Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Archive 27#Bot inoperable

Hi all. My son has recently been dipping his hand into editing and accidentally made an edit using a device I was logged in with (unbeknownst to me, they'd been asking questions at the Teahouse). I'm really sorry about this but the device is back under my control. I've reverted the edit but is there anything else I should do? I will obviously recluse myself from answering his questions! Cordless Larry (talk) 17:24, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

:The edit has now been suppressed by request, which reduces my embarrassment somewhat, though I still feel pretty silly that I allowed this to happen. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:52, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

:I suppose I'm biased, but of all the things which could be done with a compromised admin account, asking a (good faith) question at the Teahouse is the best possible one. {{emoji|1F609}} 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:11, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

::I agree, this is probably the best outcome that one could hope for in a situation like this. — Mugtheboss (talk) 16:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Why is the Teahouse not indexed by default? Toadette ^(chat)/_(logs) 18:07, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

:@ToadetteEdit It's not something I've really thought about, but, because completed Teahouse discussions get archived after just a few days, I imagine there'd be little point in search engines indexing them. Any links to discussions would soon be redundant. In addition, individual discussion threads appearing outside of the Wikipedia space would probably attract unwanted and irrelevant attention from non-Wikipedia users and end up being disruptive to our work in supporting the needs of active editors. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

:The Teahouse, and the Help desk, are not "part of the encyclopedia". They exist to help with the construction of the encyclopedia. This is also true of user pages, and article talk pages, and drafts, and policy guides. Only actual articles, and disambiguation pages and suchlike, constitute the encyclopedia itself. Maproom (talk) 21:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Help at User:AnomieBOT/SPERTable and User:AnomieBOT/EPERTable is appreciated. The amount of unresponded requests is increasing, and these can be nice for new users (autoconfirmed) as well, since most are just minor typo fixes. NotAGenious (talk) 05:54, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

:@NotAGenious: I reviewed each request and responded to a few. There are no more minor typo fix requests. GoingBatty (talk) 14:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

::There were ~10, but I did most of them last night. My point was that typo fix requests are indeed common. NotAGenious (talk) 14:23, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Just a gentle reminder to all hosts who might in the future change their Usernames to ensure that they also change their entry in our list of hosts, please. New users following links from the 'Meet your hosts' page are liable to be confused if they arrive at a page with a different name. I've just fixed four that needed changing, and it'd be great if editors would think about making this update themselves, as I only ever check the list in detail every 6 months or so. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:07, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi All. I was directed to this space to find 3-5 editors are interested in joining us and other editors in a remote online workshop to talk about Wikipedia community values and how they interplay with research that is conducted on/with Wikipedia. We're in a bit of a bind with scheduling a synchronous workshop and would really appreciate any help! If this is not the space for this kind of request, I apologize in advance and will promptly remove this post. If you're interested, you can learn more at our Meta Research Page. Leave a comment here or on our talk page and I can reach out with more information. Zentavious (talk) 16:00, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

:Hi Zentavious. As this page is for the management of the Teahouse help forum, and is likely to be watched by experienced editors who act as 'Hosts' to assist newcomers in issues around editing Wikipedia, I think some of them may well be interested in having an input into your research. So, I suggest your post remains.

:However, I think there are other fora where you could more effectively seek input from us.

:One of those is to repeat your post at WP:Village pump (miscellaneous) - a place to raise matters that don't neatly fit into our many other specific fora. (It has 2,600 people 'watching' it.)

:The other forum, when you want to reach administrators and a suite of very active (and often quite opinionated!) editors, is to post at WP:Administrators' noticeboard. (5,260 watchers).

:If you haven't yet seen them, you might wish to read and and follow relevant links at these pages on English Wikipedia:

:*WP:NOTLAB (this is a subsection of one of our Policies that we require all researchers to follow.)

:*WP:Ethically researching Wikipedia (an Information page)

:*Wikipedia:Research (just an essay, and not a formal Policy or Guideline)

:*WP:Disruptive editing (a behavioural guideline that we expect anyone doing academic research on Wikipedia does not fall foul of)

:I hope you might find some of this helpful. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

::Hi @Nick Moyes, thank you so much for your guidance. I'm familiar with a few of those pages! I will definitely raise this on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous). Cheers, Zentavious (talk) 14:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Both here and at WP:Help Desk there are frequently questions about about a "profile" (or, worse, "my profile") meaning an article about that person (or, worse, themselves). The mere presence of the word "profile" in this context triggers the thought that the enquirer subconsciously thinks that Wikipedia is in the same category as social media services such as Facebook, Twitter/X, Instagram, etc. and about the person in question promoting themselves and having controls over their "profile" there.

Might it be useful to have a guideline or essay, perhaps WP:Article not Profile, to which such enquirers could be immediately directed, as the first port of call, to learn the background and context of how WP articles and social media profiles are very different?

Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

:{{re|Feline Hymnic}} WP:NOTCV could be a good start in such cases, but I agree a separate guideline may be helpful, too. --CiaPan (talk) 22:38, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

::{{re|CiaPan}} Oh, I'd overlooked WP:NOTCV. Thanks for the pointer/reminder to it! Feline Hymnic (talk) 22:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

:::@Feline Hymnic {{re|CiaPan}} As a point of interest, it probably didn't help that, until mid-2019, Teahouse hosts were still telling people "We don't have profiles here!" whilst our own Teahouse page continued to present "Host Profiles" ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ATeahouse%2FHosts&diff=900234753&oldid=900149108 diff]). We even encouraged 'Guest Profiles' in the early years of the Teahouse, too! (see here). Nick Moyes (talk) 23:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

::::{{re|Nick Moyes}} And we also say (correctly) "articles, not pages", implicitly referring to article space. Yet we often use "page" when referring to the (very different) "User:" space! Feline Hymnic (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::That is very true! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:01, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

:::::I added "profile" to WP:NOTCV. Cullen328 (talk) 00:22, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

:::::I'd say articles are a subset of pages rather than mutually exclusive. For the sake of avoiding redundant essays, improving NOTCV to address the queries here seems a good solution. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 14:30, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::{{+1}}{{pb}}All Wikipedia articles are pages, but not all Wikipedia pages are articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:14, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::Indeed. Telling new users "we don't have pages, we have articles" is totally unhelpful. -- asilvering (talk) 16:51, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

:::::::I hope it would be helpful to emphasize that Wikipedia has encyclopedia articles that are independent of their subjects, not social media profiles. Hopefully people are familiar enough with traditional encyclopedias and social media to understand the difference in such a comparison. GoingBatty (talk) 17:13, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

::::: I added shortcut WP:NOTPROFILE. Mathglot (talk) 18:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::I'd thought about that. But thanks for actually doing it! Nick Moyes (talk) 22:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

I see that {{ping|ColinFine}} seems to have some useful standard text. Might this be useful to include or abstract?

{{Blockquote|

Hello, , and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you are in the same position as thousands of other people who ask questions here, who register an account, and immediately plunge into one of the most challenging tasks there is: creating a new article. This is like buying a musical instrument you have never played before, and immediately going out busking: you are going to have a frustrating and miserable time.

I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million articles before they try to create a new article. (They will probably over those months add far more value to Wikipedia than they would by trying to make an article before they are ready).

When you think you might be ready to try creating an article, read WP:YFA and especially NCORP (if it is a company). For most companies in the world you will quickly discover that there are not sufficient quality sources to establish notability, and there is no point in trying to create an article about them.

}}

Feline Hymnic (talk) 13:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

:Thank you, Feline Hymnic. A few years ago I did distil something I often wrote into a template, {{tl|HD/WINI}}, which I still often use. But I haven't distilled the above - so far. Anybody else is welcome to do so.

:On the main subject, I see that back in 2012 I started writing an essay User:ColinFine/Wikipedia doesn't have profiles, but I didn't get very far. ColinFine (talk) 14:15, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

:@Feline Hymnic {{ping|ColinFine}} Hi there! I like your template, but wonder if "busking" is a common enough word for people to understand. Maybe replace it with "performing"? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 16:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

::Not my template; ColinFine's! Feline Hymnic (talk) 16:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

:::@Feline Hymnic: Apologies for that. Fixed the ping. GoingBatty (talk) 16:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

::I haven't made this into a template so far, GoingBatty. I used to talk about "playing a recital", but I thought that would be too far from many people's experience: everybody knows buskers, but perhaps not the word. ColinFine (talk) 22:45, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

:I find it useful to say something like this, though as a personal rule I don't use canned responses aside from {{tl|welcometea}} here at the Teahouse. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

::Me too. I maintain a long page of 'useful' answers that I've written which I feel I might want to use again - but I rarely do, preferring to write a bespoke answer each time to make life more interesting. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Excuse my asking, as I'm sure there are good reasons, but why was my question about how to add sections to articles removed? Did I put it in the wrong place or word anything the wrong way? I hope that it can be restored for myself and other users if we want to add sections to articles, if you don't mind my repetition. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 01:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

I asked this question before but it got deleted for some reason.

I want to add a section about live events to the Tree Fu Tom Wikipedia page, but I don't know how. I would look here, but as I said, my question on that got deleted. I won't ask anyone to answer again in case it gets deleted again, but can someone please add a tutorial on how to add sections on that tutorial on how to use Wikipedia? Triviatronic9000 (talk) 02:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

:Hello, {{u|Triviatronic9000}}. Your question was not removed. It was archived. Here is the answer I wrote for you on November 1. Inactive threads get archived in two to three days. Cullen328 (talk) 02:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

::Hello, Triviatronic9000. Please read Help:Section. I use the source editor, which makes it very easy to create a section. In the edit window, on a new line, you type two equal signs, then the new section mame, then two more equal signs. The wikicode code looks like this:

::==New section==

::It is that easy. Cullen328 (talk) 02:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

:Worth noting it was archived, after 48 hours; but the archive then got borked by an unclosed reference added in a later update on 6 November, which I've just fixed [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1204&diff=prev&oldid=1183882368 diff]. So the archived question can now be seen at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1204#Adding Sections to Articles. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

:{{ec}}Hi {{u|Triviatronic9000}}. As pointed out above, your questions were archived; the first one can be found at :Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1199#Adding Sections to Articles and the second one (the one Cullen328 answered) can be found at :Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1204#Adding Sections to Articles. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:18, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

::Thanks. Not just you but everyone who replied. Why archive the question? One of the reasons I ask is so that anyone who comes wanting to have the same question I had answered can have it answered without asking. Sorry if I sound... spoiled, for lack of a better word for asking. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 03:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

:::Because otherwise the page gets too long. It is a very high traffic page - lots of questions per day. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

::::Ah. Reasonable enough, I suppose. Thanks Triviatronic9000 (talk) 03:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

:::::Yeah, if we didn't archive it, it would be illegible and take forever to load... sort of like EEng's talk page but not that bad, obviously.{{FBDB}} Edward-Woodrow (talk) 22:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

As a general note, Teahouse hosts should probably, at least once, enable the Newcomer Homepage in their preferences. All new accounts have this turned on by default, and it is their landing page, on par with, and as accessible as, their User: and User talk: pages.{{pb}}Hosts not being familiar with, for example, what the Impact Module looks like is probably just as inexplicable to newer editors as it feels to us whenever we encounter someone who doesn't know they have a talkpage. Folly Mox (talk) 13:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

:Thank you for the advice. I had a look at my "Homepage". I learned from the "Impact" seesion that the most viewed article I've edited was Star of David. I've no recollection of ever editing (or even reading) it; maybe I did once. I was encouraged to do some copy-editing on Hui mian, and did so. Then I found that the most viewed article I've edited is now Macau. I learned that I have a mentor, who has made about 1/10 as many edits as me.

