes absolutely we need that". I've noticed the same thing, we seem to have a few very common questions: image loading and use, companies trying to create promotional sites, and users trying to create their own bio page. It seems like a "no brainer" to have standardized responses both to save time and to increase the quality of answers. At the same time I think Cullen makes a great point about how individual responses are a great part of the teahouse. I would think just just having a template doesn't mean any host has to use it. I think it might be worth at least trying an experiment, develop a template for the 2-3 most common questions and just see how it works. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 01:23, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Let's keep it personal and let's not get lazy! We should be willing to type our answers up every time, and make it personal and welcoming! That's one of the best things about the Teahouse! Getting an answer that's just a template is simply not the same, you feel like a bot has replied to you. --AmaryllisGardener talk 01:34, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Wikimedia's efforts in order to keep Wikipedia an open and self-organizing network

We submitted a request for an IEG grant at Grants:IEG/"Wikimedia's efforts in order to keep Wikipedia an open and self-organizing network.". It concerns a systematic assessment of the (essential) formal policies to keep Wikipedia an open and self-organizing network and of all informal practices of stakeholders to support or subvert this. Your thoughts and comments would be very much appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.115.180.33 (talk) 12:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

This is something I've thought about a LOT since becoming an editor. I worry that policies which made total sense when the Internet and Wikipedia were brand new just won't be sustainable as we continue to grow. If this gets approved and you need volunteers I would be interested. I just took a quick look at the proposal and while it looks good my one reaction is that the deliverables will be what one of my bosses used to call "write only documentation"... the kind of document you get from MBA types where it says a lot of great abstract things but no real concrete specific recommendations. For this to be useful I think that is a must, not just generic philosophical conclusions but specific actionable recommendations -- including possible suggested changes to some Wikipedia policies and procedures. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 01:39, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Assistance needed with an article for deletion

@Nyctimene: Hi Nyctimene. I've moved your post to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Assistance needed with an article for deletion. This page is the talk page of the Teahouse – where the Teahouse itself is discussed. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Someone posted something on my talk page linking to here, can you remove it please, thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poundgroup (talk • contribs) 03:15, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Puzzling edits

Could someone else please check these four recent edits that look fishy to me, please?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions&diff=632302549&oldid=632302333

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions&diff=next&oldid=632302549

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions&diff=next&oldid=632302556

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions&diff=632304164&oldid=632303805

– Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 19:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Technical 13: I see your message in the last diff here, but first of all, you're editing other people's comments (for reasons that are not clear from the edits themselves), and second, the changes are breaking wikilinks, prose, and templates that were just fine before. What is going here? I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:45, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
T13 is on a drive to eliminate the <tt>...</tt> and <font>...</font> elements (they are obsolete in HTML 5, which was finally approved last week, although it's unlikely that browsers will drop support any year soon), but judging by the first two edits, seems to be using a buggy script for the purpose - it apparently replaces tt with code without checking the context. The third edit was almost right - it should have become {{tlx|D}} instead of {{tl|D}}. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:35, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
  • My apologies... I am just using wikEd to do a standard replace and picked the wrong version (picked to replace "tt" with "code" instead of using the regex one to replace "<(\/)?tt>" with "<$1code>"). I'm going through and fixing the issues now. As for the third one, I find {{Tl}} more informational than {{Tlx}} in these cases. Not sure what the concern is with the last one. I created a template to mirror the exact look of what the system displays for "Redirected from" texts and applied it to get rid of the obsolete code. Either way, thank you for bringing the first two to my attention. Will be corrected momentarily. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 20:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

I need help for protect my article which is proposed for deletion:Alexandra Mas

Dear Sir (Mrs) wikipedians, I ask you for your help about my article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandra_Mas which is being proposed for deletion by Biruitorul. First,Mr.Biruitorul was impolited because he don't left any message on may talk page. Second, his affirmations are ironic.His reason is that this painter has no notability.Anyone looking at the article looks like it is not true. The article is not 100% finalized.I am still working on it. It is about art.Alexandra Mas is a pluridisciplinar artist at age 36 with over 22 art show in entire world:France,Japan,England,Bucharest,Beograd.She create a new curent on art:Le Magnifisme.Se developed a new concept of art a la port in fashion.For me ,she is a prodigious person. She capted the atention of the known art critic Jean Deulceus,professor at LIISA ((Institut supérieur des Arts appliqués),France. Also,Alexandra Mas is the niece of the known artist Mircea Milcovitch. The article has 32 of references about Alexandra's art shows, about albums where she appear... Anyway,I feel a great desapoiment that in wikipedia can happen something like this. Anyone who read the article will se the beauty of creation of Alexandra Mas. Why so hurry to delete an article about art? I'm awaiting your (honestly of course)support. Please enter at this link if you want to help. I accept any point of view wich is honest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Alexandra_Mas

Thank you very much! Leedskalnin (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@TomStar81: Dear Tom, I tell you Alexandra Mas this aspect and she want to send to permission about text quoted from her site but she don't know how to compose the mail.I want to say the article been deleted how to show to permission wha texts are copyrigted? Leedskalnin (talk) 00:36, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Re-adding the live chat link?

