Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

What was your experience like when you were a new editor?

For me...frustrating! I did gnomish tasks as an IP and then eventually I made a username and I got yelled at my fair share. For doing too much work, for screwing up DAB's, and of course my first or second article was deleted because I had no clue how notability worked :) That's a bit different now of course, but, I still get frustrated by fellow users curtness and attitude when correcting my errors or telling me I did something wrong. So what was your experience like as a new editor? Perhaps we can learn from our past experiences to create better experiences for our Teahouse guests :) SarahStierch (talk) 23:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

At first, editing was very daunting. From articles with infoboxes and templates to Wiki markup, you didn't know where to start. Slowly, you get used to editing and using templates. Soon after that, I started to manually undoing unconstructive edits. In reality, you can used to Wikipedia really quickly. -- Luke (Talk) 04:00, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

For me it was theoretical but exciting. I lurked as an ip, reading through the amazing tome of policies. I couldn't believe how much thought had gone into the community. Just as the pending changes debate was peaking, I started chiming in to policy, reminding people that ip editors were valuable, and trying to understand where the motivations for PC were coming from. I started doing some major copyedits to long but poorly organized articles, and I loved the feeling of leaving a page more readable and ordered than I found it. My real education began when I tried to change a seemingly innocuous sentence at Chiropractic which turned into a 6 month long debate about NPOV, attribution, reliable sources, and undue weight. I learned a lot from that conflict, not least of which is that conflict is a very frustrating way to learn. Around this time I also started doing anti-vandal patrol, which gave me a great sense of purpose in that winning the battle against vandalism seemed possible with the assistance of various tools. My later work involved a lot of article creation and expansion in less controversial areas of alternative medicine and pseudoscience. I took on different roles--skeptic, mediator, researcher--and saw there was more to do than just wrestle with single points of dispute. I befriended useful editors of all persuasions and dispositions and learned it's better to have people you can talk to, even if you don't agree with them. This is when my deep reading about help documentation began and I started trying to educate myself as an editor in the finer points of policy and syntax. It eventually led me to the Wikipedia-en-help irc channel where I learned much more from helping other editors than I ever did from writing my own articles. It feels like many things have come full circle and many are just getting going or getting started. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 04:56, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

My beginning was more like Ocaasi's - I lurked, a lot. This account was created in May 2008, I didn't make an edit for months, then after 35 edits (most to userspace) I didn't edit again for over a year (basically all of 2009). Much of that time though was spent reading through old ANI's, ArbCom reports, and talk archives. I would start at WP:Missing Wikipedians, pick out a random editor and try to learn as much as I could about the reasons they left and the various conflicts that occurred on-wiki around the 2004-2007 time. Fascinating stuff, TBH. Once I started editing it was minor stuff (as in so minor I can't figure out what I did). I tried reverting vandalism manually...and I mean I even copied the warning messages (no templates) from other pages. It wasn't until this edit and a few more on that article that day that I finally got hooked. I was invited to work on that article with one of the best editors I ever knew (he was the perfect newbie...went through the tutorial, knew what he was doing...etc). We took that article to GA and I haven't looked back since. Eventually I got involved in WikiProject Wikify through the WP:GOCE, and that took all my time for a while. Enjoyed every minute. Wouldn't do a thing differently. I think. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:08, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I too was a lurker. I tend to be inquisitive - I often found myself reading something on Wikipedia then clicking every link I saw; this started to creep into links in page templates. I because reasonably well-versed in Wikipedia policy well before I regularly edited. I created my account two years before I would say I began editing Wikipedia, making sporadic edit when I saw typos and things - my monthly edit count is quite revealing. I had also spent a lot of time on other wikis, primarily through Wikia, before coming to Wikipedia. That taught me a lot about the technical side, so I came to Wikipedia already able to use wiki markup, create tables, etc. Having said that, I was certainly inexperienced with the community side of Wikipedia - I interacted with about 5-10 active editors on the wikis I regularly edited (though I like to think that I settled in rather quickly). ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:07, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

I managed to completely avoid the whole lurking thing. :) One afternoon a friend came around to my office and explained a bit about how to edit (such as what rvv meant), and I decided it was time to try it out. I picked an innocuous page that no one would notice and worked on that, (my local suburb), reading all of the policies and guidelines as they became relevant. And then I started throwing myself into different experiences to see what they were like - GA, FAR, saving articles at AfD, mediation, template coding, whatever I thought would help me get an idea of what it would take to meet exceptions on WP. It was all pretty painless. I did get caught up in some disputes very early, but I was expecting that and it didn't really worry me.

Given my background, the markup wasn't going to be a big concern, and disputes come with my day job. I can't think of anything that gave me pause, but I tackled Wikipedia because of an interest in Wikipedia itself and a desire to understand how it worked, so I didn't invest myself in the content. The things which would be of concern to people who are primarily interested in subject matter weren't therefore a worry, so losing an article I worked on at AfD or getting reverted wasn't as bad as it might have been. - Bilby (talk) 14:52, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

My son had done some editing a few months earlier so I figured I'd give it a go, and I created an article, Book League of America. After that, I was excited and eager to learn more about the whole editing thing. There was a huge learning curve such as reference templates... I saw them on other article pages, but couldn't figure out how to get them into the article I was working on in some automated way, so I typed them by hand into the spot where I wanted them. About 6 weeks after my first edit, I received a Welcome template with links to what I suspected were "policies". I followed those link and couldn't believe that there were policies within the policies within the policies... So much to learn. Yup, I, too, had at least a couple of articles deleted early on (lack of notability); was admonished for copyright infringement while thanked for appropriate referencing; and was questioned about redlinks within dabs. I dreaded the orange bar on top of my talk page, as I figured someone was going to tell me I made another mistake, but the fact is, no one was really snippy, and editors started asking me for my opinion, not just criticizing what I had written, and so I didn't get discouraged. --Rosiestep (talk) 03:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Q&A

