![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Good idea about merging this to Standard user greeting. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 17:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I created a table with the welcome templates and a "preview" at Wikipedia:Welcome template table. If you think your welcome is unusual enough to merit inclusion, go ahead and add it to the table. TheJabberwock 00:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Why link to the template, when whe could use Template:tl. -- George Mon e y Talk Contribs 03:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Of the templates would be great.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:05, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
We need at least one late welcome template IMHO (see my welcome) for users that have not been welcomed despite quite a number of edits. Nil Einne 00:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Should we trim some of them? The big user warning template movement should take this opportunity to do away with a few duplicate ones. Xiner ( talk, email) 18:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I have a graphic template that points new users to several locations. If you would like to look at it, it's located at
User:Cremepuff222/Greeting. Let me know if there are any problems! --
Cremepuff222 (
talk,
sign book)
19:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
We have an entirely new set of welcome templates; see Wikipedia talk:Welcoming committee#New welcome templates. Λυδαcιτγ 00:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
The user Stlchickenwings is vandalising and is a new user. What templates should I use to welcome him/her?
-- Kid Evil 1 01:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
This newly-added template is colorful, which is nice. (It was recently added at Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates/Table.)
The closing line, though, is confusing. Why direct new users specifically to other new users?
“If you want to get other Wikipedians' attentions, go to the New user log.”
- Pete 00:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
We could use a 'welcome but copyvios are not welcomed' template...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 18:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
There is something wrong with one or more templates, it's adding the [[Category:Welcome templates]] to peoples user talk pages, I removed one but there are many others, which I left alone for now In case someone wants to investigate which template is causing the error. ▪◦▪ ≡ЅiREX≡ Talk 22:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello. Could some people please review, discuss and improve Category:Poor English welcome messages, and the associated template? Thank you, Tualha ( Talk) 18:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Category:Welcome templates - do we need 113? Should we try and standardise them like we did the user templates? We could perhaps start by subst-ing and redirecting those which are barely used. Neil ム 21:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi everyone! I'm a member of
WikiProject Accessibility, a group formed to improve Wikipedia's accessibility to disabled users. One of the ideas that we would like to see implemented is the addition of a link to
Wikipedia talk: Accessibility to the welcome templates, so that users who have disabilities would know where to look for assistance. I am writing here first to ask if it would be okay if I made these changes. If you like, I can make a subpage where I show you what I intend to do to each template. (since the way I would fit the link in would vary by template)
Thanks very much for input! --(
L'Aquatique: Bringing chaos & general mayhem to the Wiki for
One Year!)
02:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Is there a template to welcome new users who are registered but have been vandalizing? I see the anonymous vandal one, but not one for registered people. If I'm missing it... sorry. Brbigam ( talk) 21:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
WP:WT is listed as a shortcut to this page and I've used it many times, but now it sends me to Wikipedia:Shortcuts to talk pages!!! The history of the shortcut shows it being a redirect to the talk page list since 2005. I'm very confused. Lyrl Talk C 16:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Using WP:Twinkle this welcome message put my name in the message above the Happy Editing line, which looks odd because the very next line is my signature. Anyone know how to fix this? Also, it seems there ought to be a comment in the template so that when you look at the subst code you can tell the name of the template that was used as is with user warnings.-- Doug.( talk • contribs) 19:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
These templates should be used but i did not have these greating as new user, wrote an article AL-kitab as per Quraninstead of welcome i had problems and problems by old users and they did not gave any help.but removed my whole text of article and forcely they changed the name of islamic Holy books but not with my whole text which contained arabic text in references of claims. No discussion bu forced every body and they donot want to have text of Quran about verses of Quran which is not fair for wikipedea truth policy. knowledge and research references were also given even then i have lost the text of whole article which is different from Islamic holy books. in wkipedea all topics describing Quran must have title "Quran as per research" and not as per text of Quran, because they donot want to accept the text of quran as a reference for claim which ia talking about Quran and citing it's verse. this type of citation can only be verified by its arabic text and not by any scholar.
