Wikipedia talk:Help Project/Archive 4

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

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 That website is no longer active.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

{ { Bibleverse|BOOK#|BOOKNAME|c:v–c:v|SOURCE } } John 1:1 Joel 4:2 1 Maccabees 2:1–5 are not working.

{ { Bibleverse/sandbox|BOOK#|BOOKNAME|c:v–c:v|SOURCE } } John 1:1 Joel 4:2 1 Maccabees 2:1–5 are working.

The source code of Template:Bibleverse needs to be changed in its entirety to:the source code found here

Can someone take care of this? Kind regards, --@Efrat (talk) 06:54, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

Never mind It's been fixed. --@Efrat (talk) 07:43, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

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

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

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

Since this page is not much monitored nor very active, I went on to ask my question at the Wikipedia Teahouse on 27 November 2013. It was quickly and helpfully answered by Fuhghettaboutit on 28 November 2013, and the discussion may be found here.

 Done So in early February 2014, I have updated the "Closing discussions" page to make it explicit on where such requests may be made. Feel free to improve or copyedit what I added to that Help page. Cheers. N2e (talk) 14:17, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Now fixed. the wub "?!" 23:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi all,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

• Tuesday 18 Novembre 16:00 UTC
• Tuesday 18 Novembre 23:00 UTC

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

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

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

ping User:The wub

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

What should we mention in the news letter??

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

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

I've created two new navboxes:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia, Wikipedia:Tutorial/Editing, Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Editing now all have links to Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide....but more could be said. --Moxy (talk) 22:40, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I should have posted this update last week, but better late than never, I guess: The results from this test were posted last Tuesday at m:Research:VisualEditor's effect on newly registered editors/May 2015 study. Aaron's back from his vacation now, so you can ask him any questions you have about methodology, but my simple summary is that the group that had access to VisualEditor was slightly less likely to be reverted than the group without it, and everything else was the same.

There's also a related proposal at the Village Pump to give new users both editors. They would get exactly what you get if you opt in to VisualEditor via Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. Then they can choose which one they want to use for each edit.

Finally, if you haven't looked at VisualEditor for a few months, then you can have a quick look on a random article (requires Javascript/doesn't change your account settings). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

{{Wikipedia editor navigation}}

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

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

Also {{Main Page topics}}

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

Looks good - any amalgamation is good ! Lee∴V 12:01, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

For Wikipedia editor navigation, I like the concept & grouping idea. As far as the sequence of the Navboxes from top to bottom, thinking of a different arrangement. I will copy the wikicode into my offline Notepad to think about it for a while before making a recommendation. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Following up on WP editor navigation, most is good, suggesting a few possible sequence changes, shown below in draft list.

• General:
  • Wikipedia principles
  • Wikipedia key policies and guidelines
  • Essays about Wikipedia
• Welcome:
  • Wikipedia community
  • Main Page and featured content
• Help:
  • Wikipedia help pages
  • Wikipedia technical help
• In depth:
  • Manual of Style
  • Wikipedia referencing
  • Template messages

Hope this helps. Okay to disregard the groupings that I put in, helps me with classification. JoeHebda (talk) 19:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done thanks for your feeddback JoeHebda. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 09:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

{{Linking and page manipulation}}

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

Only one thought, for that See also, I would recommend a name change, to something like Additional. It would avoid any confusion since SA is also the exact name for article section titles. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: thanks for your comments. I will change the template as suggested. Regards --Jules (Mrjulesd) 15:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Can i get a few more eyes on some of our redirects that are begin moved...like our main page redirect that was moved a few days ago. Not sure if it a big(wide spread) problem but many many moves have taken place,,,all in good faith but not with knowledge of our main purpose for all the redirects.Moxy (talk) 06:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Hey there Moxy, I can't seem to find where WP:HELP was moved, your question is a bit confusing and I'm not sure I understand it correctly, would you like to rephrase it and {{ping}} me back? —Skyllfully ^(talk | _contribs) 03:48, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

@Skyllfully - Not a problem any more ...this editor was moving many pages ....but has now stooped and we have fixed all the problems. -- Moxy (talk) 12:25, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello all,

I've only just come across this excellent Wikiproject. I've started teaching VisualEditor workshops for scientists and noticed the lack of tutorials for VE, but a million competing ones for markup (the need for consolidation well noted in this Wikiproject it seems). I've made a couple of {{intro to}} tutorials, but before I went any further, I thought I'd mention here what I'm doing.