:If a new user ever asks me about their Newcomer Homepage, I shall tell them that it's a rather weird place which they can safely ignore. Maproom (talk) 17:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

::Oh right I forgot to mention you may be assigned a mentor you'll have to unassign. That happened to me too.{{pb}}And yeah, the Impact Module is kinda misrepresentative. It caps out the "edits in the past 60 days" stat at 1000, for example, and teaches us more about pageviews than our own contributions (I doubt my fix of a single template error in a reference on the article Google improved the reading experience for all 400,000+ people who opened the article since then). But yeah it's the new default so may as well experience it to stay in touch with the kids these days. Folly Mox (talk) 08:44, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

:::The impact part of somebody else's Special:Homepage can be seen by manually making a link like Special:Impact/Folly Mox. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::::I have made User:PrimeHunter/Impact.js which adds an "Impact" link for a user whose userspace you are in. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::::: This is very useful to know. Thank you {{u|PrimeHunter}} and thank you, {{u|Folly Mox}}. I agree that hosts should probably be familiar with all the Growth Team features and at least some general knowledge of the mentoring and editor retaining efforts. --ARoseWolf 13:25, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

—since I try to help a lot anyway. I haven't done so yet because I've spent a considerable time learning on the job, including how to always be friendly and as helpful as possible. Of course it doesn't mean anything particular, I just wanted others to know that me adding myself to the host list is coming with an explicit commitment to be the best host possible. :) cheers! Remsense留 23:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

:Nice to have you involved {{smiley}} {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:01, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

: Welcome to hosting and I echo @Sdkb. It is nice to have you involved. --ARoseWolf 13:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

So, I've installed the talkback script, and am getting into the habit of using it—but I do note that it asks for the question to be reentered—it seems possible that this could be done automatically, since the button is in the context of a header on the page regardless. I assume this has been discussed before? Remsense留 06:49, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:You're referring to User:Qwerfjkl/scripts/talkback? I haven't used that script and aren't too familiar with it, but you could share suggestions with the script's author, Qwerfjkl.

:Putting talkbacks on users' talk pages has become less important now that the WP:Talk pages project has rolled out the subscription feature, which makes it so that editors will now automatically be notified about replies to threads they start at the Teahouse, even if we forget to ping them (which we always should, since it'll result in a bolder red notification rather than a blue one). A talkback will still give them the orange bar, which is the most noticeable of all, but I don't tend to bother with it unless I see someone continuing a behavior seemingly unaware of a response at the Teahouse. In our role educating editors about how Wikipedia works, we should be modeling normal pinging behavior, and talkbacks aren't used anywhere else these days. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

::That makes sense, thank you—I {{em|did}} feel the TB was a bit of a "making extra extra sure" gesture—I just wanted to make sure I was acting inline with expectations in the Teahouse host guidelines. Perhaps they should be tweaked to reflect this? Remsense留 10:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:::Yes, I'd support that. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

From the link on the Teahouse page, I was reading https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Teahouse, where it says {{tpq|Although the project will welcome all good faith new users, women are a particular target population.}} Is this true? I have been a Teahouse regular for many years and I have never seen anything at the Teahouse or anywhere else on Wikipedia that suggests it is targeting women users, only that it is supposed to be friendly for any new user. Was this a goal at one time that has since been dropped, or is there something I am missing that encourages women to come to the Teahouse?

RudolfRed (talk) 20:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

:@RudolfRed: I noted that the phrase "women are a particular target population" was in the original version of the Wikimedia page from 29 November 2011. I'm not aware of people making a special effort now to encourage women in particular to come to the Teahouse (but there are many things of which I'm not aware). GoingBatty (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

:The Teahouse arose out of a bunch of Foundation research on welcoming new users; the version that operates today has evolved a lot from that. Wanting to welcome women may have influenced some of the earlier decisions, such as the Teahouse's visual design. Today, I think the friendliness approach we take is naturally more likely to aid female editors who come here, given that women are less likely to endure hostile online environments than men. I also know that when culling the list of active Teahouse hosts in the past, we've given a bit more leniency to female hosts. Trying to make the Teahouse welcoming to women should be something we always have in mind as we try to fight systemic bias, but it dovetails pretty well with the things we do to make it welcoming for folks of all genders. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

::"Today, I think the friendliness approach we take is naturally more likely to aid female editors who come here, given that women are less likely to endure hostile online environments than men." Not true.

::"I also know that when culling the list of active Teahouse hosts in the past, we've given a bit more leniency to female hosts." Care to elaborate? Biolitblue (talk) 01:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

:RudolfRed, while it is old verbiage, I do agree with Sdkb on the benefits offering a variety of social approaches may potentially have for editors of different genders. — Remsense诉 23:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

: Thanks, everyone, for the replies. RudolfRed (talk) 04:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

::I was thinking it was a vandalism leftover, as a woman myself, it really confuses me, and I think it should be removed as to promote neutrality and/or positivity among all groups. Cometkeiko (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

:::Cometkeiko, this seems perfectly reasonable, especially as it's not contingent to the goals of the Teahouse at present. I would be interested in hearing more from others about removing the passage. — Remsense诉 12:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

::::I think the meta page is at this point largely a historical report document indicating how the foundation thought about the Teahouse c. 2012. I wouldn't be opposed with a notice at the top indicating that more clearly, but I don't think it'd be appropriate for us to change it. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

::::: I don't have an issue with it staying as is. --ARoseWolf 16:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

:Thanks, @CactiStaccingCrane, but wouldn't this be a bit better placed on the talk page? 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

::(And now it is on the talk page, due to MAGIC {{emoji|1F609}}) 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

:::-:-) CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 02:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

:Brilliant idea indeed, but I thought barnstars are for users. Abdullah raji (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

::I remember that a very long Wiki-time ago (in about 2006 or so), a group received a "WikiMedal for janitorial services" (I was one of them). Not a barnstar per se, but I always took it that if an award is given to a group, everyone involved (say, Teahouse hosts) have been awarded the recognition. Lectonar (talk) 14:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Is Teahouse Host a formal position here, like Administrator? Or is it more like Editor in Wikipedia at large, referring to anybody who ever comments on a question (or adds a comma to an article)? Uporządnicki (talk) 15:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

:Slightly in between — there's a listing at WP:Teahouse/Hosts, which is the sense in which it's formal, but anyone can help respond to queries. Sdkb ^talk 15:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

:I haven't joined the official list because I don't want to feel an obligation to contribute regularly. There are several regular contributors who are not on the list and a few that are on the list but almost never contribute. Nick Moyes occasionally removes those who have stopped contributing. The only important requirements for contributors, IMO, is that their answers are largely accurate and made politely. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

:I believe it's a holdover from when the Teahouse was first established, but the concept doesn't hold any significance as to who may answer questions, so long as said answers are accurate, courteous, and helpful. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

:@AzseicsoK As has been said, it's a very informal title which people who do feel they help out here quite a lot here might wish to give themselves. But anyone is free to answer other users' questions at any time without signing up as a Host (so long as they give helpful answers!). I regard it is a very good first step for some editors who are becoming interested in some of the behind-the-scenes administration and support work to do. That's probably how I started my own journey to becoming an admin when @Cullen328 suggested I participated here as a Host. It taught me so much (and I'm still learning from other people's answers to this day)

:All that said, a very tiny number of editors do occasionally sign themselves up as a 'Host' for the wrong reasons (see WP:HATCOLLECT or WP:CIR) and they do get removed in due course, as do those who have never made much - or any - contribution here, or have got themselves blocked or regularly warned for inappropriate behaviour. The key things any Host needs is to be polite, patient, helpful and welcoming.

:You will find a tiny handful of names of editors on the host list who are not actively answering questions nowadays, but have nevertheless played a very significant role in the establishment and running of the Teahouse in the past, or who still do research or bot-related activities here. I hope this additional info is of interest. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

::{{tq|and I'm still learning from other people's answers to this day}} is probably the most relatable thing here. I've got this place watchlisted primarily to answer questions I feel I can answer, but also just to learn stuff I probably never would've done by contributing anywhere elsewhere. There's such a wide array of questions asked here that you'll never stop learning. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

In signing up to be a Teahouse host I have managed to mess up the formatting of my entry (specifically the image). Obligatory {{Self-trout}}. If anyone knows how to retroactively amend this do let me know! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 22:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

:@Unexpectedlydian: {{fixed}} in this edit. The template only calls for the file name and nothing else. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:38, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

::Amazing, thank you Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 22:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Someone (preferably an admin) should probably close :WP:THQ#Notice: I am considering quitting everything since it's a discussion that's going nowhere and seems more for the OP's vanity than anything else. I would close it myself, but I've just commented in it and feel it would be a bit odd for me to do so. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:50, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

:@Marchjuly I'm not sure closing is really necessary. Looks to me like it's come to a natural end and isn't going to continue. But feel free to close it if you wish. (As you know, I commented, too). Nick Moyes (talk) 19:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

::You're right {{u|Nick Moyes|Nick}}. I was actually going to self-revert this post first thing since I reached the same assessment, but I'll leave it here now just for reference. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

File:Information icon4.svg There is currently a discussion at WT:Drafts regarding a proposed split of WP:Drafts. The thread is WT:Drafts#Split into help page and guideline. Thank you. S0091 (talk) 17:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

:The wikilink is messed up a bit. The discussion is at Wikipedia talk:Drafts#Split into help page and guideline. —⁠andrybak (talk) 00:00, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

It appears that the bot that leaves talk page notifications that Teahouse threads have been active archived has gone inoperable, and the operator hasn't been around in a few months. Would anyone be interested in taking over the task or filing a request for it to be taken over? Sdkb ^talk 19:32, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

:For the curious, Tigraan noted back in November 2022 at User talk:Tigraan/Archive 3#Problem with Teahouse notification template that {{tq|The server [Muninnbot] was running on was shut down and I am supposed to migrate the tool to another one, but I procrastinated doing that. (No promise about when I will fix it.)}} Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

::See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tigraan#Muninnbot:_Digging_Teahouse_archive_links_failure Nick Moyes (talk) 00:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

:::To keep discussion on one place, I notified WP:BOTREQ of the existing discussion here. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:13, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

:Maintainer: {{u|Tigraan}} (inactive 4 months)

:Bot: {{u|Muninnbot}}

:Source code: https://gitlab.com/Tigraan/Teahouse-bot/-/blob/master/scripts/teahouse_archival_bot.py

:BRFA: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Muninnbot

:Toolforge account: [https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/tools/toolforge-muninnbot Muninnbot] –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:59, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

::If what is needed is someone to run and maintain the bot could a current bot op take over the task with the same code on a new bot account? Geardona (talk to me?) 12:14, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

::@Novem Linguae, is the old source code still functional? – DreamRimmer (talk) 15:19, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

:::Not sure. I think the next step is someone needs to do wikitech:Help:Toolforge/Abandoned tool policy. –Novem Linguae (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

::::I've notified Tigraan on their talk pages and via email, as required by the policy :) Frostly (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

:::::Courtesy link: User talk:Tigraan#Muninnbot (permalink just in case). Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

• Hi folks, bot operator here. Thanks for the notification. I would like to get back to Wikipedia contributions and Muninnbot, but honestly I am not sure I can make that promise due to real-life events. I can however promise to stay around and answer queries in the next couple of weeks or so.

