Wikipedia:Wiki Guides/Welcome new users

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

{{rfctag|policy}}

In order to increase participation, Wikipedia should welcome new users.

This is part of a series of RfCs that came about early during the Wiki guides project. The objective is to generate new active contributors to help fulfill the Wikimedia Foundation's goal of increased participation. A recent update from the Wikimedia Foundation is helpful in understanding the need for new users. - Hydroxonium (talk) 06:49, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Summary

All new users should be welcomed, with a bot if necessary and before any talk page templates are placed. (see also — strategy:Proposal:Welcome all useful new users, if necessary by a bot)

View from User:TomStar81

I've been a new student many times in my life - so many, in fact, that I need both hands and a foot to count the times I've been new. Throughout the new student experience though one thing remained constant: Someone in the classroom always came up to me and said "Welcome to our school! I'm (name), and I can help you if you need anything." This was always a major relief, because you want to know who you can rely on for information as the day goes by.

Sadly, on Wikipedia, this welcome philosophy doesn't exist. Normally, when I am out on csd patrol, the pages I find for new users are riddled with csd notices and nothing else. For my part, I add the welcome template whenever I can, but I am one user and the site is huge - like colossal huge. Even if I spent the rest of my natural life here I doubt I'd be able to welcome everyone, yet I feel that everyone deserves to be welcomed. All of us - from the oldest of the old to the newest of the new - were new here at one point in time, and for us to assume we had it any easier when we were new is silly. Welcoming new users should be the first mandate of anyone dealing with a new user, regardless of why said user came to the newbies talk page in the first place. Its really not that hard to type subst:welcome and save before leaving your intended message, and it demonstrates an element of good faith by showing that we are not so obsessed with policy, guideline, and schedule related work that we can not come up and shake a hand and say in our own little way "welcome aboard, glad to have you here. Drop me a line if you need help." If we make an attempt to show that we are actually glad to have a new user here we may be able to gain and retain new users rather than scaring them off with a business only approach we have taken with the new users right from the start. TomStar81 (Talk) 09:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this view

TomStar81 (Talk) 09:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Buster Seven Talk 21:39, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Zaereth (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In my capacity as an administrator and volunteer, not as an employee action. Philippe Beaudette, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:38, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'll try this approach next time I'm NPP or RCP- ing! Sumsum2010·T·C 22:34, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Herostratus (talk) 06:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
abhishek singh (talk) 19:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
bobrayner (talk) 15:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

View from User:Buster7

The NEW WIKIPEDIA EDITOR senses the Wikipedia Community and they want to be a part of it. They reach out to shake hands and that first handshake should be friendly. Reciprocity. Its why Wal-Mart has a greeter at the front door of ALL their stores. It creates a bond, a customer, good will. It makes good business sense. Using the Wal-Mart greeter as an example, the First Contact Veteran Editors (FCVE) should not be there to help the New Editor decide on a red hat or a blue hat (or which aisle to shop in) but merely say a hearty "Hello" and point out where the HAT department is, if asked. The FCVE is the face of WikiPedia; a warm smile, a friendly greeting, assisting, re-assuring. The Initial Contact (FCVE) that the New Editor has with a real live fellow editor should be smooth and it should create an opening for the new editor to "walk" into. Reciprocity. It should never be an Attack. "You broke the rules. You walked on the grass. You left the assigned area and dared to think you could edit. You need to be reprimanded and, perhaps, placed in detention, until you read the 57 page manual and learn what is right"!
The Focus of the First Contact should never be about rules. It should Always be about "Welcome to Wikipedia"!: It should be obvious that the majority of New Editors do not come to do harm. And yet, it seems that the way things are now, that is not the assumption that many veteran editors envolved in the "early life" of a new editor have. Many New Editors are casual users that will either "sell" or condemn Wikipedia based on their experience here. We should do all that is possible to make that experience a good and fertile one. POINT:every New Editor should be specifically, and with a determinite effort, be referred to as EDITOR not user or newbie or n00b or whatever. They are editors at their first "Save". WE need to change the conversation, the 'meme', that is prevelant about New Editors. We need to respect them right from the start as equals.; WE need to let them know, right from the start, that they are not alone; that they are part of a community, part of a partnership. We walk alongside them, a short way down the path into WikiWorld. Sounds sappy but is necessary to counter the less than savory moments they will definitely experience. They don't know it yet but there are Grenades (Toxic Editors,as Jimbo has called them) on the path. If they pick one up...and pull the pin....POW! Let them know there is a friend they can call to soften the blow. Buster Seven Talk