Since VE is relatively new, we actually have the opportunity to plan what help pages should exist! Therefore I thought I'd outline here what currently exists and perhaps we could briefly discuss what should exist:

User guides

WP:VisualEditor/User_guide - a thorough and detailed manual (probably roughly equivalent to WP:MARKUP)

MW:VisualEditor/User_guide - the mediawiki 'master copy' that details all versions of VE (e.g. citation menu layouts for different wikis)

'Introduction to' tutorials

Help:Introduction_to_editing_(VE) - basic VE functions (roughly equivalent to WP:Tutorial & WP:Training & WP:start & Help:Editing & WP:PANDAS#How_to_do_anything & WP:Training/Newcomers/Editing basics)

Help:Introduction_to_referencing_(VE) - VE editing and general reference advice (equivalent to WP:INTREF)

Help:Introduction_to_images_(VE) - VE image uploading and inserting (equivalent to WP:IUI)

Unique

WP:The_Wikipedia_Adventure - seemingly unique game-like format

Feel free to add to the above list if I've missed anything. My immediate plans are to make a couple of additional {{intro to}} tutorials for VE (Images, Templates) and have any policy section s synchronised with the equivalent markup pages by transclusion. I actually feel that the combination of the detailed WP:VE/UG plus the 10-minute intro to tutorials is really all we need (WP:TWA aside). By focussing on a smaller number of help pages, it should be possible to ensure more consistent quality and up-to-date-ness. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 12:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello all,

The Introduction to tables tutorial has been partially complete for a few years. I've had a go at updating it but it would be really useful to have a few other editors have a quick look over to see what content and detail level the community think needs to be included. The centralised talk page for discussion is here.

Looking forward to your input. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 12:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Many participants here are core editors, understand the problems faced at Wikipedia, know policy well, and much more. Well, these are just some of the considerations at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and maybe even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:15, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

At Help:Minor edit, it is currently a major edit to add tags and templates for improving overall quality of articles, but I am not sure as to whether just giving a simple heads-up that an area needs improvement, which is not much and therefore minor in this case, really is very major. Does anyone else think of the same thing? Gamingforfun³⁶⁵ (talk) 23:46, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Well for tags, tagged material, if not attended to, can be removed. So it is fairly important that this is a major edit, as it is more visible to everyone.

As for templates, I think it very much depends on the template in question. I'd imagine most navigation templates could probably be marked minor.

If you want to discuss changes, the Help talk:Minor edit is probably the best place to start. But remember that these are recommendations, they don't hold the same weight as policies and guidelines. You don't have to follow them, although you may be challenged if you don't. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 00:39, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

This seems like a very useful database and I would like to either locate (if it exists) or construct (if it doesn't) a template for citing it easily. Been brainstorming this a bit at Talk:Copyright Catalog#Citation guide but figured people here might know better.

The best way to do this appears to be on the basis of a registration number, which would be the first input field, but it also seems like a PID code is also needed to make the page display.

Aside from that I can think of additional but optional fields which could also be useful, such as 'title' or 'date'. I don't know how to code templates though, anyone want to have a go at it?

Cocatalog.LoC.gov is the website so I was thinking that while the full title could be Template:Copyright Catalog that a good redirect to it would be Template:Cocatalog or even Template:Cocat. Ideas? 184.145.18.50 (talk) 11:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I've just posted information about an upcoming change for editors who have the visual editor enabled. The information is at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 52#Single edit tab. If you currently have two edit tabs (Edit/Edit source), then this will give you the options of having only one Edit button, if you prefer that.

This change is likely to happen in mid-to-late April, and it's likely to result in a few editors coming to this page to ask what happened to their second edit tab/how to find the other editing environment. Please read that information, and share it with other editors. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 17:37, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Can you help me with Lets Marry? Moscowamerican (talk) 18:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Does a "help page" template exist that puts a banner accorss the top of a help page explaining what it is? I just looked at a couple of Help pages, and they don't have a banner accross the top - something I've come to expect from non-article space pages. For example, the information pages have this template that generates a banner at the top of the page that explains what it is: If one doesn't exist, should we make one? LK (talk) 06:12, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

{{Selfref|For Wikipedia's FAQs, see WP:FAQ.}}

I tried to add a link to Wikipedia's own FAQ at the FAQ dab page, but it was deleted.

Shouldn't the WP:FAQ page be indicated at the dab page?

-- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 03:57, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Replied at WT:FAQ. For future reference, queries for the help desk should go to Wikipedia:Help desk, not to this talk page: Noyster (talk), 09:37, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

It's not a query for the Help Desk, it's a query for the Help Wikiproject, since it involves linkages to a page managed by the Help Wikiprpject, and not a question asked for as editing help. Does the Help Wikiproject want such links to its own pages? ; I specifically chose to ask the Wikiproject because it was a question directly related to pages the Wikiproject manages, and not a general help question. -- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 23:28, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Please compare User talk:Blargh29/Using citation templates and Help:Referencing for beginners with citation templates and possibly other pages, and determine if the User talk page can be removed. Is a SD needed for a User talk page?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 13:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

I have designed a new template for internal help and community templates:

The idea is to allow easy navigation among the various help and community templates. Could be useful for useful for user pages, or nav'plate see also documentation.

Any comments would be appreciated. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 09:32, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi all. I'd like to invite you to participate in the Wikimedia Movement Strategy discussions, about our movement's overall goals, "What do we want to build or achieve together over the next 15 years?". It's currently in the first stage, of broad discussion. There are further details in the related metawiki pages (FAQ, lists of other simultaneous communities' discussions, etc). (Also, if you're interested in helping facilitate and summarize the discussions here, and to bring back here the summaries of what the other communities are discussing, please let me know. Thanks. :) Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:59, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello all! I wanted to let you know that the Wikimedia movement strategy core team and working groups have completed reviewing the more than 1800 thematic statements we received from the first discussion. They have identified 5 themes that were consistent across all the conversations - each with their own set of sub-themes. These are not the final themes, just an initial working draft of the core concepts.

You are invited to join the discussions taking place on these 5 themes here on Wikipedia (you can also use the Meta Strategy portal to locate and participate in discussions outside of English Wikipedia). This round of discussions will end on June 12th. You can discuss as many themes as you like; we ask you to participate in the ones that are most (or least) important to you.

Here are the five themes and links to their information/discussion pages here on English Wikipedia. Each also has a page on Meta-Wiki (follow the link in the previous paragraph!) with more information about the theme and how to participate in that theme's discussion:

• Healthy, Inclusive Communities
• The Augmented Age
• A Truly Global Movement
• The Most Respected Source of Knowledge
• Engaging in the Knowledge Ecosystem

On the movement strategy portal on Meta-Wiki, you can find more information about each of these themes, see the locations of discussions about them across numerous projects and languages, and learn how to participate.

Thanks for reading, and I hope to see you there! Kbrown (WMF) (talk) 17:07, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi,

One of the sub-departments of the Help Project is the Tip of the day. It is a collection of 365 helpful tips on using, developing, and participating in Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia and a community. The collection is displayed one tip per day throughout the Wikipedia community, day after day. The collection is set up as a "yearless year", so that it automatically recycles year after year.

We're always looking for editors to monitor the tips before they go live, to catch errors. We also need new tips to replace those that go obsolete from time to time. If you know of any cool browsing, editing, or collaborating tips...

Please share!

By the way, the template for monitoring the Tip of the day a day early is presented at the bottom of the page, below, for your convenience. To put it on your talk page like that, place "<ref>{{totd-tomorrow}}</ref>" somewhere on the page.

Cheers, The Transhumanist 02:48, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi. I'd like to invite you to Cycle 3 of the Wikimedia Movement Strategy discussions. This cycle is focused on the challenges identified by the research that was conducted in collaboration with experts, current/potential partners, and current/potential readers of the Wikimedia projects. Every week until the end of July, one challenge will be discussed, so if you're not interested in - say - challenge 1, don't forget to have a look on the page later this month.

If you want to ask a question, ping me or read the FAQ. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 23:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

FYI comments welcome Template_talk:Wikipedia_how-to#Proposed rename to "Wikipedia Help page"--Moxy (talk) 22:07, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Suppose someone is inspired to create a new help page, but instead of just launching it seeks some input for quality control and apprising consensus.... do we have any means of accomodating that?

• Something akin to "Articles for Creation" or "Draft"...
• If it passes muster, it joins ranks of other help files, but if it fails, get tagged something akin to "Failed proposal"?

I don't have anything specific in mind, just thinking about the myriad essays floating about and possible ways someone could try to advance them to play a greater role (or if that fails a lesser role). This is part of my general interest in housekeeping, that's all. Comments? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 02:50, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

These are my thoughts on this:

• Most pages in the "Help:" namespace I feel are not problematic. Most I have come across are generally well written and accurate, although some could definitely do with some expansion. Obviously useless could be dealt with MfD, but not many are. So no need for drafts really for this.
• Many essays (in the Wikipedia: namespace) I feel are fairly low grade. The problem with this being is they clutter Category:Wikipedia essays and make finding helpful ones less easy. But I think the best solution to this would be in userfication: move to User: namespace, which is easy to do for essays with one main contributor; and move them to Category:User essays. Another solution would be to have a "draft essay" category, and only allow them in the Wikipedia: namespace if of a high quality. But if something was done I feel it would be advantageous.