it can be checked on talk pages what happened to my article which is now as AL=kita.... thanks Farrukh38 ( talk) 15:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Am I overlooking something, or is there no welcome message which combines wikipedia policy and help links with a "don't be discouraged" message to new users who've had their first contribution deleted? If there really is no such template, I'd propose that one be made-- well-intentioned bad edits seems extremely common among new users, and {{subst:Firstarticle}} does little to set them on the right path. Fullobeans ( talk) 18:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
{{ Welcomeh}} is my preferred welcome templates, but I use {{ WelcomeIP}} for anon users. So I've created a version of the former, with the additional content from the IP template: {{ WelcomeIPh}}. Will someone check it, please? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Template:Welcome-name from 2005 is now quaintly obsolete (it encouraged the user to use their real name, reflecting a policy which did actually say that three years ago) and slightly confusing (it advises against using the name of a "fictional character" as a pseudonym). The template isn't linked from this project page - should it be cleaned up or deleted? I'm not entirely sure what purpose it was originally created to serve. -- McGeddon ( talk) 11:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Classroom coordination would like to ask for help in designing templates for course leaders and their students, welcoming them to Wikipedia and informing them of Wikipedia:WikiProject Classroom coordination and Wikipedia:School and university projects (linking Wikipedia:School and university projects/Instructions for teachers and lecturers for course leaders and Wikipedia:School and university projects/Instructions for students for students). We could also use a third template, for the course leaders and students who misunderstand what Wikipedia is and are creating articles that are on the fast track for deletion, combining welcome with a warning. Could you help? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if it would be worthwhile if the welcome templates were to warn newbies away from articles tagged "NPOV", "unbalanced", "dispute", etc. It's too easy for a bold and earnest newbie to feel picked-on when their bold changes are speedily removed. Then, before they've had time to learn about edit warring, they've violated WP:3RR and been accused of being a sock puppet. I just saw it happen recently. It was a tough environment for a newbie to be making typical newbie mistakes. I don't know if the newbie has been disuaded from contributing further to Wikipedia. It would have been easier if he had started on something less contentious. -- SV Resolution( Talk) 18:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I like {{tl:welcomemenu}} the best, as it is most informative since it has lots of good policies all in one neat box. However I often give it to people who either have no contribs, or their first contribs aren't very promising (but might not fit within any existing welcome/warning template). In the past I have added it and then simply removed the "thanks for your contribs" section. However I think it may be appropriate to have a permanent alternative and I have copied the existing welcome menu to {{ wmnc}}. The only change is in the contribs sentence. Any thoughts or concerns? 7 07:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
As a new pages patroller, a template that says welcome and congrats to new Wikipedians for their first article surviving without being speedily deleted might be nice. Tehw1k1 ( talk) 05:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I would like some help with a few templates I have copied from another template: I copied (and modified) Template:MedInvitation to Template:PhyInvitation, Template:MedWelcome-reg to Template:PhyWelcome-reg, Template:MedWelcome-anon to Template:PhyWelcome-anon and finally also Template:MedWelcome to Template:PhyWelcome. However, PhyWelcome doesn't really behave as I want it to behave.
If the user is registered, I get {{subst:PhyWelcome-reg||}} on the screen when I write {{PhyWelcome}}
. However, I don't get anything on the screen when I write {{subst:PhyWelcome}}, and after I have press "Save page" the page source will contain a lot of code, althoughy nothing shows up on the page. When I insert {{subst:PhyWelcome-reg||}} directly on the page instead, it works perfectly well; I get a lot less code in the source of the page and the welcome message shows up as it should.
If the user is unregistered, {{subst:PhyWelcome}} almost works, however it fails in the end of the template; the PhyInvitation template doesn't show up and instead a "{" sign appears. If you look in the code it has produced, you will see that all the code for PhyInvitation indeed is there.