:What stopped the bot was the migration of Toolforge server. I was supposed to move to the new server, but did not. (Just to be clear: I am not blaming the migration team, the messages were perfectly clear about what ought to be done and by what time.) The code itself should be still working. I have not tested, so changes to dependencies (deprecations etc.) could have broken it; but at least it’s worth a shot. Note also that it has a dead man’s switch, running a couple of unit tests before posting notifications all around, and stopping if any of those fail; that is not guaranteed to catch every bug of course, but it will catch some of them. Looking at the code, it certainly is not perfect but it aged way better than my other years-old projects did. All the important Python code is in [https://gitlab.com/Tigraan/Teahouse-bot/-/blob/master/scripts/teahouse_archival_bot.py?ref_type=heads this Python file], which should be run via a cron job.

:The only problem I can envision to getting it back up is the one described at User:Muninnbot/doc#Race_condition_with_lowercase_sigmabot_III: as it stands, the script must be run exactly once between two archival runs, else notifications are missed or duplicated. Back when I set it up, LS3 ran once every day around 5:00UTC, hence just running the bot once a day at a time different from that worked. However, looking at the TH history right now I can see timestamps at various points around the clock. This may be buggy behavior from LS3 (User_talk:Σ seems to mention issues with the bot), but I do not think "runs every day at the same time" was ever a promise made by that bot, so relying on it is not good software design anyway. Fixing it would require development but should not be too hard (simple fix off the top of my head: have a log file that contains the ID of the last LS3 edit to be processed, process every LS3 edit that occurred after that one, update the log).

:So... next steps that I see:

:#(done) Anyone interested in becoming co-maintainer ({{U|Frostly}}, {{U|usernamekiran}}, any others?) files the Toolforge paperwork for adopting the tool. Feel free to link to this post as proof I did not object. I will also specifically say that access to the Toolforge for the tool should include access to secrets therein (I am 90% sure there should be an OAuth token to post as {{U|Muninnbot}}, but without it you cannot really run the bot).

:#(Optional but highly recommended) the same people send me a gitlab ID so I can add them on the gitlab repo (create an account beforehand if needed). Either here, on my user talk page, or via email if you prefer (note that project members on public gitlab repos are public though, so there’s not much privacy point in using email).

:#The same people add themselves at the places they ought to (User:Muninnbot for instance?)

:#Someone (the first one to code it I guess) fixes the LS3 issue mentioned above

:#Someone (the first one to cron it I guess) puts the bot back online at Toolforge

:If it was me, I would mildly prefer doing #4 before doing #5, but honestly I could imagine myself YOLOing it. If you do so, watch over the LS3 edits for a couple of days.

:I would imagine the BRFA is still valid - although technically the bot has not edited for two years, it was not due to a change of consensus, and I see no opposition to restarting it in the discussion here. Of course anyone is free to object at any point.

:That should cover it. Any issues with that plan, questions etc.? Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 19:35, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

::thanks for theresponse {{u|Tigraan}}. I have only one doubt. I'm not sure if OAuth is required with pywikibot. Years ago when I setup my tool/bot, to post as {{u|KiranBOT II}}, all I had to do was create BotPassword, and use it in the config file. Regarding other stuff, I'll respond in 18ish hours. Courtesy ping to {{U|Frostly}}. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

::Thanks so much for the reply, Tigraan!
The easiest / least bureaucratic way to accomplish #1 would be to add myself and usernamekiran as maintainers in the [https://toolsadmin.wikimedia.org Toolforge admin console]. My Toolforge username is EpicPupper (it was my previous Wikimedia username); usernamekiran's looks like it's the same.
Re #2, my GitLab username is "frost-ly". Long-term, I'd love to potentially migrate the project to [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/GitLab Wikimedia's instance] of GitLab.
There's a new Toolforge jobs framework that "replaces" cron, which is probably the best-practice way to get the bot up and running again.
I agree that the BRFA is likely still valid :)
Looking forward to hearing usernamekiran's perspective.
Cheers, — Frostly (talk) 03:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

:::I have added you both on the Toolforge admin account, and frost-ly on Gitlab.

:::I have not yet logged back on Toolforge to dust off the furniture (new computer, I will need to dig to retrieve the SSH keys). I should be able to do so later this week though. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 19:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

::::{{re|Frostly|Usernamekiran|Tigraan}} hi! Hope you all are well. Just out of curiosity, is this ongoing? Thanks, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::{{re|Rotideypoc41352}} Hi, apologies, I thought this one was taken care of. I will be busy for 40ish hours from now. But this will be the first thing I will take a look at as soon as I get time. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

:::::{{re|Rotideypoc41352}} I just logged in to the bot's account on toolforge. @Tigraan, and Frostly: I have created a file named "usernamekiran.log" in root directory. I will soon look into the cronjob issue, and I will keep you guys posted. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

::::::Usernamekiran, thank you! Will take a look into the bot as well. — Frostly (talk) 01:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

:::@Usernamekiran @Frostly You should be able to use botpasswords and OAuth on Toolforge. Tho OAuth in my experience is relatively easier to setup with custom containers. I run a cross-wiki(source) bot with a similar cronjob configuration in the wsstats account on the new Toolforge infrastructure. (The code for my bot is at https://github.com/sohomdatta1/wsstats.git feel free to copy over parts of the boilerplate code if you want). Sohom (talk) 05:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

::::{{re|Sohom Datta}} Hi. Using OAuth, I was able to login to enwiki with Muninnbot on the first attempt, but I am getting an error with the script. I tried to fix it, but couldnt. I have mailed Tigraan, hopefully they will respond soon. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:17, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

There seems to be a coordinated effort to get "first Iraqi on Everest" into the article Dadvan Yousuf. In these two days alone, there have been five accounts asking about it here and on the article's talk page. Is there something we can do? [[User:CanonNi]] (talk • contribs) 09:47, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

:Not really, besides direct people to the talk page and provide reliable sources. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:34, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

:You could put an {{t|FAQ}} on the talk page but I have a hunch that it'd mostly get scrolled on by. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

{{ping|Anachronist|PrimeHunter}} I think that :WP:THQ#Deleting a page probably should be closed down because it has moved beyond the scope of the Teahouse. Assuming that the OP isn't trolling, there's nothing Wikipedia can do about Wikitia anyway and the IP's/OP's last response has even further moved a discussion in a direction that's just might lead to some things being posted that shouldn't be posted. Since you two are admins and both responded to the OP, the discussion could be continued on the OP's user talk page if either of you want to, but I don't see anything further to be gained by doing so at the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:02, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

:Anyone can close a discussion, it doesn't have to be an administrator. I just wrapped it in archive tags. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

::I'm aware of that anyone can close a discussion, but I figured I give one of you the chance to do so given that the two of you had posted several responses; moreover, as admins, you're also capable of :WP:REVDEL if you deem it to be necessary. Anyway, it's a moot point now since you closed the discussion and another user courtesy blanked it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teahouse_(Wikipedia)&redirect=no Teahouse (Wikipedia)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{slink|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 4#Teahouse (Wikipedia)}} until a consensus is reached. cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi. I was wondering if removal of posts are allowed, if it is obvious that the asker is not here for help. (Such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ATeahouse&diff=1220019056&oldid=1220016769 this one]) Thanks! [[User:CanonNi]] (talk|contribs) 11:05, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

:Hi {{u|CanonNi}}. In my opinion, your best bet is to probably follow the guidance in :WP:TPO, particularly :WP:TPG#Off-topic posts. If you assess the post to be a serious violation of a policy like :WP:BLP, :WP:OUTING, :WP:COPY, etc., you can probably remove it asap but should leave an appropriate edit summary explaining why. You then probably should seek assistance from an administrator (there are usually a few active at the Teahouse at various times of the day but there's always one at :WP:AN) and ask them to review it because it might need to be :WP:REVDEL if it's really bad. If it's a case of someone posting too much of their own personally identifying information (email addresses, phone numbers, real names, etc.), you can use the template {{tl|redacted}} as well, politely explain to the person who posted why, and then contact an admininstrator or :WP:OVERSIGHT to see if revdel or :WP:SUPPRESS is needed. If it's just someone rambling about something unrelated to the Wikipedia per editing or something not really within the scope of the Teahouse (i.e. a general reference question), you can politely respond that such a thing isn't within the scope of the Teahouse and redirect the person to another Wikipedia page or another external website (if one exists). You can try to answer the person's question if you want, but that might lead to further discussion that might end up needing to be closed at some point. A lot could depend on the context of the post. For certain things, sometimes this posting a :WP:DISCLAIMER like response works best because trying to delve into too much detail (especially about sensitive subject matters) might create a new set of problems.{{pb}}The account who made the post you're asking about has already been blocked for disruption, so there's no point in warning them about. The posts it made at the Teahouse have already been removed by an administrator named {{u|Graham87}}. For reference, though, posts like this could probably be non-contentiously removed per :WP:R VAN or :WP:TPG#Off-topic posts if you want, but you might want to check the poster's contributions' history first to see whether they're just drive by posting and have already been dealt with or they could possibly be asking a "legit" question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

::Thank you for the detailed reply! I understand now. [[User:CanonNi]] (talk|contribs) 13:31, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

:::@CanonNi How do I put in a question. Do I edit it in? Jacobacademy (talk) 19:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Wikipedia:Teahouse|answered=yes}}

I asked my actual question here, whoops. I would like to request permission to ask questions in the Teahouse. TheSoS9k 16:47, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

:{{done}} – sorry, there was some spamming so editing is temporarily restricted. It'll be back to normal in a few hours. If you need to reply to a comment on your question, just reply here and notify the user with {{tlx|ping|username}}. Tollens (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

::@Tollens How do I put in a question? Jacobacademy (talk) 19:19, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't know how to edit one in and I am incapable of using the "Ask a question" link because I cannot use links that redirect me outside of the Wikipedia app. Jacobacademy (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

:@Jacobacademy I just noticed that from the app the button redirects you to the browser. You can then ask your question from the browser (I would recommend it over the app). Alternatively, from the app, go to Wikipedia:Teahouse, scroll down to the last topic at the bottom of the page, click the edit button and add a new topic there. Make sure you add a header for your topic between double equal signs, like this: == Header ==.