--Jules (Mrjulesd) 20:55, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. It certainly is like sifting beach sand without clearly marked buckets for different bits of material. Hope we can make some progress. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 20:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Just FYI being able to create these pages at will is a very long entrenched policy. ....so much so it's on our main page WP:PGLIFE.--Moxy (talk) 00:42, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Is there a Help: namespace template analogous to Template:Essay in development? NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 15:28, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

....See Wikipedia:Template messages/Wikipedia namespace....it's called under construction. ...it's set up for all name spaces. That seen and said very easy to make one if you like.Moxy (talk) 03:39, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Need help to improve format and opinion if anything objectionable.Also want to compress table. Please advice. ThanksRajiv Sharma (talk) 15:29, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

How does one find Help: namespace pages that have not been tagged with Template:Wikipedia Help Project ?

What is the procedure for getting pages properly assessed for Wikipedia:Help Project? I was under the impression that the B/C/Start/Stub scheme was intended for use with such pages. There are rather a lot of pages in Category:NA-Class Help articles, and I have found that a number of them are because Dthomsen8 (talk · contribs) has been making edits like this, and so nullifying the previous assessment. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 08:59, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Help Project. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello all,

I've done an overhaul of the Intro to MoS pages. I'm hoping to further update and improve the Help:Intro series and merge in some of the disparate help pages into the relevant Help:Intro pages (e.g. this and this). They already cover more up-to-date versions of all the info in WP:Tutorial. I'm hoping to eventually supercede the older tutorial, since I think it's off-putting and unhelpful to newcomers. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 22:24, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Because nobody seemed willing or able to coordinate the updating of all the Help Pages across en.Wikipedia following WMF's name change of the "Save changes" button to "Publish changes" last year, I've taken this task upon myself. It's taken days of rooting around and cajoling, but I think the job is now completed with my replacement yesterday of old, out-of-date screenshots for all but the most obscure processes or protected templates. Maintenance list here

Will somebody now take responsibility for checking my work, please?

I would add that we have had months of new user confusion at the Help Desks because of this issue, and that really ought not to have occurred. There is now the additional matter of ensuring a clear distinction in the minds of new editors between "Publish changes" and "publish" to mainspace. I've added a note to the front of the VE guide to that effect. Where else should it go? Could it be improved? I have also copied this post to Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:40, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I've put up a proposal at the Village Pump to replace the old WP:I and WP:T with the superior Help:Intro. Any opinions welcomed there. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 02:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

There are some very interesting help related comments and suggestions in that discussion Lee∴V 21:36, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

So, I prefer to use a black background with green text, as it's easier on my eyes. However, in the last couple of days it's messed up. The the Wikipedia background, not the article background has been black. The article background has been white, with green text. Just thought it should be reported to someone. ^{(talk page stalker)} CrashUnderride 14:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

@Crash Underride: Someone's asked the same question at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Bizarre display with green text/black screen gadget, so I suggest you watch for replies there. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:17, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Crash Underride: This is not a place to ask for help, it is the talk page for discussing improvements to the page Wikipedia:Help Project. You will probably get advice at WP:VPT; and it would be best if you mention that you are using the blackskin gadget. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:19, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I invite input at Help talk:Maintenance template removal, for clarifying the text about whether disputed maintenance templates should be removed after an RFC on the issue has concluded. Alsee (talk) 00:06, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Hello!

Have you heard about Growth team? 

The Growth Team's objective is to work on software changes that help retain new contributors in mid-size Wikimedia projects. We will be starting with Wikipedias, but we hope these changes will benefit every community.

We are contacting your project today, because you may be interested by what we work on.

8 ideas we consider: tell us what you think about them!

We are considering new features to build, that could retain new editors in mid-size Wikipedias. We will be testing new ideas in Czech and Korean Wikipedias, and then we'll talk to more communities (yours!) about adopting the ideas that work well.

We have posted the 8 ideas we are considering. We would really appreciate your thoughts and the thoughts from your community. Please share the ideas, and tell us what do you and your community think of those ideas before September 9.

Share your experiences with newcomers

We want to hear about what is working and what is not working for new contributors in your wiki. We also want to hear any reactions, questions, or opinions on our work. Please post on the team’s talk page, in any language!

Learn more about us

You can visit our team page to find out why our team was formed and how we are thinking about new editors, and our project page for detailed updates on the first project we'll work on.

Get updates on your project page

The Growth team's newsletter will provide updates regularly. You can subscribe to it.