I was just looking at the Teahouse pages and noticed that clicking the 'Ask a question right now' takes one to the Q&A page. Once you are at the Q&A page, clicking that button does nothing. To me, this seems very confusing for new users - if they want to ask a question, they'll click on the ask a question button, which they shall conclude is not working. We can't rely on them working out they need to click the Edit button (after all, to them, they don't want to edit anything, just ask). This button should really take an editor to a form where they can ask their question (maybe similar to the 'Add a New Section' on talk pages) from wherever they are on the teahouse. Is that possible? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 15:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

It is not only possible, it exists right now! To try it, I think you still need to check a box under your Preferences > Gadgets > Browsing > "Ask a question" feature for the Wikimedia Foundation's "Teahouse" project. heather walls (talk) 16:44, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Ah ok, thanks - that seems to work. Will the default setting for that be on? Because I doubt many new users will know to go to their preferences and turn that on. Also, might I suggest one improvement? Currently, if you click the link from the Guests or Hosts page, it serves as a link to the Q&A page. Instead, it might be better to make it open up the question box when clicked from any page, then submit the question and redirect the user to the Q&A page (maybe with a notice telling them what is happening). Other that that, it looks very good. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:11, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for trying it out, and for your suggestions! We are looking into making 'on' the default setting. As for the 'ask a question' links, I was actually supposed to change those on the other pages, but I haven't done it yet. When I revise that we can review and see if things make more sense. We do hope to work out bugs and make things more intuitive as we go along. heather walls (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I guess you'll need community consensus for making on the default setting. I'm glad you're looking to make it intuitive - that will be important, I feel. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:53, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Zippy. The links on the other pages have all been customized now. What do you think? - J-Mo 19:07, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

That looks good, Jtmorgan. I wonder - could there be box similar to the question box for the introductions page? It's not a big problem at the moment, but new users will still have to navigate code. As I said, nothing huge, so don't worry if not. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Hehe. We'll see :) Getting any gee-whiz functionality at all is a minor miracle. Right now, I think the question box gadget is necessary (I've argued hard for it) because:

* a) it's important to make things very easy for brand-spanking-newbies, many of whom are here because they are struggling with markup in the first place(!), and

* b) the format of a question is unlikely to change, so we can afford to hard-code some stuff.

With the intro-boxes, however, we want the option of changing their layout, or the fields options they offer, so a more flexible system is better, IMHO. We could also expect that the kind of new user who decides to make an intro for themselves has been around a little longer and are a little more comfortable with markup. - J-Mo 21:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

That sounds very reasonable, actually. And it is very nice to see functionality in the way we have at Q&A, which is so often lacking at Wikipedia. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:11, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Good heavens, how is that popup box generated? I didn't know that was even possible. Oh, Wikipedia_talk:Gadget#Teahouse_gadget was pointed out to me on IRC -- it isn't possible (except for this one particular page on the entire wiki). Banaticus (talk) 06:29, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

shhhh....there is no Teahouse gadget ;) - J-Mo 08:25, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Added Goals and Scope

Heya fellow hosts. I added a "goals and scope" section to the front of this page. I'm not 100% sure that's the best place for it, but I thought it would be good to have a short summary of what the Teahouse is supposed to be (and do), and to display it somewhere fairly prominent. I don't see this as something that brand-new users would necessarily be interested in (that's why it's not on one of the pages with a nav link). It's more for other Wikipedians who come by and wonder what all the fuss is about. We've had intermittent queries from various folks throughout the design process--wondering why something like Teahouse is necessary, whether it's meant to crowd out other resources, or Facebook-ify Wikipedia, or be some sort of Esperanza-esque cabal. This "goals and scope" section is something you can direct people to as a conversation-starter, and will hopefully clarify some misconceptions. Thoughts? - J-Mo 20:56, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Good idea. There have been a few (not many) users who have asked questions about what's going on here - something like that should maintain clarity and transparency. I don't have time to read it all now; I shall later. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 21:13, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Nice. This section, the Host Lounge, is meant to serve specifically as a place for hosts, not really others (well, anyone can view it, but we aren't advertising it's existence). These can be points for the hosts to utilize. We are also in the process, on meta of developing a FAQ for people, which will be a great place to point them also. We've also discussed this subject matter extensively on the meta talk page, so thanks for tossing the link up there. SarahStierch (talk) 21:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Could someone set up automatic archiving on Q&A board?

Halp request: If someone has some "free time" (whatever that is), could she or he look into setting up automatic archiving on the Q&A board, using MiszaBot_II? This has been on my to-do list for a while, but I'm slammed right now, and concerned that if we don't get archiving set up soon-ish, we'll end up with a long, unruly page when our hoped-for hordes of newbies show up. Setting it up to archive threads inactive for 3 or more days should do the trick. Thank ye! - J-Mo 07:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done SarahStierch (talk) 15:39, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank YOOOO! - J-Mo 08:16, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Navigation

A navbox may be useful for us. -- Trevj (talk) 13:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Can you say more about where and why? We are trying to keep things extremely simple. For myself as someone newer to the details of Wikipedia, the navbox is intricate and confusing and to be honest I ignore it completely (at the moment). Which is not to say that it is not useful, it is just a whole new thing to learn and we would rather not add the complexity. Unless you mean something other than I what I am assuming. heather walls (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm thinking about something like {{Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host navigation}}, which could be placed at the bottom of the 'Hosts' pages it links to. Optionally it could possibly be placed on the 'Guests' pages too (but in a collapsed fashion) for easy access by Hosts. Unfortunately I'm not familiar enough with templates to know if/how this would be achieved.