:Note for the Teahouse experts: the button should not redirect outside the app. Anyone knows how this could be fixed? Broc (talk) 21:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

::This appears to be because the template {{tl|clickable button 2}} takes {{para|url}} as a parameter, which requires a full URL, not a wikilink. This is presumably done to immediately put the user into edit mode, and it would be impossible to do so with a wikilink. With the introduction of DiscussionTools and the Reply tool I'm not sure how redundant that would make the button. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm still kind of confused, sorry if this shouldn't be written here. Crylophosaurus (talk) 03:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

:Hi, {{u|Crylophosaurus}}. The Teahouse is just a place where beginners can ask questions about how to edit Wikipedia. Actually, anybody can ask, but it is aimed at beginners. It is just like the Help desk except that people here at the Teahouse make an extra effort to be patient and not "bite" the newbies.--Gronk Oz (talk) 06:11, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

::@Gronk Oz How do I ask a question at the teahouse? I am working on a device with some restrictions and cannot use any links that redirect out of the Wikipedia app. Do I just edit the question in? Jacobacademy (talk) 19:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

:::Hi, {{ping|Jacobacademy}} Sorry you are having trouble. You don't have to leave the app to ask a question. If you go to the Teahouse (WP:TEA), you will see a big blue button near the top that says "Ask a Question". Press that and it will open an edit window for a new question. Or if you prefer you could edit the page to add your question at the bottom - but the button is the better way (especially since multiple people might be editing at once, which can cause problem with clashing edits). Note that the page you are on now is not the Teahouse itself - this is its Talk page, to discuss how the Teahouse works, raise problems with it, etc. So to ask a general question about editing Wikipedia, make sure you go to WP:TEA first. I hope that helps.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:41, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi all. Please try looking at WP:TH on a phone in mobile view mode and in its default portrait mode. Many users will see it this way. Sadly, our Teahouse image is so large that it forces our welcome message to be (rather humorously) spread across 6 separate lines as shown:

Welco
me
to
the
Teaho
use!

I think we need to fix this so that the image size is reduced in mobile view and the text reads more normally. Hopefully, some experienced template editors could take a look? Pinging Sdkb who, I know, has worked on this before. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:56, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

:Definitely a problem. Coding a more mobile-friendly header requires someone with more knowledge of HTML stylings than me, though. Sdkb ^talk 19:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)

::Thanks, Sdkb. Maybe @PrimeHunter could suggest how we might take this forward. Perhaps a post at WP:VPT asking for help? Nick Moyes (talk) 04:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

:::@Nick Moyes @Sdkb I fixed it, see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ATeahouse%2FHeader%2Fstyles.css&diff=1234056018&oldid=1206869423 diff], by ensuring the Teahouse image is at most 50% of the total width in mobile view. I tested it with various mobile sizes and it seems to work well. Please let me know if you find a bug or the change is not to your liking. Broc (talk) 10:27, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

::::@Broc Thank you! That looks a whole lot better now. On my mobile, it's nearly, but not quite perfect, as I'm seeing the header welcome message properly laid out, although the text beneath it (i.e. "Your go-to place... ...and editing Wikipedia") all right justified, apart from the last two words (..."editing Wikpedia") which I suspect have slipped under the Teahouse image and now appear centrally justified. But I can live with that. Thanks again, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

:::::@Nick Moyes that was already happening on my phone (which I assume has a higher resolution than yours). The reason for this is that the "Welcome to the Teahouse!" message is in the same column of the buttons "Ask a question" etc. "Sticking" the column to the right would cause all the buttons to appear on the right side instead of full-size.

:::::It's not an unsolvable issue but it would require some larger changes, so I decided to only apply this minor fix. Broc (talk) 15:15, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

::::::That’s absolutely fine. I didn’t mean to sound critical. We’re grateful that you’ve made it look a lot better than it was. Thanks again, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Apologies to {{U|DandelionAndBurdock}}, {{U|RudolfRed}}, {{U|Cordless Larry}}, and {{U|CFA}} for [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ATeahouse&diff=1236464739&oldid=1236462021 my recent deletion] of the thread "How’s it going", complete with their well-meant contributions; but as the thread developed it became increasingly obvious that the original (and repeated) poster was either an extraordinarily silly person or an attention-seeking troll; either way, a time-waster. There's no point indulging such people. -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

:That's understandable. I was going to close the discussion until I saw that the instructions at :Template:Hidden archive top state that that should only be done by an uninvolved editor. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

::The IPs have now been blocked for block evasion and trolling. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:03, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm curious to hear from other hosts about what you've been encountering with editors being confused by the button to save an edit when creating a new page being labelled "publish" rather than "save," as it used to be. It seems that this has caused a lot of confusion, e.g. here, here (both handled by @331dot), here, and here, among many others. We have the ability to change it at MediaWiki:Publishchanges if we decide to do so. Sdkb ^talk 02:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

:I don't think we can change it; as I understand it was Wikipedia's lawyers who wanted it changed, to emphasize that every edit is public. Apparently "save" does not carry that implication. I think we just have to live with it. 331dot (talk) 08:00, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

:Users think, understandably, that "Publish" means "put in mainspace". Some want to put their draft into mainspace and are puzzled when "Publish" doesn't do that. Others just want to save edits to their draft but can't find a "Save" button. It's strange that lawyers think WP's legal position is stronger when its users don't understand what they're doing. Maproom (talk) 14:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

::I've wondered if there was a way to reword it to both make it clear what the button does and satisfy the concerns of the lawyers(who I think are trying to avoid users saying "I didn't know that would be public!" or some other legal concern) but I feel like that would be hard to do in a concise manner with a minimum of confusion. 331dot (talk) 14:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

:::I've thought about it a bit and think the solution isn't in the wording (as both put us in a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situation), but in a warning dialogue box that says something along the lines of: {{xt2|Warning: Your edits will be publicly viewable. If you wish to keep your edits private you will have to do it off-site.}} This would be enabled by default for non-autoconfirmed users and removed once they become autoconfirmed. Unfortunately, IP addresses would most likely have to be left out as there's no way to differentiate between veteran editors who wish to remain anonymous versus complete newbies. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

:::{{button|Save & publish}}, instead of the current {{button|Publish changes}}.

:::There's already a disclaimer by such buttons (including the "Reply" button on talk pages) giving full details. Bazza 7 (talk) 14:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

::::Speculating about what's legally necessary rather than seeking clarification is a surefire way for us to get bogged down in circles. @Slaporte (WMF), can you let us know if there's any legal reason the button needs to say "publish" rather than "save"? Sdkb ^talk 16:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

:::::The answer (I assume Slaporte isn't going answer at this point) is because "Save" led to a lot of newbies believing that the contents were being saved privately, and thus were a perfectly safe place to make a note about your password, or your home phone number, or to stash a copy of a copyrighted text that you meant to cite. We also had problems with students who thought that 'Save' meant 'My supervising teacher will not be able to see this yet'. The UI needs to give people the information that they need to protect their privacy. Since the meaning of 'Save' shifted in the public's mind from the 1990s idea of 'This puts a copy on a hard disk' to the 2010s idea of 'When I save my e-mail draft, it does not send it to anyone yet', new users didn't feel like what they expected from a 'Save' button is what they actually got from the big blue button.

:::::It's probably worth noting that the group of experienced editors who never complain about this change are the ones who worked in Wikipedia:Oversight before this change was made.

:::::If memory serves, the Hebrew Wikipedia got approval from WMF Legal to use "Save and publish". I don't know whether this solves any actual problems. I assume that the net result is to have newbies ask "Where's the plain 'Save' button? I only want to save it. I don't want to publish it yet." At the time, a significant part of their idea was that it would ease the transition by retaining and expanding the old wording, rather than replacing it completely. I do not think that such a change would be helpful to us. (Also, as a matter of pure personal aesthetics, I don't happen to like it myself.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

:See this announcement for background (and further discussion further down the page). 57.140.16.57 (talk) 19:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

:I do regularly (though not frequently) encounter questions from new users who are confused by the publish button. I find it somewhat embarrassing to have to trot out the "it's a legal requirement that's been forced on us" explanation on each occasion. It is time-consuming to have to explain what the difference between 'publish' and 'Publish' means. But I haven't experienced the constant confusion amongst large numbers of new editors that I had actually expected. If I could change it back, I would, as it's the most logical title when saving edits in a draft. But I suspect most new users manage to understand it well enough, and that we are where we are, and are stuck with it. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

::What about displaying different words to different user access levels? Autoconfirmed and above could stick with {{strong|Publish}}; non-autoconfirmed could get {{strong|Save publicly}} and a separate disclaimer above or below the edit summary textbox to the effect of {{tq|Everything saved to Wikipedia is immediately publicly visible}}.{{pb}}I suspect a knock-on effect of the {{strong|Publish}} wording is people leaving the editing interface open too long (till they're ready to "Publish") and being unable to commit edits made due to the "no stashed content" Mediawiki error, which is something we get questions about several times monthly. So even though we don't hear specifically about the wording very often, I suspect adding clarity for newer editors may help in that regard.{{pb}}Of course, I just realised people might get even more confused when the wording changes upon becoming autoconfirmed, so this idea is probably at least mostly dumb. At least I necroed a whole thread about it. Folly Mox (talk) 10:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

:::If we thought it was a significant source of confusion, we could add a little pop-up note for first edits that says "Everything on Wikipedia is public. There is no way to save a private copy on wiki." But I don't think it's that big of a problem. If I were going to add a message, it would probably be about the desirability of citing sources. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

Some of you might be interested in some first edit stats I asked for.

BLUF: 70% of first edits are to an existing page, and 90% of those are to the mainspace/articles. If your first edit is to create a new page, then a third of them get deleted within the first week. Only 1 in 60 of those first-edit page creations get moved to the mainspace, and about 20% of those get deleted shortly afterwards.

The queries are quarry:query/84512 and quarry:query/84486 if anyone ever wants to re-run them in the future. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

:My quotable takeaway factoid from the above synopsis is {{xt|Editors who attempt to create a new Wikipedia article as their first action have a 1-in-75 success rate}}. Folly Mox (talk) 11:06, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

::That sounds about right. And it's likely much lower (perhaps by about an order of magnitude) than in our pre-ACTRIAL systems. We are probably losing notable subjects because of the hoop-jumping required by NPP and AFC. There are downsides as well as upsides to our current systems. WhatamIdoing (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

:::For sure. We've got a lot of priorities to balance, and pervasive lack of agreement on the weightings. I'm really grateful for your involvement. Folly Mox (talk) 14:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

The above two strings are what render in Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header on my device when the "search help pages" button is labeled "Search Help" and "Search", respectively. Can someone who knows what they're doing (evidently not me: see my bungled attempt) have a go at reformatting Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host lounge/Announcements/1 or the header itself such that a full word appears on the search button on narrow screens? Folly Mox (talk) 10:28, 26 July 2024 (UTC)

:{{Resolved|Special:Diff/1236986938}} Please let me know if this makes the "Search Help" button look stupider for anyone. I imagine the true fix is getting it to display the same regardless of client parameters, but {{nowrap|{{works for me}}}} {{shrug}} Folly Mox (talk) 14:59, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

The Campaigns team at the Wikimedia Foundation is interested in learning from diverse editors that have experience joining and working on WikiProjects, Campaigns, and other kinds of on-wiki collaboration. We need your help:

• Take a survey about your experience with collaborations: [https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScKWHPjSjSqOmca8E-eQl1HHUxYRbB4QeEV3zR2bd1_tcwuMg/viewform?usp=sf_link with this Google Form ]
• Share examples of Collaborations or WikiProjects that have worked for you: m:Campaigns/WikiProjects

Whatever input you bring to the two spaces will help us make better decisions about next steps beyond the current tools we support. Astinson (WMF) (talk) 18:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Has there always been so many questions about the search bar? This seems to also be a very recurring question on the help desk. I know it's fixable by unzooming, but is this intentionnal or a bug? The best documentation we have is this... : Wikipedia:Help desk#Search tool and is what I see often linked. Thanks! win8x (talking | spying) 22:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

:I remember an influx of interface-related questions when the WMF decided to change the default skin to Vector 2022. Was there an update a while back that changed some interface elements? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:50, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

::That's what I was wondering. It seems like a pretty bad accessibility issue if users with high zoom can't see the search bar, and afaik I haven't seen these questions before the one I linked above, from 6 September. win8x (talking | spying) 01:06, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

:::I played around with the zoom levels on Chrome. As far as I can tell, the search bar disappears when pages are viewed at 150% zoom, and at that point the user has to click on the link= that appears next to link= at the top of the page. Doing so causes the search bar to appear and hide the link= and the Wikipedia logo in the top-left corner. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:42, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

::::Ah, is that what this person is asking about? (Feel free to answer on my talk) Seems like maybe an attempt to integrate the mobile and desktop versions and to use a more mobile-esque version when zoomed in enough that the screen appears to have low-resolution. Whatever change it was, the developers will probably want to know; perhaps there's some way they might want to change the feature or to add a notice along the lines of "search bar is now here"? @OVasileva (WMF), would you know anything about this or who to ping? Sdkb ^talk 17:08, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

:::::@Sdkb It looks like this is exactly what it is. That editor is searching the search icon since their zoom level is too high. I've answered on your talk page. Thanks for pinging someone from the WMF; I'd have no clue. win8x (talking | spying) 20:01, 11 September 2024 (UTC)

:::::There's also a similar question being asked at mw:Talk:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements, where I requested a link to a changelog for the skin. Hopefully someone from the WMF knows something about this. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:29, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

I have reported the problem on User talk:Σ.