Hello! The live chat link was taken out some time ago, apparently since it was messing up the formatting. Is there anyone who'd have the technical knowledge to replace it? I personally find it much easier to help in real time. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 23:33, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Community job openings at Wikimedia

Hello all! There are a few job openings on our Community teams, and I thought someone here might be interested. Feel free to share if you know someone who might be interested! JSuzuki (WMF) (talk) 00:41, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

@JSuzuki (WMF): Hi Jenn. I noticed these positions on WMF website:
Are these the positions you are referring to? Should we put interested folks in touch with you? I, JethroBT drop me a line 00:57, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
@I JethroBT: Hi! Yes, those are the positions! If you or anyone you know is interested, they can reach out to recruiting@wikimedia.org with questions or apply directly on the careers page :)

How to deal with COIs (want to make sure I have the proper info)

This is one of our most common questions. A while back I gave a new user some bad info when I said they couldn't edit at all if they have a COI and someone corrected me. (Thanks for that) So I just wanted to post my current understanding of what people with a COI can and can't do to make sure I have it right when talking to others. So if you have a COI on topic X you CAN Create a stub article for X. But you can't directly edit X after creating the stub. From that point on you have to suggest changes on the Talk page of X. Also, you have to identify on your user page and on the talk page of X that you have the COI. Is that correct? Is there anything really important I'm missing from that? --MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:30, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Yes. People with a COI are not prohibited from doing anything. They are merely strongly discouraged from editing articles about the topic where they have a COI. That comes pretty close to a prohibition, but is not quite there.
The other commonly held exception is that submitting a WP:AFC draft is not considered to be "editing an article about the topic where they have a COI", because it will be reviewed before it gets approved as an article (if it does). This leads to the slightly odd situation where COI editors are permitted (and maybe encouraged) to edit an AfC draft before it is approved, but strongly discouraged from editing that same page after it is approved. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:48, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Makes sense. thanks! --MadScientistX11 (talk) 20:08, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
My understanding is that there are limits on the types of edits that a COI editor can make. Examples are given at WP:COIADVICE, but basically any edit considered to be an obvious minor edit, i.e., something almost certain not to be challenged by another editor, is probably OK; On the other hand, COI editors should avoid making any content-related edits or anything which has the potential to be challenged. The COI editor should discuss such edits and can request that they be made, but should not make the edit themselves per WP:PSCOI#Steps for engagement. - Marchjuly (talk) 04:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Marchjuly thanks for that as well. I bookmarked the COIADVISE article and will consult before advising people here in the future. That's why I thought it was worth asking the question, it's IMO fairly subtle. BTW, if I were the God of Wikipedia I would change that. I think it's better to just keep things simple and I would say COI means you don't edit, period. But I'll just have to add that to the long list of things that would be so much better if I ruled the universe. Then again if that race of metal munching moon mice works out ruling the universe may still pan out so here's hoping... Anyway, until that time I'll keep that article in mind, thanks for the info. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 22:43, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
There are circumstances when a person perceived as having a COI is permitted to edit an article directly concerning themselves, and the most important of these is that they should be allowed to remove unsourced untruths about themselves, per WP:BLP. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:01, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
@Redrose64:That is true. WP:BLPEDIT, WP:COISELF and WP:COIADVICE allow for editors to "remove content that unambiguously violates the biography of living persons policy" from a Wikipedia article written about them. Even so, what may seem "unambiguous" to one person, may not be so unambiguous to another. So, it seems to have to be something really serious, i.e., something which would seriously harm the subject of the article if not immediately removed. In such cases, it's best to follow up by emailing WP:OTRS, posting on WP:BLPN or possibly both so that the offending material can also be removed from the edit history if needed. - Marchjuly (talk) 07:38, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
"Seriously harm" is not the severity required for BLP to come into play! It does not have to be something at that level. BLP kicks in way before that.
Secondly, if material could "seriously harm" a living subject, you certainly shouldn't be posting to a public noticeboard to get it removed from the edit history! You should be going directly to WP:RFO and using the email address given there. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
You're right Demiurge1000. Perhaps "contentious" would have been a better choice of wording on my part, but "serious" and "BLPN" were used in WP:COISELF: An exception to editing an article about yourself or someone you know is made if the article contains defamation or a serious error that needs to be corrected quickly. If you do make such an edit, follow it up with an email to WP:OTRS, Wikipedia's volunteer response team, or ask for help on WP:BLPN, our noticeboard for articles about living persons. If my interpretation of that statement was in error, then my bad. Not trying to intentionally misinform.My switch from "ask" to "post(ing)" was careless since I assumed "asking a question" implied "posting". Anyway, thanks for the correction. - Marchjuly (talk) 01:00, 21 November 2014 (UTC); edited by Marchjuly (talk) 10:05 am, 21 November 2014 (UTC+9) [Note: I didn't realize a reply was posted before I edited the above post. So, I have struck out the text that was removed and underlined the text that was added per WP:REDACT - Marchjuly (talk) 12:03, 22 November 2014 (UTC)]
No problem, glad to have helped. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Photo License