I think this would be a useful addition for host navigation. If there's support to use it, a few items may need swapping etc., other links including, colo(u)rs tweaking, etc. -- Trevj (talk) 14:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow, cool Trev! I do think this is a valuable idea for the Host Lounge more than the guest section, as even I'm having a tough time navigating around all those pages I created :) I do think we can also perhaps play with the colors a bit (I'm so not savvy at that, but we have some folks around here who are!) too and make something great and useful for us. Thanks for being bold with this! Looking forward to others input.. SarahStierch (talk) 15:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

I think this is great for the non-guest-oriented pages. I've also found 'getting around' a pain. Thanks! - J-Mo 17:59, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Trevj and J-Mo, I changed a couple of things, mostly colors, and added Trevj's navbox to the Host lounge. Please keep it on the hosts-only pages at least for now. I hope this helps everyone get around! heather walls (talk) 22:33, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Thank you Trevj and Heather! - J-Mo 07:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Those colours are certainly easier on the eyes! -- Trevj (talk) 15:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Template headings

When substituting the templates, no headings are included. Would it be worth having optional versions which include headings, cf. {{Welcomeg}}, {{Welcomeh}}? -- Trevj (talk) 13:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Trevj, that sounds reasonable. I'll look into making that change this weekend. BTW, since you mention it: please transclude rather than substitute the templates (both the welcome templates and the talkback template). We're currently tracking transclusions to build up some tasty metrics of what % of invitees showed up, whether they stay on WP longer and edit more than non-invited newbies, etc. StevenWalling changed these to subst: recently b/c he didn't know our rationale for doing it this way, but I changed 'em back. Cheers, - J-Mo 08:21, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I've now replaced the substitutions I made (only 4 so far) with transclusions. -- Trevj (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

That rocks. Thanks! - J-Mo 18:00, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

New suggestions regarding Q&A participation - Hosts please read!!!

Hi hosts! Right now we're suffering from "too many salespeople," syndrome - there are too many of us, and not enough new editors asking questions. That will change soon enough, but, I did want to make some suggestions regarding our participation on the Q&A page:

• Don't forget to say hi! When you applied for the Teahouse and learned about the Host process, it was stressed that being as friendly as possible would be a key to making the Teahouse a success. Don't forget to say hi! to the new editor before you respond to their question. If you worked at a real Teahouse you'd greet your customer, right? :)
• Let's try to limit responses to each question to one or two responses. I know we all tend to have our own methods of doing things on Wikipedia, but it's best to try to focus on the shortest responses that provide the easiest (yet correct) method of process in regards to what the question requires. I'm pretty overwhelmed (and impressed!) at reading our responses, but I'm an old editor; so imagine how a new editor feels. And if you find that another fellow host provided a better response than yours, feel free to remove your response (like I have) and let the new editor focus on that.
• Remember, many new editors don't know wikispeak, so when we use Wikipedia terms like "ref" or "wikilink" or "orphaned," (and many more examples) they mean nothing to new editors. We want to explain things to them in a way that utilizes as little Wikispeak as possible. Even as an experienced editor I don't know every bit of Wikispeak, so imagine them as they are slowly learning a new language. :*Talk simple as if you're explaining to your grandmother how to edit. Seriously!
• Try to link to as little Wiki policy and procedure as possible, as that's one thing we're working against here at the Teahouse (it's a common technique on other on-Wiki help places). We want to focus on sharing information with new editors in a way that isn't overwhelming. For many of us those procedures and policies are easy for us to get, for many of us it's still overwhelming. As a new user, the last thing I want to do is be tossed into a pile of "paperwork" that makes no sense without having my hand held!

I hope this helps! I'm happy to also provide private or on-Wikipedia polite, constructive criticism about your interactions on the Q&A board, just ping me :) Keep sharing suggestions on the talk pages and IRC, and if you're feeling the Teahouse doesn't fit into your own desired role on Wikipedia, just let me know and you can be "free" of your hosting :) Please review this Host lounge document, Host tips, to learn more about similar suggestions above to make the Teahouse the best online help resources for Wikipedia! SarahStierch (talk) 18:00, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Lookin' Good!

Hey everyone, I just wanted to say that I was really pleasantly surprised when I checked the Q&A board a few minutes ago. Not only were there several new questions, but each question had excellent, friendly answers. Thanks for doing a great job so far. Don't forget to use the talkback template to follow up with new users, BTW. We're hoping to give 'em compelling experiences that draw them back in. - J-Mo 19:42, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I don't mean to get all gushy here, but I just checked out the Q&A board again, and I can honestly say I have never seen the level of support, positive vibes, and plain ol' wikilove I'm seeing here on Wikipedia before. For what it's worth, I think you are all doing an incredible job.