The duplicate content is in User:Vchimpanzee/sandbox.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:27, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

:Nice! I appreciate that. Steven1991 (talk) 00:28, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

{{re|usernamekiran|Frostly}} happy Friday! No news from {{u|Tigraan}}, I presume? Is the revival of Muninnbot still ongoing? Thanks for bearing with yet another check in. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 16:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)

:{{re|Rotideypoc41352}} Hi. Yes, I have worked a little on the bot. I think I would get it running in a week or two. I apologise for the delay. —usernamekiran (talk) 17:41, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

::Thanks! For reference: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/KiranBOT 13 (permalink) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:43, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

::Trial run approved. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:44, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse,

The Community Wishlist has gathered a collection of wishes and suggestions over time, highlighting the need for better support and guidance for newcomers as they create articles, while also aiming to reduce frustration and reverts. These ideas have been grouped under the Article Creation Guidance Focus Area.

We invite both hosts and those interested in improving newcomer workflows to explore these wishes, join the discussion on the focus area’s [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Wishlist/Focus_areas/Article_Creation_Guidance collective talk page], and cast your vote if this topic resonates with you.

On behalf of the Community Tech team, STei (WMF) (talk) 17:16, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Wikipedia:Teahouse|answered=yes}}

I would like to describe the subject neutrally. Can you help me with this? NTIBABAZANIGENE (talk) 19:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 20:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

::Question moved to Wikipedia:Teahouse#Describing subject neutrally. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:10, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Wikipedia:Teahouse|answered=yes}}

Master Eddie Bravo calls him Louis "Street" Ho. Look it up on the 10th Planet website in the videos. Starid (talk) 20:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

:File:Red question icon with gradient background.svg 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 20:50, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

::Question moved to Wikipedia:Teahouse#Sensei Louis Ho. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:15, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Wikipedia:Teahouse|answered=yes}}

:Posted Graeme Bartlett (talk) 04:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I noticed he is in digital romantic comedy series on YouTube and he has a small role maybe a guest role. I want to add this on his filmography but the only source i can find is the full episode on YouTube. What can I do if he officially appeared but there are no other sources regarding this. What can I do? 122.55.235.127 (talk) 03:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hello,I saw that a wiki page called List of Korean Names of Native Korean Origin is not on the Wikipedia website anymore. Why is the page deleted? Derdaniel636 (talk) 08:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

:I can find no article by that exact title. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

::It is about to native Korean names. The title I told you may not be the exact one. Derdaniel636 (talk) 09:29, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

:See also Wikipedia:Teahouse#Wiki Page Gone. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

Sabi Christy is an Costume Designer of Shine Tom Chacko and worked in so many malayalam films. Would you please approve this page for him. it will help more notable for him. Please help me to develop this page.

Thanks, ArifVlog782 (talk) 06:16, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

:@ArifVlog782: This is the wrong place to ask for help, and it looks like the page has already been deleted. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:35, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I have just reverted some childish vandalism to the Teahouse, which had removed the usual page-top navigation templates, etc., and left a silly message.

This is not usually the sort of area I operate in, so others may wish to check what I've done and to take any warning or other steps appropriate regarding the vandal. Thanks. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.6.86.81 (talk) 19:33, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

:This page is for discussion about the operation of the Teahouse, and is not the Teahouse itself. (That's at WP:TEAHOUSE). Vandalism should be reported to WP:AIV. 331dot (talk) 20:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

::The IP's comment was about the operation of the Teahouse though. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:51, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

:Thanks, 94/87! Not going to bother with a warning at this point since the IP hasn't edited since, looks otherwise fine to me. Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 21:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Wikipedia:Teahouse|answered=yes}}

The Scale of the Universe

I am on the edge of getting banned rn. I added the description in the info box, i've been doing this for 3 days straight. But the one about the water molecule had a joke about how they look like mickey mouse heads, so they called it vandalism, I reported and undid the mistake, but then it said that I might loss privileges, and if I'm getting banned for telling the truth, then so be it, i'm going to undo the bot bot again, and if this is the last message I send, I want this account's dying with to be to remove ClueBot NG. goodbye Saarabout (talk) 16:56, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

WHY IS THE TEAHOUSE PROTECTED

:Because there was disruptive editing from an IP editor. You should be discussing your reverted edits at Talk:The Scale of the Universe rather than edit warring. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:02, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

What is the difference between Teahouse project page and Teahouse Talk Page UnsungHistory (talk) 20:48, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:@UnsungHistory This is answered at the top of the page, the talk page is to discuss how the Teahouse is ran, while the Teahouse itself is for asking questions about Wikipedia. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 20:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

This page, provided especially to welcome new users, should not have pending changes protection. User:Ivanvector, please undo this ASAP (same for WP:Help desk). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

:This and the help desk has been the target of an abusive user(on the assumption that we won't protect those pages). 331dot (talk) 19:21, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

::Andy, I don't think you were around when we were dealing with [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&action=history&offset=20241112211445%7C1257029649 this], and pending changes (where anon editors can edit with moderation) seems preferable to semiprotection (where anon editors can't edit at all) and also to reverting a vandal every few minutes. I'm open to suggestions, though. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:28, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

:::That was almost 24 hours ago, and warrants protection for a few hours at most, not a month, unless repeated on another occasion. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:31, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

::::The history of this user is that they resume targeting this page when protection ends. 331dot (talk) 19:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

:::::Well I do love your optimism that this particular user is going to give up after a day of protection. They've been at it for about eight months at this point, after writing things like [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drmies&diff=prev&oldid=885194403 this], and personally I'm disinclined to not act on it. But if you insist, I will unprotect the pages. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 19:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

:::I don't really see the point in using pending changes here. Nothing is prevented — their changes still have to be reverted. All it does is make people approve every other edit. I personally think we should just leave their posts and quietly remove them after a couple hours instead of getting into long revert-wars that ultimately result in semi-protection anyways. C F A 💬 00:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• I'm going to bring this up at WP:AN for wider opinions. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:21, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure what purpose there is to allowing edit request like those above to be added to this talk page. Edit requests regarding specific article content should be made on the talk page of the article itself, right? So, declining them as they've been declined above doesn't make much sense to me. The best that can be done in my opinion would be to respond in the same way as if the "request" was posted on the main TH page itself: advise the asker that questions and concerns about article content should be discussed on the article's talk page. Similarly, when TH questions are posted here by mistake, they are sometimes moved to the main page and responded to there.{{pb}}I know these ER are the direct result of the main TH page being protected, and the templates used for protection probably are advising people to post their ER on this talk page. That set up may work fine for other pages but seem to work as well here since pretty much TH questions are about things other than the TH itself. Is there any way to tweak things so that this talk page doesn't suddenly get filled up with edit requests? -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

:Yes, declining the edit requests isn't very useful. Now that the edit protection has been lifted, I'm going to move the questions to the main Teahouse page so that they can be answered. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:05, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

See Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Teahouse#Template styles CSS needs to be changed. Myrealnamm's Alternate Account (talk) 18:54, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Teahouse hosts, we're going to be trialling a new Growth Team Feature starting on Monday. You may see some unusual newbie behaviour or get some questions you've never had before. They're not sockpuppets! They're the new accounts that are being introduced to the new Add a link task. You'll be able to identify these edits easily, since they'll be tagged like this: (Tags: Visual edit, Newcomer task, Suggested: add links). It will also be possible to filter Recent Changes to see all edits suggested by this tool.

This feature helps spot likely places for new wikilinks and guides newcomers on how to add them and why. We're starting it really, really small - just 2% of all new accounts will get this feature in the first week - but the number will start rising over time. It should be a big improvement over the "add links" task we have now, which simply points newcomers at articles in :Category:Articles with too few wikilinks. If you've ever added Template:Underlinked to an article only to come back a few hours later and find it overlinked to hell and back by a horde of well-meaning newbies, this is why. This new task is smarter, so we shouldn't see that kind of problem. But if we do notice that newcomers are adding bad links too often, or too many links, we can tinker with various settings that will impact this behaviour. And if this causes some kind of horrible unforseen problem, we can pause the experiment at any time.

More information here and here. -- asilvering (talk) 04:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

:Appreciate the heads up! Sdkb ^talk 05:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I am a new editor and want to ask a question about Wikipedia. I can't do so if this page is protected. Lenderthrond (talk) 00:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:@Lenderthrond, it's fixed now, sorry about that. -- asilvering (talk) 00:19, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I am also a new user and have to ask a very urgent question/s. The other page is still blocked. T3fg72zp (talk) 01:46, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:Hi T3fg72zp,

:Hope you are doing well! What page are you referring too? I would be happy to answer any questions you have here, feel free to hit reply and ask and I will do my best to answer them!

:I would also like to say that I think it is awesome that you are a lawyer!

:Best, Luke Elaine Burke (talk) 01:51, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:This page (Wikipedia: Teahouse) and other help pages are the target of a long term abusive user (MAB); unfortunately lesser measures do not deter them which always leads to page protection. Untamed1910 (talk) 02:00, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

::I would like to edit (remove/ update / modify) a certain incorrect sentence on a particular page which is semi-protected. The talk page of the concerned editor (who reinserted back that controversial sentence after it was deleted by a Wiki Admin) is also semi protected so I can't discuss with them. I need advice. T3fg72zp (talk) 02:07, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:::Hi T3fg72zp, could you please reply to me with what the page is that you are trying to edit? If you could also include who the other user is and what sentance you are trying to change that would be great! Please feel free to ask any other questions and I would love to do my best to help!

:::Best, Luke Elaine Burke (talk) 02:10, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

::If you are replying to me:

::It is always best to assume good faith. I would encourage you to answer the newcomers asking for help via your talk page. I am well aware that this page is targeted.