Users who endorse this view

Buster Seven Talk 21:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Zaereth (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jane Peppler (talk) 11:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC) My first contact was somebody who threatened to pull my first article Fanny Gordon because it didn't have enough sources. That was creepy and depressing. My second contact was Buster here! He was nice and made me feel welcome.[reply]
Herostratus (talk) 06:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
abhishek singh (talk) 19:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

View from Zaereth

OK, I'll give my $0.02. I started off making a few talk page comments as an IP. Not familier with the project yet, I wanted to learn before making any actual edits. If not for the encouraging words of one editor, I probably never would've bothered to start an account.

Still wanting to learn, I decided to do a little observation. I chose what was probably the most controversial article at the time, mostly because it was close to home. That experience was a real eye-opener for me. During this time, I recieved only one cryptic warning, (no specifics, although I'm guessing it had to do with a vandalism edit prior to mine). I finally decided to join some very heated discussions, met some very interesting people, and got a general feel for the place.

I finally had to take a much needed break from that article, and began delving into scientific topics, where I found the community, for the most part, to be much friendlier. I found an article which I had some experience in, and searched the talk pages to locates some knowledgeable editors who could assist me. I got no responses from the first article, even when I went to some of the users talk pages. Rather discouraged at that point, I decided to comment on another article which I had some experience in. That was when I finally met an editor who seemed willing to give some advice. After this long ordeal of my arrival here, he finally placed the welcome template on my talk page, which I found to be very helpful.

I try to add the same message to any new editor I come across, although I'm not familier with templates. I usually just copy/paste from my talk page. However, Wikipedia is usually just something I do when I'm on break, or on one of those "terminal hold" phone calls, so my time is often very limited in this respect. But I know how far a little encouragement can go, so I try this whenever possible. (Usually not with vandals, though. Too many, no where near enough time, so I just revert and go.)

However, I often find a written message will generate a lot more good will than a mere template will accomplish alone. Barnstars are pretty, but, given a choice, I get much more satisfaction from a simple, "Hey, nice job." I usually try to make all my welcomes unique, and taylored for the individual. This seems to generate a much better connection, I think, and is possibly something we shouldn't stop after the welcome. Zaereth (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this view

Zaereth (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Buster Seven Talk 23:51, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jane Peppler (talk) 11:51, 21 March 2011 (UTC) a template welcome is not much of a welcome at all.[reply]

View from User:J04n

I'm very much in tune with everything written above this except the phrase with a bot if necessary (emphasis mine). I know that the numbers are daunting but when we see that red talk link we should be saying hello and if we're around frequently enough inviting them to ask for advice. Being welcomed by a bot is barely more than getting a confirmation email when registering to get frequent flyer miles, getting a link to someone's talk page who has been in dialog about content, praised for their work, and received comment for their mistakes is invaluable. Better yet if the newbie is editing an article that you have a close connection to or your username is frequented throughout that article's talk page your personal greeting can serve as in inspiration to someone starting out. Even if the edit made by the newbie goes against all of our rules, if you believe it was made in good faith, make you message informative but still welcoming: Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. It pains me to say this but the subject of the page you added X does not look like it meets our...I know it can be confusing at first as to what can be included here but here is a link to the relevant guideline and more importantly here is a link to my talkpage, feel free to drop me a line if you have any questions. We should be opening dialogs not just saying hi and giving a reading list. J04n(talk page) 11:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this view

J04n(talk page) 11:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strange Passerby (talk • contribs • Editor review) 15:24, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mr.Z-man 16:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also think the reading list aspect can be tl;dr for many new users. And frankly, I don't see much point in welcoming obvious vandalism-only accounts. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:12, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Being welcomed by a bot or a template is barely better than having a welcome banner. A better rule is "if a new editor has nothing on their talk page, make sure their first talk page entry is NOT a template." I think that would immediately see better results. Shooterwalker (talk) 13:03, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Jane Peppler (talk) 11:53, 21 March 2011 (UTC) as a newcomer I must remind you that the pages we newbies are directed to are mostly almost unreadable by newbies. One gets used to the daunting wikipedia style but at first it seems like it's from Mars.[reply]