All right, now that that's off my chest, one bit of news: I'll be posting some data from our "first week" (really only six days) to the lounge tomorrow, in case anyone's curious. I know it's been a slow start, but we're trending in the right direction--as you can see yourselves from the recent uptick in Q&A traffic. - J-Mo 07:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Question about responses

Hello fellow Hosts! I was wondering about what the preferred method for responding to more in-depth questions was here at the Teahouse. Most of the questions people have been asking have required relatively simple answers, but is there a point when perhaps things should be taken to the user's talk page, to keep the Teahouse from becoming difficult to read? What do you think? --McDoobAU93 19:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

I have directed some users with technical questions to the reference desk which seems to have been well recieved.--Charles (talk) 23:38, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Questions-recent

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Questions-recent

The added category was breaking the Question-box, please don't add it back unless you can solve the problem. (It made the quote/question connect to the same line as the "Find the answer here" link instead of being its own line.) heather walls (talk) 05:46, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

HTML comments numbering the hosts

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Hosts

I don't really see the point in HTML comments numbering the hosts since if someone leaves or goes inactive then we'd have to go back and change the numbers of every person following. Banaticus (talk) 05:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Banaticus! I think the #s are only meant to make it easier to dig through the markup and find your own profile. Not sure who added them. Nice to meetcha, Jtmorgan (talk) 19:00, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Also, I think that since Banaticus said this the hidden comments have been changed to match the alphabetical order on that other page whose name escapes me atm. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 22:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

They did seem a little superfluous, so I've removed them - I hope that's OK. (The only reason they were renumbered was for consistency with WP:Teahouse/Your hosts#Meet the Teahouse Hosts.) -- Trevj (talk) 12:12, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Hosts on the main Teahouse page

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Hosts

Hi everyone! Just a note about the hosts that are "featured" on the main Wikipedia Teahouse page. We will be working on a solution to make the host profiles automatically rotate upon refresh. So bear with me while it's still "in progress." Feel free to be bold to rotate the hosts out for now, so it's not my mug up there the entire time :) SarahStierch (talk) 17:40, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Commitment seems rather large

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/Responsibilities

I am sure this was discussed elsewhere but I am just finding your frontpage. Asking teahouse hosts to commit to 20 hours a month is a large commitment, as is a directive to inviting 20 new users a week. I think the project would be less intimidating and just as effective to accept hosts who offer to do half of that. Good luck on this project - it seems necessary. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Blue! Thanks for coming by. This is a pilot project, and all of the hosts who applied agreed to participate upwards of 5 hours a week. This is a pilot, so responsibilities can evolve and change if the Teahouse is a success. Thanks for your support and thoughts! SarahStierch (talk) 20:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Spreadsheet editing

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/Invite guide

Can't edit the spreadsheet at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlKek6iKEo5IdDAtN2QxQmQ4dDFyUVgtZlN5V2hBV3c#gid=0 Its set as "view only" I am logged in, but still cannot edit it. --Jayron32 18:54, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Bah! Ok, sorry about that. I fixed it now, please let me know if there is a problem :) We can also tweak the layout of the spreadsheet or add anything else if needed. Thanks for letting us know. SarahStierch (talk) 19:07, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

inviting new users

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/Invite guide

Why not autoinvite new users, the same way the FeedbackDashboard is currently inviting new users to comment or ask a question? The FeedbackDashboard seems pretty amazing to me. Banaticus (talk) 22:55, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Banaticus. We discussed this at great length when thinking about the Teahouse process. The goal is to invite good faith editors, and after extensive research by the Teahouse fellows (myself and Jonathan) we determined that Feedback Dashboard often delivers less good faith editors than other areas. We did extensive contribution checks and logged what we found numerous times over the planning stages, and weren't too impressed with what we found after going through every single person on the FD. You often get trolls, non-contributors, vandals, hopeless COI cases and even socks, so we figured it'd a healthier approach to just individually invite each user that appears as good faith. SarahStierch (talk) 22:59, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone have any hints for speedy invitations? I've not invited as many as some hosts here, and have been mainly filtering for "promising new editors", per the invite guide. -- Trevj (talk) 12:59, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Spreadsheet

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/Invite guide

The spreadsheet is in Cyrillic letters. How do I change it into English? --Rosiestep (talk) 03:35, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Rosie. Perhaps it's some type of setting in your Google doc preferences? We've had contributions coming in from hosts already and no one has mentioned this as a problem. SarahStierch (talk) 03:52, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

When I open it, it currently begins at row 421. It wasn't like that before! If an error is made, is the file backed up? (I've already inadvertently renamed col A and had to guess an appropriate title to replace my error.) I sincerely hope I've not cocked this up completely... I was checking things with filters so hopefully one's been left turned on or something! -- Trevj (talk) 13:06, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Someone had turned on a filter for the Host usernames section. I turned the filter off. As of tomorrow, Monday, we'll start on a fresh tab for "week 2," btw. SarahStierch (talk) 14:56, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Phew! I tried to clear the filter but it seemed to have no effect. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 15:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Keeping how-to's short and sweet

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/How-to guides

Hi everyone! So awesome to see all of our contributions coming together, I'm actually learning a lot from your how-to's - just when you think you know it all! :) Anyway, one of the biggest challenges for me when while writing responses to these how-to's was how do I keep my response short and sweet and without a ton of links and Wikispeak? Do you guys have any processes that help or ideas on that? My end goal is to make my own responses as "duh" as possible - even now I still get confused by Wikipedia lingo and documentation. Great examples that I'm pulling inspiration from include the two here: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host_lounge/How-to_guides/Userspace_guide#Userspaces, by Nolelover and ItsZippy. Would love to hear about others processes, frustrations or more. I think this is a great exercise! SarahStierch (talk) 23:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, so that wasn't too wiki-speak-y? Good...yeah, I'm going for a what-would-my-ninety-year-old-grampa-understand kind of level. Not that I anticipate that our readers will be at that level, but easy helps... Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 00:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Nole, your contributions are looking great so far. And I love the idea of describing it as so simple your grandpa could get it. That's what we're aiming for! If competent well educated professionals can't figure it out - even the most tech savvy, we've got work to do! I'm surely pulling inspiration from the grandparent concept :) SarahStierch (talk) 01:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

When explaining things to new users, I quite like the assume no clue essay. It's all well and good clearly explaining something, but if we leave them with more questions, that's not so helpful. Having said that, we cannot explain everything we mention - if the question is about someone's talk page, a long discussion on watchlists because you've mentioned it once is not what they are looking for. Perhaps we should assume no clue on the issue that they are asking about, but some clue on surrounding issues. That way, if they do know what a watchlist is, we avoid an unnecessary lengthy explanation and, if they don't, they can find something about it or ask another question easily. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

DR

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/How-to guides

Hi. I almost added this to the page but the format was not quite right. If this takes off, it would be very useful for new and old alike:

• Wikipedia:Dispute Resolution

There is virtually no substitute for reaching consensus, which means talking with people over disagreements. While sometimes trying, it is also rewarding. These processes are here to help.

Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Text overlap of 'description' parameter

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host

Is there a simple way to prevent multiple transclusions of this template from overlapping the text on the left? I've tried using {{Clear}} (to apparently no effect) in a preview of Wikipedia:Teahouse/Hosts but not meddled with the template itself. Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 11:52, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Experienced editors who are not hosts answering questions

Hi hosts! We've had an influx of non-host experienced editor's answering questions over this first opening week of the Teahouse. I've had mixed feelings about it - as someone who has spent a lot to of time working with all of you, and as a group who has volunteered (and applied, in a way similar to Campus/Online ambassadors) to participate and provide certain weekly deliverables, I've had pretty strong feelings about it. I've informed a number of those editors about our Host system during this pilot period, all to negative response (I understand, but I also have tried to explain there is a method to the madness during this pilot period!). I notice that none of you either notice they aren't hosts, or don't seem to care - just curious if we should be caring or not. How do you feel, during this pilot period, about non-trained hosts who are experienced editor's answering questions before you get to them? Should we be informing them? What do you think and how should we handle this during this pilot time? Thanks everyone, -- SarahStierch (talk) 15:09, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

And if you are curious who your fellow hosts are a reminder is here: Wikipedia:Teahouse/Hosts :) SarahStierch (talk) 15:09, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Well I suppose we should be pleased that there are people wanting to help. Knocking them back would not be good. The answers I have seen look very helpful. It is fundamental to the project that anybody can edit anything if they are acting in good faith and we cannot stop them anyway. If they get over technical or bitey then we can ask them not to. Hosts should be around to see fair play as it were.--Charles (talk) 16:26, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Great input Charles. This is what I'm seeking :) I'm admittedly a little "protective" of the project still (this will pass!) and I really do agree with the good faith method and like that the idea of the hosts also serving as moderators and keeping folks in check (for lack of a better term). Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 17:10, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree that all good-faith adivce is to be welcomed. And I expect the guests aren't too bothered either, provided they receive understandable advice without too much jargon. However, for the pilot to be effectively evaluated it seems that we need plenty of guests. Therefore (if it's not already been done) it may be worth inviting those who've helped in the Q&A to also help with the invitations... giving a small target figure of invites per question answered. This figure could be gauged from the uptake of invitations... 6-12 or so per question, if <50% follow-up at Q&A? (This target reminds me I'd better send some more invites myself!) -- Trevj (talk) 15:36, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi all, I spent some time updating the Your hosts page today and Sarah is working on a template to invite those who are answering to formally join the ranks of hosts. Curious to know what everyone thinks about the updated page. I completely agree that we can't and shouldn't rebuff people who want to help answer questions! The more Wikipedians who want to help new editors, the better. But I do think it would be a shame if you guys don't get help inviting and we ended up with lots more hosts than guests, or if well intentioned editors are answering questions that don't fit with the experience we'd like to give guests in the Teahouse. For example, I think a really important part of what hosts are doing is including a greeting in your reply, and posting a message on the guest's talk page to let them know to come back to the board for an answer. These are some of the things that can really make a different to some new editors, and if questions start to be all answered by non-hosts I worry about losing some of this in the experience. Do you think it would be a bad idea to point those who answer questions in the forum to that page and invite them to learn more about becoming a host? Sbouterse (WMF) (talk) 21:30, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Absolutely not (in response to your very last question). I guess I agree that there not really a reason to ask editors not to comment - I can smell the MfD from here -

Halfway through the above comment I found that Esperanza had already been invoked here. Yeah, we don't want to give that vibe. I suggest all experienced editors are welcome but hosts are clearly explained to be _______ (how they are different is up to you guys, I guess). However, if they are going to answer we can definitely ask that they help out in other areas, if need be. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Maybe someone wants to add a section to the Yourhosts page that spells out anything we'd like someone who wants to answer questions without becoming a host to know? Maybe the info on the hosts lounge tips page should just be put on the yourhosts page directly instead of linked? I think Mlm42's point in that Esperanza thread is well placed, just being that they want to feel like they can contribute and having easy access to info like the reply template and request to greet would be useful. Sbouterse (WMF) (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC).

Blog announcement

I've just spotted Wikipedia Teahouse a warm welcome for new editors on the blog! -- Trevj (talk) 12:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Interesting read...a good overview. Kudos to Sarah for writing it :) Now, this is a stupid question, but since I've never seen/read/noticed that blog, who is it directed towards? Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:22, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation blog? It's focused on anyone - from Wikipedians to non-Wikipedians! I do encourage you all to tweet, Facebook and share the blog. Sarah (talk) 15:32, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

"Wikimedia Foundation blog" = this 'community blog', right? Yeah...I've never noticed it. Grr...now one more thing that I want to follow... Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 15:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Each department has it's own blog, but [1] is where they all feed... Sarah (talk) 15:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Welcoming new hosts, how should it be done?