On behalf of the Growth team, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 13:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I just gave this page a major revamp. It could look a fresh pair of eyes, especially from users that never used User:Citation bot before. Please give feedback at User talk:Citation bot/use. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 03:03, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

I just checked the wikilink Wikipedia:Annotated article and looked for advice on the sectioning of referencing /notes/bibliography. The article is a car crash, and technically wrong. It takes a 2007 article on a US railway topic and gives advice. Clicking links takes us to the 2018 version of that article, and that has multiple-issue warnings. Glancing at the list of useful advice; it takes us to a raft outdated (say pre- 2015) articles. If anyone is working in this area can I ask you to look at each one. --ClemRutter (talk) 13:13, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

I have made a proposal to remove IRC chat information from Wikipedia:Questions. You can discuss it at Wikipedia talk:Questions#Proposal to remove IRC chat from this page and I will be removing the information shortly if no other people show up to discuss it. Thanks Seahawk01 (talk) 03:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Consulting Help:Convert#Quick start, I found much of it confusing or possibly inadequate. I've made a number of edits there. Please check them over and correct any goofs I may have made, and {{ping}} me when you do so. Thanks! --Thnidu (talk) 18:47, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Template:DISPLAYTITLE: Instructions for this template, and documentation templates including it i.e. Template:Correct title examples, still refer to a totally non-explanatory help page on meta. I would have rewritten it, but I am not totally sure what it does! I suspect it searches a page for a string of characters and substitutes each instance with another defined string, i.e. non-standard cApiTalS, but it doesn't quite say that. ^{~^\}\_\.rTG'{~ 11:31, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

@RTG: Is WP:DISPLAYTITLE easier to understand? I have added a link to the documentation of Template:DISPLAYTITLE. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: It seems to say the template affects the title above the lead section. If that is the case, I am suggesting that starting with the nutshell on DISPLAYTITLE and clicking the link fullpagename, along with those unfamiliar multicolour pastel highlights, and links to non-descriptive meta sections which link to unrevealing phabricator entries, is probably... Um, I'm going to edit them all so they say this template is used to display a different title than is in the address bar, and/or when you need to display a different title than is in the address bar, use this template unless I am again mistaken. Thanks PrimeHunter. ^{~^\}\_\.rTG'{~ 13:04, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

{{DISPLAYTITLE}} is not a template, it is a behaviour switch. As such, it shouldn't be documented as if it were a template, that is misleading and leads to confusion. Its entry here already has a link to WP:DISPLAYTITLE. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:52, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Maybe, but it is a template at the moment, and it is documented in the template way, so I have edited it. It's just a copyedit basically. The coloured parts are now more obvious, the nutshell is a nutshell, and I believe the lead sentence is conveying what it was intended to, o7 ^{~^\}\_\.rTG'{~ 19:38, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

It is not a template. With templates, the first parameter is separated from the template name using a pipe; with behaviour switches, it's a colon. This uses a colon: {{DISPLAYTITLE:<span style="color:red;">Wikipedia</span> talk:''Help'' Project}} and its effects may be seen at the top. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:10, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

For me C++ is a foreign language, though I used to speak some Basic and HTML. In English, a template is a temporary overlay, or a preformed base. I consider this an overlay of sorts in the output, but really I just mean that it says, "Template:" at the top of the page.

However yes, you have stirred some understanding. My interest is piqued. In the template function there are often colon or pipe char after the function name, and thus determines the route of the code thereafter. It sinks. I joyfully bleed understanding. I look up expectantly, but C++ remains a mystery, tugging on my vision, a point somewhere near the top of the mountain. I wrench myself away and continue my journey marching toward Avalon, my eyes on the ground and the horizon, but my head in the sky, filled with anime visions. ^{~^\}\_\.rTG'{~ 13:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

It doesn't say "Template:" at the top of the page. The page where this behaviour switch is described is Help:Magic words. It is a Help page, in Help space. Not in template space. It's not a template. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