::Best, Luke Elaine Burke (talk) 02:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

::: Thanks for your assistance. The brief facts are these :- a) it is a single sentence in a very controversial article. Actually the sentence should not even be there. b) I would not like to edit the page directly because of "Streisand". c) Discussing it on the article talk page would bring in all the dramaboard regulars. d) The concerned editor seems a very sober and veteran editor, so I'm sure would appreciate my points and would delete it themselves. ie. if I could contact them, T3fg72zp (talk) 02:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

::::The place to talk about an issue on a particular page is the talk page for that page. You can also ask for changes to a protected page on Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for edits to a protected page. You will have to say what you want changed somewhere or change it yourself. And if it is a controversial article, you can be sure that many editors will notice, and some will disagree. Anyway that is why a discussion is likely necessary. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 05:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

:I have, unenthusiastically, s-protected the page again. Any admin thinking it wise to adjust or cancel the s-protection is free to do so without consulting me. -- Hoary (talk) 08:24, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

I expect the usual number of questions about fundraising season, which starts soon. What do you all think about putting a big, neutral box/banner at the top to answer the usual questions (i.e., "Is this a hoax?" and "How do I get rid of this?")? Maybe something like this:

{{Info|The Wikimedia Foundation has started its annual fundraising campaign. Donations are optional. If you want to donate, go to https://donate.wikimedia.org {{pb}}

Clicking the X in the corner will turn off the banner for up to a week, or until you remove cookies in your web browser. If you create a free account, you can turn off all fundraising banners (as long as you stay logged in).}}

Alternatively, if there is a page on Wikipedia:How to hide fundraising banners, the second half could be replaced with a simple link to that. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

:The reply template {{tl|WikiDonation}} addresses the most common concerns and objections but I think it's too wordy (or maybe some judicious bolding of text may help). If we're going to add a talk page banner we could try revising the WikiDonation text at the same time. I'm afraid not all visitors will even see or read a banner so we can't rely on that alone. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 00:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

::Um, @ClaudineChionh, were you aware that that message links to WP:DAILYDOT, which is not a very reputable source per WP:RSP, and to a user comment in an internet forum, which is outright banned by WP:V. I'm not convinced that good editors would be comfortable posting that if they realized what it was linking to. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:43, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

:::WhatamIdoing: No – thank you for pointing that out, and what a great illustration of me just glazing over familiar-looking text! So fixing that reply template should be a priority. It shouldn't be hard to find better sources. — ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email · global) 00:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

::::For now, I've just removed the unreliable and self-published sources. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:24, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

:{{re|WhatamIdoing}} I have redirected "Wikipedia:How to hide..." to Wikipedia:Suppress display of the fundraising banner, but it looks like that page could use updating also. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

::Thanks! WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

I want to donate a small sum to Wikipedia but the link says {{tq|Thank you for your interest in supporting the Wikimedia Foundation. We are not fundraising in your country at this time, but monetary contributions are not your only option for donating to and supporting Wikipedia}}. How can this be, I previously donated money for 1 cup of coffee (approx US$3) as a Wikipedia reader in the same country - India ? T3fg72zp (talk) 00:00, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

:JBrungs (WMF) may be able to tell you something about the schedule. Fundraising is different in each country, and something as small as a delay in getting a contract approved, or needing to find an approved bank, can cause temporary disruptions. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

::Hi,

::Thanks for the ping. To answer the India donation questions, we mentioned [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Community_response_to_Asian_News_International_vs._Wikimedia_Foundation&diff=prev&oldid=1260973468#No_donations_in_India? here] that accepting payments in other countries involves navigating various technical and operational complexities for us as a U.S. nonprofit. Recently, we've experienced a payment processing issue with our existing provider and have temporarily removed the option for readers in India to donate. Let me know if I can help with anything else. Best, JBrungs (WMF) (talk) 06:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Isnt this affecting new editors from contributing in good faith? While i see the vandalism aspect, i do think that the semi protection here comes with a high price. Ayohama (talk) 07:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

:@Ayohama yeah, this setup is bad, but it's necessary to prevent a certain LTA. New editors can still ask their questions here, which will be moved to the main page if they're in good faith. [[User:CanonNi]] (talk • contribs) 09:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

::I've gone and boldly edited the header at the top of the page to reflect that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Thanks, Tenryuu! I continued that trend and tried template magic that's supposed to switch the header text based on the protection level of the Teahouse, so the autoconfirmed part only shows up when it's protected (still learning template stuff, so please revert me if it breaks something{{snd}}I only tested in my sandbox). We might want to consider alternatives to the "This is not the place to ask questions about Wikipedia" text at the top and in the editnotice as well, though. It might be easier to just remove that line, and maybe clearer too to use some sort of new editor language rather than "autoconfirmed" as non-autoconfirmed users are probably least likely to know that terminology. Perfect4th (talk) 20:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

::It also stops this kind of junk appearing o the Teahouse's main page. A feature, not a bug... SerialNumber54129^{A New Face in Hell} 16:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Striking a balance is key. Ayohama (talk) 17:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

::::All things being equal, not mucking around on Johannes Falkenberg may also be key. SerialNumber54129^{A New Face in Hell} 19:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Wikipedia:Teahouse|answered=yes}}

Please copy the following question over for me:

Having a strange interaction at Empty string with an editor who seems not to be able to read or understand guidelines; I don’t really know how to talk to a person who thinks [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Empty_string&diff=prev&oldid=1270374242 this] is mandated by the MOS. Advice (or, even better, weighing in gently somewhere) requested. (Is this bad use of punctuation explicitly ruled out somewhere in MOS? Anything that requires interpretation or reading comprehension seems like it would be hard to convey to them.) 100.36.106.199 (talk) 13:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

:File:Semi-protection-unlocked.svg Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. MadGuy7023 (talk) 22:28, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

::That's not the most helpful of responses given that the Teahouse has been repeatedly semi-protected and is again now. I've copied the question across as requested. Cordless Larry (talk) 23:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello, Teahouse hosts and question-answerers! Are you friendly, know how to answer newcomer questions, and would be willing to have your talk page be a mini-Teahouse? Wikipedia talk:Growth Team features/Mentor list is currently having a discussion about expanding the number of new accounts that receive a mentor. Basically, only half of new editors currently get access to a module allowing them to ask questions to a more experienced user. We'd like to be able to roll that out to all new accounts, but we need a few more people to sign up as mentors first. The questions asked are mostly the stuff you usually see on the Teahouse, and there are some mentorship FAQs at Wikipedia:Growth Team features/Mentor list. I've also been a mentor for a couple of years and I'm happy to answer any questions that would nudge you to consider signing up here! Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 21:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

{{Courtesy link|Wikipedia:Teahouse/sandbox|Courtesy demo link:}} – (compare to the real Wikipedia:Teahouse page)

I am seeing a large empty space to the left of the flush-right ToC on my laptop; discussion content doesn't begin until the end of the (rather long) ToC and archives. Not sure how long it has been like this, but given that someone took the trouble to make them both flush right, it hardly seems like the right behavior. I made some sandbox changes which fix this behavior, but I am not at all familiar with these templates and prefer that someone familiar with it make the change, or at a minimum, look over the changes to make sure I'm not overlooking something. To see the proposed look-and-feel, please go to Wikipedia:Teahouse/sandbox.

The changes break down as follows:

• {{tl|Teahouse questions navbox/sandbox}} : modified to change Q_header left-margin to 1.5em (Note: not used in the demo)
• {{tl|Teahouse questions navbox/testcases}} : modified to add following lorem ipsum to watch floating and wrapping behavior
• Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header/sandbox :
• # Redo code with Html hierarchical structure using newlines and indenting; this should be functionally identical to the live version. (The dense version was too impenetrable to go through; this is much easier.)
• # Comment out {{clear|class=thh-smallscreenclear}} – this doesn't appear to be needed; was there some reason for including this that I am not seeing?
• # add 1.5em left margin on the div containing the __TOC__
• Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header/testcases – revamped this page entirely, and added a test specifically for float wrapping; this looks good, indicating that the locus of the problem is in Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header
• Wikipedia:Teahouse/sandbox – a new file to demo the change; consists of a truncated, non-archiving Teahouse copy:
• rev. 1269115474^(permalink) of 03:21: a copy of Wikipedia:Teahouse revision 1269111215 of 02:49, 13 January 2025, all but the last five sections stripped off, and archiving disabled. In this version, the ToC and Archive box appear alone flush right, with no text to the left of them; i.e., no float wrapping
• rev. 1269115592^(permalink) of 03:22 : same thing, but transcludes Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header/sandbox instead of Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header (diff). In this version, the ToC and Archive box appear flush right, with portions of the first discussion section to the left; i.e., float wrapping of discussion content next to the ToC as expected.

Because my changes to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header/sandbox included my re-vamp of the template to redo indentation, a simple, previous-live-to-sandbox diff is not very useful. However, you can see the only substantive edit that changed its behavior in this diff (assuming you believe that my white space-only restructuring for readability was as harmless as I claim).

Note that my changes to {{tl|Teahouse questions navbox/sandbox}} are not included in the demo, and appear not to be needed for the fix, and thus may be discarded. The part that gives me pause is the {{clear}} code I commented out in Wikipedia:Teahouse/Header/sandbox; I really didn't analyze that, and it's perfectly possible I may be missing something important. Yet, the demo page looks good, and if I haven't missed anything, then I think we should install the changes. Would appreciate some eyeballs on this from regulars of the templates involved. If you think it looks good and want to install it live, be my guest. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

: {{done}}. Absent objection, I went ahead and installed the change. Feedback welcome. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 06:16, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

::{{yo|Mathglot}} My apologies for the stereotypical bringing up stuff after implementation rather than during the feedback window (though in my defense I'd originally meant to ask and forgot), but the change shifted the "Question forum", "Meet your hosts", "Articles to improve", and "Become a host" buttons to a vertical stack rather than a horizontal row and the padding, header size, and font have also changed slightly on my device. I may have missed something you said that explains it, so my apologies if so, but did you intend to include that? Or is it just on my device? Perfect4th (talk) 07:12, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

::: {{u|Perfect4th}} Not at all, I'm glad you caught. Thanks, I've rolled back and will take another look. Mathglot (talk) 08:24, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

::: {{u|Perfect4th}}, I've reinstalled it; can you check on your devices and let me know? Mathglot (talk) 08:43, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

::::{{u|Mathglot}}, looks good to me, thanks! Perfect4th (talk) 03:45, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Please help

I once read an Andalusian poem translated into English( elegy of Ronda city ) the source book did not mention the poet who said the poet. I searched and found the Arabic poem. According to some Arabic books, the poem was said by ( Abu al-Fath bin Fakhir al-Tunisie al-Andalusi; others would say unknown poet who lamented the city in a satire elegy manner that after he saw the city turned ugly, isolated and likely eclipsed appearance to souls.

I can't remember where I saved that file. I also found the search in Google is very difficult and never supporting.

I also searched in the internet archive and everywhere, but could not find.

The poem is related to the Almohad period of ancient Andalus.