Hi everyone. I've revamped some areas of the "Your hosts" page. Taking into consideration comments from the main Teahouse talk page and so forth. I also tried to make it seem a little more fun and a little less formal. It'd be great to have help in the process regarding "accepting" (for lack of a better word) new hosts. You can see here, that I made the "I wanna be a host!" section a bit more fun and casual. I tried to make it like they're swearing a vow of "Teahouse-awesomeness" and promising to practice the Teahouse warmth, friendliness and related skills that make the Teahouse special.

So, after someone "signs the oath" what should happen next? Do we wait for a host slot to open up before pinging those who sign the "oath" on their talk pages and telling them "you're up to bat!" or let anyone who "swears the oath" just start participating instantly and assume they've followed the "Host guide" information - so if they aren't inviting people, etc, we can start pinging them and saying "hey, you said you were gonna help us out here and there, so...help out!" Or do you think we need an application process, like what the original hosts kindly submitted to, and have a peer review similar to Online Ambassadors? I'm sort of leaning towards the second option, but I'd love love love to get your input. I also figure we can revamp the section that says "Meet the Teahouse Hosts," and once the new hosts are delivering, we can move them up. Thoughts? Thanks all. Sarah (talk) 16:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

This template has also been created, what do you think?:

Hi! Teahouse, thanks for visiting the Teahouse! As an experienced editor, your knowledge is very valuable to new editors. Teahouse Hosts help new editors at the Teahouse and beyond. If you'd like to get involved in assisting new editors at the Teahouse, please learn more here Sarah (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Sarah (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmm...I hope this comes off right...but I don't think that making the host stuff too informal is a good idea. The experienced editors who we are asking to join us would, I assume, be used to a slightly more formal tone than "Teahouse-awesomeness" and the general treehouse-club atmosphere of the "vow". I know that was more what you were going for anyway, but--

Ehh, let me start over. I guess we have to strike a balance in attracting editors between the really serious ones who will automatically look down on a project like this because of the language used, and the ones who will actually appreciate that and really help out. TBH, I don't think the extremely serious editors (we all know some) would really be willing to be dedicated helpers anyway so it may be better--

But on the other hand, somewhat in the manner of WP:DTTR, I personally wouldn't use that template. The links are useful, of course, but the tone is not really what what I would like were I on the other side, receiving that template. Just slightly patronizing...no, that's the wrong word but--

Casual = good. Definitely. That's the first 'test', of sorts...if they don't like the tone of the invitation, they probably won't like the tone of the project. However, "Teahouse-awesomeness" is, dare I say it, an almost cringe-inducing line that I think experienced editors won't mind if we do without. Our 'target audience' hopefully won't need that sort of language in the invite to get them in the mood to answer questions at easier levels

Was that confusing enough? Sorry :( Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 01:53, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Do you have other language or another message you would write? Being specific is really helpful! heather walls (talk) 03:52, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Exactly. I've failed multiple times to explain to users on their talk pages about the host program. The template has seemed fruitful with the one user I have shared it with, but, that's just one user. And I'm still having a major guilt complex about my previous interactions. On another note - we get flack for being too formal, therefore I experiment with being quirky, casual and excited. Stronger input on verbiage (or be bold, and edit the host page!) is welcome. Sarah (talk) 03:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

And on another note, we already had another person sign up to be a host with the recent changes to the host page :) Sarah (talk) 03:56, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

With the clarity of a good nights sleep comes the inevitable backtracking, I guess:

Ehh, its fine. As you say, better to be slightly loose than far too formal. Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 18:11, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Usability feedback

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Hosts

Hi, this is really good looking :), great job!

I was going to write a comment about how I thought hosts should explain a little more about themselves than just the lines that were on the right of their pic, when I saw that it was there (I looked a lot before I saw it ;)) on the left. Just to say that as a newbie, I think I'd be interested in who these people really are, so the left-hand stuff (mini-bio/resume) could be easier to see in relation to the picture. notafish (talk) 09:47, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually, thinking about it, you might want to reverse and have the quote on the left and the bio on the right, by the picture. Just an idea. notafish (talk) 09:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Notafish! The quotes are placed 'inside' the introbox in order to match the layout of the guest introboxes. But I see how the descriptive text might be easy to miss. We'll look it over and see if there's a change that makes sense.

While we're at it, does anyone else have any feedback? - J-Mo 15:17, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Teahouse week 1 - some data

Hi everyone!

I wanted to share some number from our first week. These are not only interesting to look at, they can help us spot trends and identify strategies that are working. I'm posting it here for now because this is where the action is, but if someone wants to make a 'reporting' page for hosts and throw it up there, that would be totally fine with me.

Update: Week 1 report data moved to new Metrics page. - J-Mo 00:23, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

To Email or Not to Email? I wanted to mention one thing I saw in the data in particular: emailing users who have the email this user feature really seems to work. Consider this: we only emailed 102 users. However, of the 30 newbies who showed up, 7 had received an email. That's almost 25%! So it looks like using the "Email this user" feature in addition to using a talk page template is a good strategy for reaching out to newbies, if they have it enabled (the database report page shows which ones do). And remember that if you use the "email this user" feature, your email will not be shown.