It's confusing to many users. In MediaWiki and therefore in Wikipedia discussions and documentation, a template is an editable wiki page in the template namespace. The page name starts with "Template:" in the English Wikipedia. Templates are created by editors of the wiki. Templates don't exist from the start when MediaWiki is installed on a server. Template:DISPLAYTITLE is a template which happens (on purpose) to have the same name as the magic word {{DISPLAYTITLE}}. The latter uses syntax similar to templates but is not a template. Magic words are part of the MediaWiki software at installation and cannot be deleted or edited by users. {{DISPLAYTITLE:title}} with a colon applies the magic word and doesn't know or care whether a template by the same name exists. {{DISPLAYTITLE|title}} with a pipe is no longer the magic word but a template call. The MediaWiki developers chose very similar syntax for templates and some of the magic words. {{DISPLAYTITLE}} with no parameter refers by MediaWiki definition to the magic word and not the template, but there is never reason to use {{DISPLAYTITLE}} without a parameter. If you want to call a template with the same name as a magic word without using a parameter then you can say {{Template:DISPLAYTITLE}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:22, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I see! @PrimeHunter:, thanks for this informative comment. When you wrote that "The MediaWiki developers chose very similar syntax for templates and some of the magic words", you revealed the source of much confusion. Design choices are not about function alone, but also about usability. Had a different syntax been chosen for magic words, say using {[…]} delimiters (or {/…\}, or ««…»», or whatever would work without also breaking the parsing of existing syntax), we might have fewer problems understanding what we're looking at. Yes, that's right, humans also read syntax, not just machines! Should I take this up on MediaWiki, perhaps? But the magic words help page has other problems as well, which I'll address in a new section. yoyo (talk) 01:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello,

Wikimania 2019 is organized into 19 “spaces”, which are all accepting proposals for sessions. This email comes from the team organizing the Community Growth space.

We would like to invite you to submit a proposal to the Community Growth space because of the actions you’ve done around newcomers on wikis. The deadline for submission is June 1. See below for Community Growth submission topics and session formats. Topics and sessions have to be in English.

In the Community Growth space, we will come together for discussions, presentations, and workshops that address these questions:

• What is and is not working around attracting and retaining newcomers?
• How should Wikimedia activities evolve to help communities grow and flourish?
• How should our technology and culture evolve to help new populations to come online, participate and become community members?

Recommended topics. While proposals related to all aspects of community growth and newcomer experience are welcome, the organizing team is particularly interested in proposals related to:

• Research on recruitment, activation and retention.
• Technological approaches
• On- and off-wiki engagement strategies
• Supporting diversity and cross-cultural newcomer experiences
• Lessons learned from beyond Wikimedia, and
• The future of newcomers and editing

If you are interested in seeing presentations around additional topics, but do not plan to submit a proposal, you can suggest additional topics here.

If your topic does not fit into our space, remember that there are 18 other spaces that could welcome you sharing your knowledge and perspective.

Types of session. We prefer sessions that are participatory, interactive, promote conversations, and give a voice to parts of our movement that are heard less often. We welcome the following session formats:

• Roundtable discussion
• Panel discussion
• Lightning talk
• Working session
• Teaching session
• Conference presentation

Poster submissions. Posters are also a good way to introduce a topic, or show some results of an action. Please consider submitting one!

More information about the Community Growth space, topics, and submission formats is available on the proposal page.

Please submit your proposal. The reviews will happen at the beginning of June.

If you have questions about Wikimania in general, please ask them on the Wikimania wiki.

Sincerely,
Trizek (WMF) (talk) 13:05, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
On behalf of the Community Growth leadership team

Hello, Help Project participants. Please see my question at Help talk:Talk pages#An example of a talk page. —⁠andrybak (talk) 09:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Greetings, Wondering if {{Inline talk templates}} can be changed to a narrower format? It is very wide and requires horizontal scrolling to follow a line across the display. Any improvement is way beyond me & requires expert help. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 12:47, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I followed the link you provided, it doesn't exhibit any width problem that I can see. It's just an ordinary dab page. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:04, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Fixed the link, it should have been the {{tl}} template but was mistakenly put as a link instead. I'm not sure what the best way to redesign that template would be, but agree that the current layout isn't optimal. the wub "?!" 23:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

It has been proposed that Portal:Contents its subpages and Portal:Featured content be moved to Wikipedia space and in the discussion came the possibility of moving to Help space. We would like to hear this wikiproject. See Portal talk:Contents#Requested move 9 October 2019.Guilherme Burn (talk) 21:22, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:23, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi. the first section on the main page for Wikipedia:WikiProject Help reads as follows. I would like to help the problem stated below.

Excerpt:

As one option, I have created a new category, below. this is designed to help new editors to find, as stated below, an "oasis of order amidst the chaos," namely a central category that can enable and assist others in finding helpful pages more easily.

• Category: Wikipedia help overviews.