The poem ( Arabic)

وقال بعض الهجائين في رندة = one of the satirists said on " Ronda city )

قبْحًا لِرُنْدَةَ مثل ما قَبُحَتْ مُطالعة الذنوب

بَلَد عــلــيــه وَحْشَةً ما إن يفارقه الـقُـطُـوب

ما حَلْهَا أحدٌ فَيَنْ وي بعد بين أن يؤوب

لم آتها عند الضحى إلا وخُيْلَ لي الغروب

أُفَقِّ أَغَـم وســاحــة تملا القلوب من الكروب

The book as much as I remember stated transcription ( transliteration to the Arabic letters )

As :

"Qabḥan li-Runda mithla mā qabuḥat muṭālaʿatu al-dhunub

Baladun ʿalayhi waḥshatan mā in yufāriquhu al-quṭub" — Preceding unsigned comment added by MohammadAA33 (talk • contribs) 16:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

:@MohammadAA33, you should try WP:RD/H with this question, Teahouse hosts aren't likely to be able to help with this. -- asilvering (talk) 20:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Currently, above the visual editor for talk pages when adding a subject it displays: Note: This page is semi-protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit it. If you need help getting started with editing, please visit the Teahouse.

I know that the page is semi-protected, but is there a way to fix that? Thx56 | Talk to me! 21:02, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:@Thx56: Without more details, I can only say that semi-protection would have to be removed from whichever page you're referring to. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:46, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

::It's Wikipedia:Teahouse Thx56 | Talk to me! 00:20, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

::{{u|Tenryuu}}, I believe Thx56 is referring to what seems to be the automatically applied edit notice for semi-protected pages and articles, which informs users basic information about the page protection and directs them to the Teahouse if they need help, and is pointing out that the notice isn’t correct if the page in question is the Teahouse. (I couldn’t find the exact editnotice with a brief search since I’m not at my computer, but perhaps some wise other soul knows which one it is.) Perfect4th (talk) 00:37, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

{{Moved discussion from |1=Wikipedia:Teahouse#Indefinitely protect Teahouse}}

Teahouse has been protected repeatedly since [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Wikipedia%3ATeahouse&type=protect&user=&offset=&limit=500 2 January 2025, with the previous wave of protect-unprotect cycle happening in November 2024.] Should we indefinitely (semi)protect Teahouse, to avoid any further back-and-forth protection waves? It's to prevent vandalism, sockpuppetry, LTA, and other problems in the future. And in case of continued abuse, should it also be upgraded to extended-confirmed, and even full protection? What should I do to protect this page? Should I make a request for protection? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 18:53, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

:Welcome to the Teahouse, {{u|CreatorTheWikipedian2009}}. Semi-protection prevents new editors from asking questions, so I don't believe that we should employ it for any longer than is necessary. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:09, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::So, should we just enforce a rule that repels vandals, sock puppets, and otherwise bad users? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 19:23, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::@Cordless Larry Semi protection requires 4 days and 10 edits, its really not that much but helps deter casual and even moderate trolls since they dont want to wait 4 days. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 19:51, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, I understand what page protection is and does, thanks. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:@CreatorTheWikipedian2009: {{welcometea}} Unfortunately, the Teahouse is supposed to be for new editors, most of whom won't have autoconfirmed rights. Upgrading it would definitely ruin the page's purpose. There's not much we can really do here.{{pb}}As this topic is about the Teahouse's operations, anyone feel like moving it to the talk page? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:26, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::Moved. Perfect4th (talk) 19:34, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

:::We cannot allow one or two disgruntled people to prevent the Teahouse from operating as intended. Immediately reverting trolling inappropriate edits is the main line of defense, and administrators can promptly block the new IPs as they pop up. Overprotection of the Teahouse is a mistake, in my view. Cullen328 (talk) 19:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::::@Cullen328 perhaps we should limit teahouse to only accounts? Even accounts that arent semi confirmed can access it. This prevents casual trolling where they dont want to go through the hassle of signing up. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 01:43, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::No, {{u|SimpleSubCubicGraph}}. Our goal is for the Teahouse to be available to all new good faith editors, including IPs. Cullen328 (talk) 02:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::@Cullen328 I don't really like IP editors, I'd much prefer the idea of accounts only editing across all of Wikipedia. When you put effort into a wikipedia account, you don't want it to get blocked. It can surely help a lot. SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 04:25, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::::{{u|SimpleSubCubicGraph}}, the Wikimedia Foundation has made it quite clear that unregistered editors are allowed to edit anywhere on the public projects they host, except when active ongoing disruption is going on. That being said, I think that the WMF needs to try harder to identify and take legal action against people who make repeated death threats. Cullen328 (talk) 04:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::@Cullen328 You said that you think WMF needs to try harder to identify those who make repeated death threats.

:::::::::I think. This is not the job of WMF because I consider this is the role of police forces and the judicial systems in the world.

:::::::::I don't know what do WMF when cases like this happens because I don't know internal policy and I did never worked for this fundation.

:::::::::I did never saw dead threats you're mentionning. I suppose comments are erased then hidden from the history.

:::::::::Victims could complaint to authorities like police but there are a problem.

:::::::::If victims aren't in the same country than the perpetrator(s).

:::::::::If there are investigations , there are a high probability than the perpetrator(s) is/are never identified then arrested particulary if the perpetrator(s) use things to cancel their identity online .

:::::::::I think this is not the role of WMF to take legal actions because this is the role of victims.

:::::::::I did never saw dead threats for which you're talking. Therefore , I'm unable to judge how serious these threats are.

:::::::::Anyway , serious or not. It's not an acceptable behaviour.

Anatole-berthe (talk) 06:59, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::::::WMF has a reposiblity to its users to make Wikimedia and all of its other sites a safe place for all users. Law enforcement likely doesn't have the resources or access to information to pursue these threats. WMF likely also lacks the information to pursue legal action but they can certainly improve automated content moderation to combat it. Nixovel (talk) 07:05, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::::::Your point of view is interesting.

:::::::::::Do you have any idea to improve automated content moderation ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:32, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::That does not stop this particular person, so this would have drawbacks with no positives. -- asilvering (talk) 02:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::@Asilvering I thought there were abuse filters that prevent blanking of pages for new accounts? Or is he doing something else? SimpleSubCubicGraph (talk) 04:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Something else. -- asilvering (talk) 04:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:::If it were an option then logged-in-protection for a longer period, not indefinite, might be the way. Anything heavier handed than that would be self defeating. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 19:44, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::::I agree. But I'm afraid that continued protections may ruin the page's purpose, but showing the current condition, we'll leave the protection as it is. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

:The individual responsible for this(who is banned by the WMF, not just us) targets the help pages precisely to make things as miserable and difficult for us as possible, as they know they aren't going to be unbanned. Unfortunately vigilance is the only thing we can do. Sometimes they create socks or change IPs faster than we can block them, so protection is regrettably sometimes necessary, but I don't think it should be indef. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::It's known that they are abusing a VPN service to do this, a la Nate Speed. This is why their IPs almost always get long-term blocks, either locally or globally. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:31, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:Minor listgap fix (please don't switch between asterisks and colons - it breaks screen readers, see MOS:LISTGAP). Now, for my comment - why is there no edit filter yet for this spam? I agree for not protecting the Teahouse indefinitely... but I also am quite shocked that this run of the mill spam that is always the same characters/format isn't yet blocked by an edit filter... -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 19:55, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::This is a WP:BEANS question, I'm afraid. -- asilvering (talk) 21:03, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::Multiple edit filters are in use. C F A 23:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::They structure their posts to beat the filters. 331dot (talk) 23:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

::To not go into too much detail, the edit screen puts paid to the claim that it's "the same characters/format". —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 18:30, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks all, I figured there were people smarter than me that had looked at it and considered it. I know there's limitations to how edit filters can work and at least people have been trying per CFA.

::For the record, I'm against protecting indefinitely - if it needs to be protected for 4-8 hours at a time... or just watched and reverted quickly, so be it. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 22:56, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:::I'm personally of the opinion that even 4-8 hours is longer than necessary to deal with this particular problem. -- asilvering (talk) 23:49, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:No, that would defeat the entire purpose of the Teahouse. It would also give the LTA exactly what they want. C F A 23:15, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

:Can't we just have pending changes protection for the time being? That will save the hassle of having to repeatedly semi-protect the Teahouse. — 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they) ^talk/edits 06:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::Yes. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 12:44, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::We tried that for a while a month or so ago, but some discussion over at I believe ANI led to a weak consensus that pending changes didn't help. You're going to get the legitimate IPs asking for help being unable to see their questions until someone approves them, or editors without the right being unable to see their changes if an unreviewed revision is already pending. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:53, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Tenryuu, ahhhhh, I see. That's unfortunate though, so many people won't get the help they need because of a single LTA troll. — 💽 🌙Eclipse 💽 🌹 ⚧ (she/they) ^talk/edits 00:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:I fear we are under constraint to indefinitely semi-protect teahouse or / and apply pending changes. Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:38, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

::What we should de then? CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 14:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:::@CreatorTheWikipedian2009 I have a question about your message dated "01/24/2025" at "14:52 UTC".

:::Is this message addressed to me ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:40, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

::::yes CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 09:22, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::What we should do then ? My answer is the next.

:::::I think we have only unsatisfying solutions like pending changes or / and semi-protect it.

:::::

:::::The problem with pending change is the next.

:::::Vandals can continue because logged-in editors see all edits, whether accepted or not.

:::::The problem with a semi-protection is the next.

:::::Legitimate editors who haven't an auto-confirmed account can't ask a question.

:::::This is a choice between plague and cholera.

:::::What is metaphorically the "plague" and what is metaphorically the "cholera" in this context ?

:::::

:::::I don't know what is metaphorically the "plague" and what is metaphorically the "cholera" in this context.

:::::I don't see a possibility to avoid this choice. How can we choose if we don't know how to identify "plague" and "cholera" ?

:::::It doesn't please me to say that but I fear that without alternative , we are under constraint to semi-protect the teahouse.

:::::Is semi-protect the "plague" or "cholera" ? Anatole-berthe (talk) 03:17, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::Excuse me @CreatorTheWikipedian2009 but I didn't pinged you.