Do you know why the template behaves like this? I have no idea, but I think it should work since it is basically just a copy of another working template! -- Kri ( talk) 16:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Just a heads-up about this proposal. Anybody interested in trying it? Maryana (WMF) ( talk) 18:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
WP:TWINKLE gives users the option to instantly add many of these templates to userpages by presenting a menu of choices of welcome templates. It asks for a "Linked article (if supported by template)" so that the template can reference an article on which the user to be welcomed had been working. I noticed that for some templates this field works and for others, such as Template:Welcome-COI, even when the field is completed the automated mechanism does not populate the template and instead just gives the default response.
I was thinking of fixing this, but I wanted to ask first - is there a reason why things are as they are? Also, does anyone know offhand where I am going to look to fix this and make it consistent for all templates? All of this works on the template side and TWINKLE knows how to respond, right? Has there ever been a "Best practices" talk about this? Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
How's my template:
|
-- Ankit Maity Talk • contribs 05:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Recently, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง told an inexperienced editor to refrain from welcoming users who have made few or no contributions:
"Hi, I understand your enthusiasm, but please refrain from welcoming users who have made few or no contributions. We don't know if their intentions are honest, and we don't want to encourage people who register for the wrong reasons. It's best to wait a while and see if they are making constructive edits. Thanks." [1]
To which I replied:
"Kudpung is dead wrong. See WP:AGF. Please do welcome new users. WP:WT has some templates you can use." [2]
Kudpung took exception to this, writing:
"HI Guy; Before criticising experienced editors in a dismissive tone, please get your facts straight and AGF yourself. Join the WP:WC [Note: I am already a member -Guy] and read the recommendations: 'Our main activity is to welcome new users who have made constructive edits.' It is 'dead' logical that there is absolutely no point whatsoever in welcoming people who have made few or no edits, or if their only edits are to their own user space, or worse, vandalism. It's all common sense really. Happy editing!" [3]
The first thing that strikes me about this is that the section of WP:WC that Kudpung quotes was added by Kudpung himself. [4]. This change does not appear to be based upon any discussion or consensus, but rather Kudpung's opinion. On the other hand, nobody objected or reverted the change either...
It also struck me that many of the existing welcoming templates are specifically designed for new users who have not made constructive edits. For example:
Template:Uw-vandalism1: - Welcome for vandals
Template:Welcome-anon-vandal: - Welcome for IP vandals
Template:Welcomespam: - Welcome for spammers
Template:Welcome-COI: - Welcome for users with a conflict of interest
Template:Welcome - Copyright: - Welcome for copyright violators
Template:Welcomenpov: - Welcome for users who violate
WP:NPOV
Template:Welcometest: - Welcome for users who post editing tests
Template:First article: - Welcome for users who create a deletable article
Template:Welcomeauto: - Welcome for users who write articles about themselves.
Template:Welcome unref blp: - Welcome for users who create an unreferenced BLP
I don't see anybody objecting to the existence or use of the above templates.
In the case of a newly registered user who has made no edits at all, I agree that posting a welcome is not appropriate. (is it even possible for an ordinary editor to find those?), and I agree that welcomes to vandals should not thank them for vandalizing (but note that we do thank people for making test edits).