However, this category is in danger of being DELETED.

could you please go to this category, click the link for the deletion discussion, and then add your thoughts there? we greatly need a wider amount of input. We appreciate any input that you could please provide. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Let's turn down the dramatization by a few notch here. There's a CFD going on. Just look at the CFD and evaluate the arguments. The world isn't about to end. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 19:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

ok, well said. I have revised the section heading. that's a good point. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 20:32, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Proposal to streamline the welcome template. Sdkb (talk) 06:57, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussions at Wikipedia talk:Introduction#Proposal: Redirect this page and WP:Tutorial to Help:Introduction and Wikipedia talk:Welcoming committee#Let's get rid of Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome to Wikipedia. Sdkb (talk) 22:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC) Sdkb (talk) 22:02, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

For the record, the discussion is now at Wikipedia talk:Introduction (historical)#Proposal: Redirect this page and WP:Tutorial to Help:Introduction. —⁠andrybak (talk) 16:56, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:New user landing page/Archive 1#Where should the "start helping" button link?. Sdkb (talk) 03:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I've just created Template:Simple help page, an editnotice for simple pages targeted at beginners (e.g. WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide). Please help spread it by adding it to appropriate pages! {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:37, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

If it is designed for pages in the Help namespace then Template:Editnotices/Namespace/Help might be the place to add it — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

MSGJ, my intention is for it to go only on pages that are simplified versions of more complex pages or designed explicitly for newer editors. Creep is certainly a problem beyond just those, but adding an editnotice for all help pages crosses into the realm of offering generic editing advice on pages that have shown no special need for it, and there might be concerns about that. I also think it's appropriate for some WP-space pages (another example is WP:Simplified ruleset), and while we'll hopefully someday better clarify which pages belong where, we're not there yet. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:00, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay that makes sense. I would prefer to see a bit more discussion before adding this edit notice to so many pages. I will post a link here from VPR to make sure it has consensus. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:11, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Support - this seems like a good idea. It is unquestionably important that new editors understand policy, and to achieve that goal, we should be ensuring that our policies are (in some form or another) understandable to new editors. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 19:49, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose. WP:CREEP is a widely-recognized shortcut. Editors who are not affected by it will not be affected by an edit notice. I note the irony of fighting instruction creep with instruction creep. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:19, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Oppose: What ^^^ he ^^^ said. Regards, GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 21:38, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I disagree with having this edit notice. Banner blindness is a significant problem and edit notices should be reserved for the most urgent concerns. Managing an appropriate level of detail on help pages can be done adequately with the usual editorial process. isaacl (talk) 21:46, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

@Isaacl: (and also Mandruss and GenQuest): this notice as proposed is only for pages that are simplified versions of more complex pages or designed explicitly for newer editors. These are the most urgent cases. Go take a look at WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide or pretty much any other supposedly simplified version of a help page — they are notoriously barely any simpler than the page they're supposed to help clarify; the usual editorial process has very much failed to keep them from becoming bloated. They all need to be trimmed, but without a more structural change to help them WP:ENDURE, they will just start expanding again. An edit notice is the best way to try to curb that cycle. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 22:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I understood your proposal for putting the notice on specific help pages; I just don't agree with your interpretation that it is an urgent matter requiring an edit notice. Also, in my experience, edit notices generally aren't very helpful at persuading editors not to make certain types of edits (banner blindness and people just not worrying about advice are the most likely reasons). isaacl (talk) 22:46, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

• Support this a very good idea. We need this to avoid unnecessary talks and over-detailing. This a brilliant idea Tbiw (talk) 13:33, 8 June 2020 (UTC)^{Moved from VPR}
• I'm neutral, but one concern is likely edit notice fatigue. Eventually people will start ignoring it, and maybe other more important edit notices. I don't really see the benefit of adding such generic advice to help page edit notices. — Wug·a·po·des​ 21:06, 8 June 2020 (UTC)^{Moved from VPR}

  @Wugapodes: Probs best to avoid a WP:TALKFORK and have the discussion at WT:Help Project, but for what it's worth, the intention is clarified over there to be that it would specifically be added to help pages that are explicitly designed for newcomers - not just all help pages, or even a significant number of them. Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 21:10, 8 June 2020 (UTC)^{Moved from VPR}

  Thanks, I've closed this with a pointer to the discussion so that it's more obvious where to go. — Wug·a·po·des​ 21:33, 8 June 2020 (UTC)^{Moved from VPR}

• Support. To editors who see irony in fighting fire with fire, sometimes that's what it takes. In my humble opinion, this is one of those times. I do like editor Pppery's idea to add {{Simple help page}} to {{Help Introduction/editnotice}} and to rename the latter template. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 04:27, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
• Alt suggestion Support - One option might be to use an Editnotice to display it only to editors going in to edit the page (current example for for the WP:I editnotice). That ay we avoid header tags wherever possible except for editors actively about to edit the page. In the long run, it'd be nice to have a bot warn a article talkpage and recent editors when a page gets above a designated byte length an/or reading complexity! In the same way that editcount shapes editor tendencies via gamification, so too could optimising page length or readability etc. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 04:38, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