On the draft page (hopefully soon to be accepted as official page) Cave Aubaï Mema that my colleagues and I are creating, all but one of the photos were given to me by the owner and I have permission to use them on my page. There was trouble uploading them so they are cited as my own work. The other photo is my work. Proof of permission available upon request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophielake (talk • contribs) 16:37, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Sophie, I am a Junior Wrangler here at the Wikipedia TeaHouse, so please consider this to be such a request. (Actually Junior Wranglers have no powers at all, so don't take it too seriously.) Please arrange to send permission information for your uploaded images as described in Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries to one of the email addresses on that page, then add the template mentioned on that page to each of your uploaded images. This is to try and make sure your images do not get deleted unnecessarily if you wish, or the copyright owner wishes, to freely license them. Please be aware that permission only to use them on a page on Wikipedia is not sufficient.
Finally, TeaHouse questions and answers normally go at the upside-down page WP:Teahouse/Questions, so you are very welcome to ask there, either for this or for future questions. 19:14, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

External image

Hello there! I just noticed that the Sophie Hunter page has an external image which is outdated. The photo from IMDB was from 2011 but there's a newly uploaded photo that is more suitable, taken just this month. This one http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1259206656/tt2084970 or this one http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1275983872/tt2084970. I hope you can help in changing it (or removing it altogether as I don't think it's necessary to the page at all). Thank you very much!41.203.190.30 (talk) 13:14, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Greetings 41.203.190.30 welcome to the teahouse. Actually, where you posted this is really more like the Teahouse kitchen where the staff gets together to talk about how to run the teahouse. This is the teahouse talk page, it's meant for the teahouse host editors to talk about how we answer questions; not for editors to ask questions. I'm going to take the liberty of moving your question to the actual teahouse in case other hosts can answer it. Look for it here: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#External_image:_Question_Moved_from_Teahouse_Talk_to_Teahouse hosts tend to look at the actual teahouse lot more than the teahouse talk page. In the future please post questions about editing to the actual teahouse page. However, I think I can answer it as well: what you are experiencing is unfortunately a common problem with Wikipedia. Often the pictures we have for celebrities aren't the best or most recent. The reason for that is that Wikipedia has to be much more rigorous about sticking to the letter of copyright laws, Other sites have user agreements that users have to sign and those agreements shift the responsibility from the site to each individual user. Wikipedia can't do that due to the anonymous crowd sourcing way we edit content. In order for us to use an image we must have the explicit rights to it and we almost certainly won't have the right to a random picture on IMDB. You can search here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Any picture in the commons is something that can be used in Wikipedia. If you find a better picture there let us know. Here are some articles with more info on copyrights and images: Wikipedia:Basic_copyright_issues Wikipedia:Image_use_policy --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:02, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Hi MadScientistX11, thank you for trying to help the unregistered editor here, however this is not really correct. First, Wikipedia contributions are covered under an agreement, it's the one that starts with 'By clicking the "Save page" button, you agree to...' - and similar arrangements for uploading images both here and on Commons. So there is no lack of a user agreement and thus that is not an issue at all.
Secondly, Wikipedia most certainly does not demand "the explicit rights to" an image in order to use it.
The main difference between Wikipedia and other sites, in this respect, is instead the third pillar. It's worth reading up on that for a clearer idea of Wikipedia's priorities and where most of Wikipedia's policies and practices in this area come from. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 23:30, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't agree. When I use Facebook I click on a user agreement that transfers all the responsibility for posting images etc. on to me not to Facebook. If I upload a picture of Bono and his record company decides to start suing people who upload illegal pictures when they go to complain to Facebook, Facebook will send them to the individual user and say to the record company "gee sorry but we can't help it if our users violate the agreements they clicked on, go sue them." Of course there is a user agreement for Wikipedia as well but where as the agreement I click on for Facebook provides them with some serious legal wiggle room it's not the same for Wikipedia. Anyone can edit anything on Wikipedia. And Wikipedia doesn't even try to authenticate most users where as Facebook at least pretends to. So if Time Warner goes to sue Wikipedia they have a much better case against us than they do against Facebook. I may be getting some of the details wrong, I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure that is all correct. As for "explicit rights" all I meant is that on most sites you can just copy and paste images without worrying about the rights at all. Strictly speaking that's illegal but everyone does it anyway but here (also if you ever manage a corporate web site they also pay strict attention to this stuff) we do. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