That's it for now. Any questions for me? How are things going in general? Any 'feature requests' (I've already got the header for the invite templates on my to-do list)?. Keep up the good work! - J-Mo 20:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Email surely has been one of the best tools for me. I've even had people email me back, and while I'm okay with people seeing my email, it's been really a great tool. I also haven't used the database report, because I figure it'd be easy pickings for the hosts. I would love to hear further input regarding this data from our hosts. We're not just here to build a pretty space, we're here to retain and inspire new editors! Sarah (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

A couple of questions, though you may need more than a week's data in order to respond: Who is more likely to come to the Teahouse: the newbie whose talk page is blank until I arrive with the invite, vs. the newbie who has 1 or more "issue" notes on the page which are followed by the Teahouse invite? Also, I'm curious if there's any data regarding posting a Teahouse invitation only, vs. Teahouse invitation + Welcome template with the helpful links. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:37, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Rosie: I'm curious about these things, too :) I probably won't do the analyses you're suggesting just yet, though: (as you mentioned) I'm waiting for a larger sample to accumulate, since we've only had about 60 newbies visit us so far. However, these are just the kinds of things I want to find out, and I will gradually be performing analyses like these and publishing them with the weekly metrics, over the course of the next month or so. BTW, week 2 data is now posted on Metrics. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 16:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion to merge other Host talk here

How about merging all Host talk to this page? Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/Invite guide is another page which has relevant discussions, and there may be others too. It seems logical to have it all general discussions in one place. What do people think? -- Trevj (talk) 09:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea to me. It's hard to keep up with all threads when they're all spread out. Are you interested in setting up the redirects from all the other Teahouse/Host_lounge subpages? - J-Mo 19:08, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Sounds great here too. Are we thinking of copying whatever threads are currently on those pages? Nolelover ^{Talk·Contribs} 21:41, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm one more supporter. A few days ago, I posted a question on one Teahouse host talk page, only to learn that a similar question was asked by another host on another Teahouse talk page. Keeping all the host talk in a central location, including merging threads, especially now that that we've become so active, makes sense. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:16, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd support that too. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:47, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done We now have just this page and Wikipedia talk:Teahouse, which should be easier to manage. I checked and there should be no missing discussions, but if anyone spots any then please paste them in!

1. They're not currently in chronological order, which will be unhelpful when they're archived.
2. I used the Wikipedia talk subpage list. Note that there are a number of Wikipedia subpages without corresponding talk pages - so perhaps they should be redirected before someone starts any discussions there.

Anyone fancy addressing those two issues? -- Trevj (talk) 16:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm. I imagine that as discussions continue, they will become chronological, right? It's just the posts that were there when you implemented the redirects that will be out of order. If I understand that right, it's not such a big deal IMO. Regarding the uncreated talk pages, I may get to this in one fell swoop, or it may be something we handle on an ad-hoc basis as new talk pages get created. I'm happy to do ad-hoc for now, unless someone else wants to throw some time at it. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 17:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion - where to start

I've recently adopted a new user and, from the conversations we've been having, it seems that he is struggling to find articles to edit. I know I had a similar experience when I first started and I guess many others would too. I was thinking that it might be nice to set up an area in the Teahouse to give users a starting point. It could provide two services: Firstly, people could come with no idea where to start and hosts could chat with them, find out what they're interested in and point them towards articles they might like to edit. Secondly, editors who have found articles that interest them could ask what needs doing to them; hosts could give a mini-review (in newbie friendly language) telling them what needs doing and how to go about doing it. What do you think? How could we improve and/or implement something like this? ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:37, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

A really cool feature would be a "What to edit" wizard, which asks a few basic questions like "do you like writing?", "do you like doing technical maintenance?", "do you like working with images?" and then present good starting points for people with those preferences. It could also have a page where people type in their interests and then a list of likely WikiProjects is presented, with links. This isn't a personal way to go about things, and a simple interview and request subpage might be better, but I just thought I'd throw it out there. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:50, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

That does sound like a good idea; I think a wizard and a personal page could go hand in hand. A wizard could probably address the first purpose in my original post; a personal questions page could address the second and pick up anyone who still needs help with the first. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I think that we should assume that for now any process we create would be pretty manual. Also, wizards are pretty impersonal (as Ocaasi noted). I figure we could outsource some of this work to actual people at friendly and active Wikiprojects--they're already set up to connect people with editing tasks, much better than we are. And it has the advantage of being personal: we're not pointing the newbies towards bots or documents, we're pointing them towards people. Sarah already started a list here. All of these projects are active; we just need to contact a person from that project and ask if they're interested in being a 'point person' for Teahouse guests who are interested in joining. Are you guys interested in approaching any of these editors? - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 17:15, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I should mention that I would like to implement the kind of "SuggestBot for Wikiprojects" you're describing, and have been for a long time. I'm just not sure it's something we can bank on in the next month or two. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 17:15, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Week 2 activity report posted on metrics page

Hi all! I added the week 2 data (as well as some data that summarizes activity up to this point) onto the metrics page, for all you other numbers geeks out there! - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 19:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Ideas for improving the invite process

• I think what really would make the invite process effortless is a Twinkle modification or independent userscript which automatically posted a Teahouse invite to the talk page and then loaded the email user page if enabled, all the while preloading messages and usernames as it went along. I don't know how to code, but I believe this is doable. It would cut down each invite to only say 20 seconds rather than about 1 minute per which it's taking right now to change everything. Could someone work on writing up something like this?

•  Done I would also like if the database reports had a column for 'has been invited' which updated whenever a teahouse invite was on the userpage. This would save time and help us coordinate our efforts.