  Evolution and evolvability, could you clarify what the "alt" aspect is of your suggestion? The template is already intended as an editnotice. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:45, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

  • @Sdkb: Hah, I misread it in haste and thought it was a proposal to add a status template to the top of the page! Please treat my re-suggestion of the same proposal as a support! T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)^talk 08:37, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

• Support This would be great! P,TO 19104 (talk) (contributions) 14:20, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

It looks like I'm talking to myself...would love to have others' perspectives. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

For the record, these were archived at Wikipedia talk:Contact us/Archive 5#Jimmy Wales line and Wikipedia talk:Contact us/Archive 5#Responding to threats of harm?. —⁠andrybak (talk) 17:00, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi folks, there is a preliminary discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Template_index/User_talk_namespace around whether we should link to different warning pages in the most common warnings.Your input would be appreciated. Cheers, Darren-M talk 17:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) § Better designating the reader-facing and editor-facing areas of Wikipedia. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 07:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Help talk:Contents § Small addition. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Task Center#Refining the tasks listed here. Sdkb (talk) 01:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC) Sdkb (talk) 01:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Is there a tool that will show me who has viewed a particular page? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:06, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019: I don't think this information is even recorded. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:27, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

OK Thanks. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 11:35, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Help:Glossary. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) § Directing users to VE or Wiki Markup help pages based on what they actually use. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:49, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Raised again at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Guiding_newcomers_to_editor-specific_advice. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 23:03, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussions at MediaWiki talk:Cite-ve-dialogbutton-citation-educationpopup-text and MediaWiki talk:Visualeditor-linkinspector-educationpopup-text. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi. We have a lot of introductory pages, and a lot of guides and central pages to help newcomers to find introductory pages. I felt that instead of adding another page to list the links, perhaps a nav box might be helpful to some newcomers.

Below is what I came up with so far. Please feel free to comment, provide feedback, etc. this is Template:Introductory pages. thanks!

Thanks! ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 23:03, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

This is unfortunately a pretty textbook example of the WP:BADBEGINNER problem. I've nominated the template for deletion. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:49, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals) § Changes to VisualEditor instructional pop-ups. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:36, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:New user landing page § Welcome link. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 20:02, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

FYI Template:Five pillars box (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion. Apparently this is supposed to help users navigate to the WP:5P pages? -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

FYI, Template:Glossary term (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion. Apparently this is related to the glossary help pages. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at MediaWiki talk:Signupstart § Moving username message to appropriate location. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 04:46, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

FYI {{Creation/1}} and {{Creation/2}} have been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 14:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

FYI WP:article wizard has been proposed to be renamed; see Wikipedia talk:Article wizard -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:41, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Help talk:Introduction to policies and guidelines/1#Requested move 27 January 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ASUKITE 16:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I have recently lost my password, and found the Special:ResetPassword page unhelpful. It did not send me an email.

I created a new account and only then realized that there is a Preference that requires that BOTH the email and the username be provided, and that my old account had this preference enabled. There was no mention of this on either the special page or the corresponding help page. Once I entered both fields, I was sent the email and able to access my account.

I think that either the Help page or the Special page needs to mention this caveat. If nobody cares to disagree in timely manner, I will edit the Help page myself, but I'm asking for comment now. Henstepl (talk) 20:11, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

I have edited the page with a note. Henstepl (talk) 18:44, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Template:Double soft redirect has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 04:53, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Template talk:User access levels#Requested move 30 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ❯❯❯ Raydann^(Talk) 17:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Citation templates § References not notes, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 10:45, 18 August 2024 (UTC)

There is a requested move discussion at Help talk:How to import articles#Requested move 15 January 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. JJP_Master (she/they) 03:21, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

At the top of Wikipedia:Help Project, a banner says: Assessed quality: 100% complete [...] Assessed importance: 99.9% complete. I could not find the remaining 0.1% of pages importance of which hasn't been assessed yet. So my question is: is assessment complete? And a follow-up to that: is the banner at the top of Wikipedia:Help Project still useful? —⁠andrybak (talk) 11:34, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

If that's what it says, I'd assume it is indeed complete; congrats! I have no issue removing the banner from the top. Our current collaboration ought to be perpetually improving clarity and reducing WP:CREEP on beginner pages—that's less measurable but far more important. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:13, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

WP:Rater seems to be having difficulty recognizing this project's talk page banner. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:30, 17 October 2021 (UTC)