::::::My answer is above. Anatole-berthe (talk) 03:18, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

:My controversial opinion is to NEVER protect teahouse. We have enough eyes on this page that vandalism doesn't show up for more than a couple minutes. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 23:08, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:The teahouses intention is to provide help and support. regarding questions made by any wikipedia editor. Most user who need help will be new users without auto confirmed rights. Semi protecting this page indefinitely would prevent it from fulfilling its role. We cannot let an internet troll and vandal permanently damage a crucial resource. Nixovel (talk) 04:25, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

The Teahouse should never be protected. It has enough watchers to quickly remove vandalism when it happens. HiLo48 (talk) 22:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

:Not when the vandal in question tends to edit-war to force their stuff in and the content requires RevDel. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:34, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

::I don't know what it means when you say "Not when...." there. HiLo48 (talk) 09:27, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

:::It means they are persistent enough that it's caused people to swear off trying to revert their garbage off (think the bullshit asymmetry principle albeit applied to this) and that leaving them alone is likely to just cause them to escalate from tamer stuff to issuing the death threats and harassment that got them 86'd. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:39, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

::::So just block them immediately. Shit, I've been blocked for far more minor offences. Don't take away a tool that's so valuable for beginners.HiLo48 (talk) 01:18, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::If only it were that simple. He hops IPs very quickly and has access to a fairly large pool of VPN addresses, and tends to camp his target. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 06:50, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::We don't have to protect the page once they post something here. I've suggested before that we just ignore their new section when they post and quietly remove it later, instead of reverting immediately which always results in semi-protection. It obviously wouldn't be ideal, but I think it would be better than always having the page protected (which in my opinion is much more disruptive to the project than the posts themselves – and disruption is exactly what they want). We could also revert-block-ignore without ever protecting the page until they run out of proxies. But I recognize I'm in the minority here. The best option, of course, would be a bot that automatically blocks their proxies beforehand, though no admin has taken that up yet. C F A 11:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

:::I just remembered we hat ST47proxybot, some time ago. It has since been deactivated, but did good work; does anyone know why exactly it is deactivated (I know ST47 isn't active anymore)...but could it be reactivated perhaps? Fwiw, I am also against permanent protection of the Teahouse. Lectonar (talk) 12:30, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

::::there has been a lot of discussions around ST47proxybot. the short answer is no. the bot is closed source for security reason, and ST47's point of view is that the solution lies in somewhere else, and one possible solution is the IP info tool where information if the IP address is a bad one or not is available. There is work currently being done to avail the information in the IP info tool to edit filter extension. Keep your fingers crossed! – robertsky (talk) 12:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

:::{{ping|CFA}} The guy's moduc operandi is to continue a harassment campaign against a specific contributor, and they have openly stated they believe they have the right to issue death threats. Leaving them to do as they will is not an option. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 16:41, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

::::Sure, but getting the Teahouse protected is the sort of whole-project disruption they're hoping for. They want as much attention as possible. We should not be making a big deal about this user like we sometimes do — if we just ignored them, they would get bored very quickly. I do wish the WMF would step in and help enforce their ban, though. C F A 00:56, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::You missed the part about continuing a harassment campaign. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 00:57, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::I'm well aware of what they're up to. C F A 00:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::::Perhaps a BRI approach would cut back on the edit warring. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:06, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

{{od|7}} I think I mentioned this previously either on this talk page or the talk page of one of the other heavily affected pages, but I guess it's worth repeating. Figuring out what to do with respect this problem is important for sure, but it's also probably something better off being discussed on some less public venue. If people are really concerned about doing something that "feeds the troll", then discussing things here or on the talk pages of any of the other affected pages might be counter productive and giving this person just what they want. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:16, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:Ok, we learned that we need to just protect (pending changes) Teahouse. This is the final decision. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 12:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::Editors may choose to request and apply page protection on a limited spot basis when there's active abuse, but forcing new editors to ask permission to edit The Teahouse would be contrary to the page's purpose. Welcome to Wikipedia, User:CreatorTheWikipedian2009, but as an editor with very few edits, you should probably avoid making broad pronouncements as above. Continuing to do so is unlikely to impress your fellows. BusterD (talk) 13:53, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Ok. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 13:55, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::Applying pending changes to the Teahouse is absurd. The Teahouse is not a reader-facing page. It's a page for coordination between editors. The only benefit of protection here is to prevent the spammer from spamming the page history, and pending changes protection does not mitigate this. The page should not be protected at all; it's watched by tons of admins and is a perfect honeypot for their spamming (likewise for the Help desk and for AN/ANI). Elli (talk | contribs) 15:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::So, the question about protection, and the protection of the page in general is debated. CreatorTheWikipedian2009 (talk) 15:36, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::::Exactly the opposite. Every editor above (except perhaps yourself) is against such protection except for the narrowest of purposes and for the briefest of periods. BusterD (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Elli, the Teahouse and Help Desk are the worst pages to use as honeypots for that purpose, since it runs the risk of a well-meaning new user interacting with him. I don't think I need to tell you why someone whose primary goal is attempting to harass another contributor off the project and who believes he has the right to threaten to kill other people who stand in his way should not be allowed to interact with new users at all. I'm in favour of short-term semis to stymie him absent movements by the WMF similar to what they were attempting to do with JarlaxleArtemis. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{threads critiques} 17:53, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::::Sure, it wouldn't be good for a new user (or anyone) to interact with him, but these edits are usually reverted within a few seconds. Protection makes the page completely useless for many new users (who aren't autoconfirmed). Elli (talk | contribs) 19:17, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::::@Elli You're right about the fact these edits are usually reverted within a few seconds.

:::::You're also right about the fact protection makes the page completely useless for many new users who aren't autoconfirmed.

:::::I suspect these vandalisms are maybe automated with one or more bots configured by a human.

:::::We defenders can be tired. I thanks all users who reverted these malicious edits.

:::::I reverted some of these and it's a boring thing to do. The time used for that could be used for others things.

:::::I acknowledge semiprotection is problematic but this is better than make a choice between monitor teahouse to protect it or make more usefull contributions in Wikipedia. Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

::::::@Elli Many time on this day , when I wanted to revert vandalisms. I had the message below :

::::::"The edit appears to have already been undone. You may have attempted to undo a page move, protection action or import action; these cannot be undone this way. Any autoconfirmed user can move the page back to its previous location, and any administrator can modify or remove protection."

::::::I can confirm defenders like me are there even if I'm far to be the best of them because I'm not the fastest.

::::::Defend is boring but have to be done if we don't semi-protect the page. Anatole-berthe (talk) 09:08, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

:I'm late to the party, but I'll give my two-cents. We advertise the Teahouse as being a space for new (strong emphasis on the "new") editors who need to ask simple questions. Indefinetely protecting the Teahouse, even if just C-protection, completely eliminates the point of it, as the editors who ask the questions have nowhere to ask them. We usually get to the vandalism before editors will have time to read it, so the only physical issue the LTA causes is edit conflicts, which h some editors may not know how to deal with. Either way, protecting it would be inflating an issue that is relatively minor. E_F⁵ 15:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

::Can we get this fixed...... there is already discussions going on about opening a new help page for unregistered users. Let's get this page back to the basics.... before it comes irrelevant. Moxy🍁 04:39, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

:::Starting a new help page isn't going to do anything. The LTA's just going to target that one as well. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:41, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

:So it looks like the consensus here is against indefinite protection of the Teahouse (and I firmly oppose it too). But I have a bit of a different question: what about the length of temporary protections?

:Should we keep increasing it (e.g. doubling it) every time the page has to be protected, or should we keep it at a rather short length (e.g. 1 to 7 days) each and every time?

:Man it's really hard to understand the minds of vandals sometimes, but um, I'm thinking keeping it a short length will be more likely to make someone bored of what they are regularly doing. — AP 499D25 (talk) 22:56, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

::Support short length. I've noticed that often, the minute it is unprotected, they come back. Less protection length = more "a few minute" intervals to ask questions. Also the point about getting tired of it. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 23:43, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

:::In addition, if we can fish the location of the original LTA account, we can use timezones to our advantage. Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 23:44, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

::I still don't think we should ever be protecting the Teahouse. C F A 23:43, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

::Could admins make it seem like a long protection, to prevent the LTA from checking until protection is over, but secretly remove protection soon after? Wildfireupdateman :) (talk) 19:13, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

::@AP 499D25 I think indefinite protection is not a good thing and I hope we could avoid this.

::I think protection have to be longer when used.

::Which length ? I think we have to choose a length longer than 1 days that does not exceed 7 days unless necessary. Anatole-berthe (talk) 07:34, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

Just wanted to note that as of a couple hours ago Teahouse has been indefinitely semi-protected VolatileAnomaly (talk) 03:34, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

:That is not true. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:39, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

::You're right, my bad. Missed the timestamp. VolatileAnomaly (talk) 04:53, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Question is in the title. That's all. — AP 499D25 (talk) 03:17, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

: I would say no; too off-putting and large there. However, I think it would be fair to add something like that to the edit notice, assuming a new editor can get that far; I'm not sure if they get to view the source but cannot edit it, or cannot even view it. If the latter, then probably they have no access to the edit notice, either. If it's possible, then one could use {{tl|If autoconfirmed}} to only include the message for newer users. You might try asking about this at Wikipedia talk:Editnotice, adding a pointer there to this conversation as well.

: Adding ping: {{u|AP 499D25}}. Mathglot (talk) 00:29, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

::Fun fact: There's a template for that called {{template2|Courtesy ping}}! QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 16:03, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:::{{courtesy ping|Mathglot}}. Like so! QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 16:04, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

:i'll disagree, but actually because of the reason the leaf juice abode is protected in the first place. if that's done, i think it'd only give the lta the idea to take the spam to multiple talk pages consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 20:03, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

Recent extended periods of ip disruption have caused me to very temporarily semi-protect the page. Any admin is welcome to downgrade this protection if desirable. Thanks to the many different editors who have helped deal with this disruption. I apologize for my protection choice on this very newbie-facing page; it's not something I enjoy at all. BusterD (talk) 01:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

:Don't worry; you or another admin will be reapplying it soon enough once it ends. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:38, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

:To me, the fact that there were many different editors who have helped deal with this disruption makes protection unnecessary. HiLo48 (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

::Help deal with disruptions like this is boring.

::"01/24/2025" in the morning (UTC+1). I participated in the defense of the teahouse.

::When defenders are defending , they are using time that could be used for others tasks in Wikipedia.

::I hold to thanks all others defenders including those who semi-protect the page.

::Each of us is essential. Anatole-berthe (talk) 05:00, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Planning to create a page Michael Ade-Ojo, but I notice the page [https://ha.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Ade-Ojo already existed in Hausa]. Is it okay to create a new page which has already been created in another language? Opyquad (talk) 07:57, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

:There's no issue, just be aware sourcing and notability requirements may be different on different wikipedias. CMD (talk) 08:54, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

::@Opyquad I can say to you @CMD had explained to you the basis.

::I saw few works you done for "Wikipedia in English".

::Before translate. I advise you to read "Wikipedia:Translation".

::Also , I advise you to read "Wikipedia:Notability (people)" and "Wikipedia:Reliable sources". Anatole-berthe (talk) 19:42, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Not sure where else to post this, so it'll go here. I have the THInvite script installed, but for two days in a row now it has automatically sent THInvite templates to people when my internet briefly disconnects, no matter what page I'm on. Yesterday the script automatically [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Departure%E2%80%93&oldid=1273761760 sent] a Teahouse invite to {{ping|Departure–}} without me even being on their talkpage. Today, I was working on 2024 Sulphur tornado and the script automatically [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:EF5&diff=prev&oldid=1273948306 sent] me an invite to myself, despite me not clicking anything. Has anybody else had this issue? Apologies if this is the wrong place to report this. :) — E_F⁵ 18:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

:Do you know if you were looking at a history when this happened? It seems the message go sent to people working on the same kind of extreme weather you do. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 12:45, 12 February 2025 (UTC).

::{{ping|Rich Farmbrough}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Onemillionthtree&oldid=1275277471 Happened again yesterday], while I was looking at January 5–6, 2025 United States blizzard. Yes, it's usually people who edit topics similar to me, because they are who are most likely to end up on my watchlist. E_F⁵ 14:23, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

:::{{re|EF5}} You want the tech village pump, which is where the "tech people" hang out. I note (from viewing your account JS) you're using numerous user scripts; the odds are one or more of these has something to do with it, possibly a conflict between different scripts which don't "get along" perfectly. You might find this annoying but unfortunately the troubleshooting process will probably have to start with "disable them all and see whether it keeps happening". --Slowking Man (talk) 04:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

I was told to raise this point over here. Hello. —ReadOnlyAccount (talk) 00:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

:This text comes from MediaWiki:Semiprotectedpagewarning, I think. I'm not sure what a solution would be, just wanted to mention what causes it. --rchard2scout (talk) 01:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)