• Finally, if not now then after the pilot, we should look into an invite bot which could consider a number of factors such as rapidity of edits, absence of blocks, absence of warnings, as well as other sophisticated data such as WikiTrust or WP:STiki metadata which judges vandalism likelihood using a computer algorithm. If Teahouse grows, it will be unideal if we have to continue doing this manually, i think, so we should start looking at intelligent machine assistance. Let the machines take over, if you will, so hosts can focus on the quality work of actual interaction. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:45, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

The first two would be a really good idea and would make the inviting process much easier. I'm not sure about the bot - I think that might lose the personal touch that the Teahouse runs on. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:32, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Ocaasi, I like the idea of a Twinkle mod, and the 'has been invited' column, and (to some extent) the invite bot. Right now, my dev hours and skills (such as they are!) are going to more mundane things. I did update the db report so that you can access a Special:EmailThisUser page with one click; hopefully that makes it a little smoother (email still seems like one of the most successful methods for getting newbies to actually show up). However, if there are other developers who are Hosts (or host-friendly), I would love it if you would point them my way, and we can chat about getting some of our backlog cleaned up and trying out some new ideas.

I should also mention that although all of the things you bring up are technically possible to a great extent, not all of them are possible exactly as you describe them, and at least the final one (the invite bot) is a fairly major software project in itself. WikiTrust is a NSF funded research project by a team of crack computer scientists, and it still took over a year to develop! But that's not to trivialize your idea; in fact, I'm hoping to get the folks behind SuggestBot to do some work with us on the Teahouse front, and I'll definitely let you all know if that pans out.

once again, not trying to shut you or anybody down. I really do want to make this invite process as easy for you all as possible. So keep the ideas coming - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 16:55, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

The "has been invited" column as been added. As soon as the db is up and running again we should be good to go. The page will be updated with new "invited" statuses every 30 minutes, so be sure to refresh the page every so often as you're inviting. Once running, if something's going wonky, let me know and I'll fix my code ASAP. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 05:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback reminder userscript

Hey, guys, I don't know about anyone else, but I don't really ever use talkbacks, so there's basically no chance that I'll remember to talkback people on the Teahouse. So I made a script to remind me to do it whenever I make an edit to the Teahouse questions page. Don't know if anyone else is interested in it, but it's here, if you like. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Also, anyone know of a way to find the creator of a subsection through user scripts? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 15:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey Writ. The only way I know is to match the edit comment string. Not an easy solution. Thanks for the userscript! I look forward to trying it out myself. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 04:57, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Another idea that might help with this, that I would love your input on. Would a floating navbar like this one be useful for hosts? I was thinking we could put links to resources (like templates) in something like this, which might make it easier to access them when you're answering new editors' questions on Q&A, or when you're inviting.. It might also make it easier to remember to do things like adding a talkback template.

It doesn't look like this particular floating nav-bar is something you can turn on or off, but I imagine that something similar could be created as a user script. I'm not advocating we go Full Twinkle and automate everything, but something like this might help with certain pain points. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 05:41, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

That's an interesting idea...doing it as a userscript would definitely be the way to go. I don't think it'd be too hard.....hm. I guess it would depend on what you put on it, but some links to policy pages could be useful, etc. I quite frequently find myself opening a new tab and looking up the wording of a policy, or just to make sure I am reading it right; that could be an interesting way of making a shortcut. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 06:34, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Writ Keeper, this works OK for me. Is there a simple way to make it only pop up the box when Saving, not Previewing? Thanks. -- Trevj (talk) 09:01, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Yep, this is now implemented; it will only give you a warning when you click "Save page." Remember to clear your cache! Thanks, Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Database is down now, but soon you'll have "invited" status

Hi everyone, A couple of you (I'm looking at you Ocaasi), have requested an update to the database report page: specifically, getting the report to display whether a particular user has already been invited.

I managed to get this working! Unfortunately, the database went down around the same time, so it's not happening automatically yet. :( but basically, what should happen once the reports start flowing once again is that every 30 minutes or so, a little script will run to check whether the users displayed on the report have been invited yet. If so, the word "invited" will appear in the rightmost column.

Hopefully, this ameliorates some of the frustration of figuring out which users have been invited by other hosts, and which ones haven't.

Like I said, it's not automatic yet, but you can see what I mean if you look at the report page now. The list of invited/not invited should be relatively up-to-date as of this writing. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 05:04, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Awesome, Jtmorgan! Thanks so much. I think/hope it will lead to more invites. It will from me. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 11:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Another user script

Hey, guys, I just finished another user script for the Teahouse talkback template: this one will add a little "TB" link after each user talk page linked on the Teahouse/questions page that, when clicked, automatically places a teahouse talkback template on the user's talkback page. It should catch most people's signatures, hopefully without breaking them *too* badly. here's a diff of it in action. Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions? This is a substantially more complicated script than I've made on Wikipedia before, so if anyone knows Javascript, they might want to take a look and make sure I don't bork the database. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 18:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Very useful. Another tweak to the Teahouse interface which will make host duties that much more pleasant. Thanks. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 21:44, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Blargh, so apparently Wikipedia parses wiki markup within .js pages...significant bug fixed, please clear your cache if you're using this script! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

When all you have is a hammer...

...everything starts to look like a nail, I know. But I was reading a thread up a ways about a navbox, that would be useful for hosts but problematic for guests. Well, I made (surprise!) another script to do this. If you go to my sandbox, you won't see anything. But if you install this script and then go back to my sandbox, voila! a navbar appears! It's an opt-in navbar, so new users won't get confused (and let's be honest, if they can install a custom script, they have no right to be confused by a navbar!)

Since using this script would entail changes to the actual Teahouse pages, I'd need approval before making this go live (even though the changes would be invisible to anyone who doesn't have the script). Also, this could relatively easily be adapted for J-Mo's floating navbar suggestion above. What do y'all think? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

That's a really clever solution. I like it. Ocaasi ^{t | c} 21:43, 19 March 2012 (UTC)