REALLY HELP

I am (user:Halias 23), on another account, I could not recover my password, I really need help to to regain my old account, thanks (user:ELreydeEspana) 12:27 1 November (UTC)

This has been answered at other pages. w.carter-Talk 21:06, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

OneClickArchiver on the Teahouse Questions page

Hey everyone! I don't know if you are aware of this, but I am now the maintainer for User:Equazcion/OneClickArchiver as the result of me making a sandbox version to request additional features to the script shortly after Equazcion's unannounced retirement from Wikipedia. As a result, I've been checking here and there and everywhere and in the process of doing so, I found that it didn't work, as I expected it would, on the THQ page. I figured out the reason it doesn't work for me on the page is the on-by-default THQ "Ask a question" gadget modifies the section headers in a way that disrupts the script's ability to find the edit link which it requires to know which section number it is. The problem is, that anyone with that gadget disabled would still be able to archive sections using the script. I've disabled this by including the THQ page in a category that the script checks against to exclude pages from using the script for this.
My question here is: should the script be allowed to run on the THQ page, and if so, what should the requirements for its use be (number of edits, membership in a usergroup, age of account, some other requirement)? Thanks for any input you can offer! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 01:12, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Removed Question

A question was just removed as per the Reference Desk guidelines. The removal text said that we cannot provide medical or legal advice, and went on about types of medical advice that we will not provide. The question that was removed was asking legal advice rather than medical advice. My related questions are, first, whether that was the text in a standard substituted template, which contained boilerplate that was more appropriate to a different type of removal, and, second, if there is a legal advice removal template. I am not questioning the removal of the question (although at the Help Desk, the question is usually left standing with a disclaimer, but may be boxed or hatted.) Robert McClenon (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

That's the first time I've seen that template, honestly. @Dodger67:, as you are the one who responded to the question, are you aware of a template that is more specific for legal advice? I, JethroBT drop me a line 23:46, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Try {{HD/leg}} RudolfRed (talk) 23:58, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Join this discussion Hover box

I want to know how to implement; on any page; the functionality which creates a link next to Section headers which leads to a hoverbox for easy replies. This is in reference to Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Something more helpful than .5Bedit.5D_near_section_headers_on_the_Help_Desk. --Fauzan✆ talk✉ mail 14:00, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Request an account process needs help

Hello everyone, I'm Callanecc, an administrator on account creation interface. Recently, our project has had an increased backlog in getting accounts for new users. Our numbers are currently over 250 people waiting for accounts on the English Wikipedia. If you could even spare a moment to do a few requests a day to help us clear this backlog, that would go a long way to encouraging new editors to participate with an account. If this interests you and you're willing to help, and you match the following description, then please do apply! Ideal users are:

We have a very friendly team to help you get started, we also have a private IRC channel where you can ask questions or get help with difficult account requests. If you have any questions for us or about the process, feel free to ask at the talkpage. If you can help out, we would greatly appreciate it. For the ACC team, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callanecc (talk • contribs) 19:32, December 4, 2013‎

Please remember to sign your posts with four tides!!!

E-e-bayer lover (talk) 21:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

pawak

Can this user be reprimanded re his threatening and patronizing language please— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.100.248.212 (talk • contribs)

Please remember to sign your posts with four tides!!!

E-e-bayer lover (talk) 21:14, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

About Editing

I'm a super beginner in this whole editing process. What constitutes a major from a minor edit? Aside from the extremes what is the standard that makes something a major edit? Thx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attilan (talk • contribs) 07:14, 15 December 2014 (UTC) Attilan (talk) 07:17, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

@Attilan: Next to the minor edit checkbox, it says "This is a minor edit" - that should have a link explaining it. If not, see Help:Minor edit. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:18, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
@Redrose64 Thank you! Right in front of me and I didn't even know it. I'm sure you're busy but can I ask you to check my edits? So appreciate it. Attilan (talk) 05:09, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
@Attilan: Most of the edits that you marked as minor were indeed minor edits. A few were not, such as where you added a paragraph [2]; [3]; and [4], or significantly changed the meaning of a paragraph [5]. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:25, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Teahouse/Archive_9&oldid=1142662776"