View from User:Ajbpearce

I generally agree with the intelligent comments that have already been posted above, one thing I think should be added though is that I think we need to be clearer that welcoming should be about more than just sticking a template on the talkpage of a new user. If all that happens is that an editor dumps a template on someone's talk page and then moves on to whatever they were doing before, that is a task that could effectively be done by a bot. As wikipedians if we are welcoming someone to the community I feel that places some obligations on us, to actively try and engage with a new user both "professionally" - to ensure they feel comfortable with editing wikipedia and answer any questions, and "personally" to engage with them socially so that they feel that they are joining a community of real people rather than an abstract project. We need to be clear that we are doing more than simply saying "hello", providing a list of common problems and a contact address. Instead, we should be seeking to actively engage with new volunteers, check up on their progress and how they are settling in, and actively looking to develop working relationships or friendships with them, just like you would welcoming someone to an offline community. My perception, is that too often "welcoming" is seen as a technical act rather than one of friendship - which is detrimental to the project and to ourselves. Ajbpearce (talk) 21:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this view

Ajbpearce (talk) 21:51, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
--Tryptofish (talk) 23:11, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mr.Z-man 00:14, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strange Passerby (talk • contribs • Editor review) 01:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

View from User:Fetchcomms

Many people have written that they don't like being welcomed. It's simply annoying. I liked exploring Wikipedia for myself; I was never welcomed and glad that someone didn't spend a second sticking an ugly plaque on my talk page.

Welcome people with a bot? How insensitive is that? It defeats the whole purpose of welcoming. The reason I like Wiki Guides is because it discourages clicking a button to add a boilerplate and instead writing a personal email that addresses some problems a user may have already faced (a deleted article, a reverted edit, etc.).

Users who endorse this view

/ƒETCH COMMS / 22:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
--Tryptofish (talk) 23:12, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mr.Z-man 00:15, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Strange Passerby (talk • contribs • Editor review) 01:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. The vast majority of other websites (aside from some wikis) don't do welcomes either, so it's a Wikipedian peculiarity to think that users are going to get confused and leave if we don't dump some templates on their page five seconds after they make an account. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:21, 14 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 02:05, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I also enjoyed finding my own way. Sumsum2010·T·C 22:36, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would have considered being welcomed an insult. Guoguo12 --Talk-- 02:49, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

View from User:Mono

I've never found welcomes helpful in the least. They contain links to boring pages and not much more.

Users who endorse this view

Mono (talk) 23:33, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to make mine more engaging. Except, I can't really user it after the Japanese tsunami. /ƒETCH COMMS / 05:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

View from User:Shooterwalker

"If no editors have previously contacted an editor on their talk page, do your best to ensure that the first thing on their talk page is NOT a template message." Templates are just humans imitating bots, bots are just dynamic banner creators, and welcome banners don't do anything.

Users who endorse this view

Shooterwalker (talk) 13:06, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. And if there are already templates, and the user is acting in good faith, it's a good idea to add a personal message then too. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:18, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

View from User:Johnuniq

The proposal is one of those ideas that does not stand up to thought. We all agree that a sincere and helpful welcome to useful new users would be good (well actually, no, there are people who do not welcome the intrusion of strangers as some comments above confirm). But how many welcomes can be extended while maintaining sincerity? This proposal would result in people dropping one of those exaggerated welcome templates on every user with a red link (I have seen wikilove messages delivered to vandalism only accounts). There is no way that a bot could guess whether someone with under 100 edits is being helpful, and while some personalities may like being greeted by a bot, there are plenty who would hate the idea (and many of the editors who would dislike a fake welcome would probably be those of most value to the encyclopedia). Some of the ideas in the proposal are particularly unhelpful (for example, target the welcome by delivering cookies to American female editors). Finally, have a nice day. Johnuniq (talk) 07:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Users who endorse this view

Johnuniq (talk) 07:22, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are some users who are not welcome on Wikipedia. Let's not give false impressions that they are. MER-C 12:35, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
--Tryptofish (talk) 20:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

View from User:ThatPeskyCommoner

Just a suggestion: any way of 're-welcoming' users who have come back to Wikiland after a long break, having (possibly) done very little before? It's changed a lot in the past few years, and a suggestion of a brief 'revision' course and a 'welcome back' message would be good. Perhaps a 'welcome back' after a dozen or so constructive edits, just to be sure they mean it! I'm sure there must be some clever way of filtering to produce a list of those who'd qualify.

Users who endorse this view

ThatPeskyCommoner (talk) 06:32, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.