In the case of those who have only made a few edits, I think Kudpung is dead wrong, and that his edit to Wikipedia:Welcoming committee that discourages welcoming should be removed. His reasoning for making that change ("please refrain from welcoming users who have made few or no contributions. We don't know if their intentions are honest") is a clear violation of WP:AGF, and his "It's all common sense really" and "It is 'dead' logical" arguments are simply WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I don't see any logic or common sense in not welcoming new editors. Such a change in welcoming policy should not be made without consensus. Comments? -- Guy Macon ( talk) 17:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
That is not the only reason we don't use a bot. The discussions that reached that conclusion also mentioned that it was pointless welcoming accounts with no edits who could very well be vandals, dead accounts or sock puppets. I would also argue that slapping a template down is cold and un-personal and that most new users wouldn't be able to tell a bot account from any other, but we do it because it would be extremely monotonous to hand type dozens of welcome messages. I tend to agree that we should not be placing welcome messages on accounts with no edits—it's just unnecessary. As for welcoming accounts with few edits: it really depends on the type of edits they are making, if they appear to be attempting to make legit edits then a welcome template is clearly appropriate, perhaps backed up by some personal comments by the editor placing it. On the other hand, if a new users' efforts seem to be to try and insert the word 'poopyhead' into as many articles as possible then it should be off to AIV with them... Pol430 talk to me 19:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I am quite happy with my new design. Perhaps we should mainspace it and move it up on the list here? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 20:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps we do have too many welcoming templates, but I think we have a gap in the range, consideringconcerns over child editors and their safety. Today I welcomed a young editor, but found that I couldn't find a really approporiate welcome, including links to Wikipedia:Child protection and related pages. I did find Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors and added a message linking to it. I think we might need a child-specific welcome template. As per my section title I suggest Template:Welcome child or similar as a name. If I have missed a suitable template please advise. Regards, 220 of Borg 04:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Many of these templates begin by thanking people for their contributions. Sometimes with a link to the contributions themselves. Which are often copyvios, POV, and unsourced [5] [6] [7]. Perhaps we should remove this from some of the specialized welcome templates? NTox · talk 08:07, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
I would find it very helpful to have a welcome template for a user who's first contribution was to delete content with an explanation. Perhaps it could combine Template:welcomevandal and Template:uw-delete1, something like:
I'm not sure what the procedure is for doing this. I'd appreciate any comments or suggestions. Joja lozzo 18:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Please see User:Jojalozzo/Welcomedelete and User:Jojalozzo/Welcome-anon-delete for proposed registered and non-registered versions. Does this seem useful to anyone else? If so, I welcome suggestions for improvement or simply bold improvements. Thank you. Joja lozzo 04:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
What about putting a small video in Welcome notes to teach newcomers that how they can follow articles, and add articles to their watchlist. That helps a lot as learning this function may be take time for new users because some users even don't know such things is available in Wiki. KhabarNegar ( talk) 08:55, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I could have sworn that when I was around WP during a previous life there was a welcome template or new user template directed at users whose first contributions are at WP:AFD or other !Vote discussions. Something along the lines of:
If something like this ever existed outside my imagination, I'm having trouble finding it now. If such a template doesn't currently exist, what would anyone's thoughts be on creating something like this? It would be a message that would fall under WP:WT#Specialized messages/Potential problem users. I could have used something like this a few times in just the past couple days.
If there is something like this elsewhere, would someone please point me in the right direction? Thanks. - Wine Guy ~Talk 20:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
I suggest we add a link to Special:GettingStarted to our various welcome templates (with exceptions if appropriate), worded something link "Here are some things you can do to help". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I recently noticed that the popular Welcome template, {{
Welcome to Wikipedia}}
, treated the newer, longer
IPv6 users in the same manner as registered users. So I fixed it by using the {{
IsIPAddress}}
template as noted at
Template talk:Welcome to Wikipedia#IP contributors. I thought I would mention it here so other editors and templates might benefit from its use. –
Paine Ellsworth
CLIMAX!
04:23, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
No, I'm not saying that this should be an automated process. The issues is that a lot of our new editors think the messages are automated - the flow research has shown this. When I made my own template ( User:Oiyarbepsy/welcome), I specifically mentioned that it wasn't placed by a bot, and this might be a good thing to message on all our other welcome templates. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:34, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I have created a new template that welcomes new Users before they make their first edit or create their first article - {{Bfpage/registering new users}}. Typically, a user receives a welcome message after they have made their first edit or after they have created their first article. This often leads to difficulties, deleted articles and discouragement leading to a possible decision to end their participation. Creating a new User account is a critical period of time because with the right "welcome message", the new User will be directed to: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - WP:FIVEPILLARS, How to make your your first edit - WP:Tutorial/Editing, and How to make your first article - WP:Your first article.
I have discovered a method that identifies new users who have created a new user profile within seconds of the creation of the username.
Just to let you know, this particular webpage was designed by a couple of programmers who wanted to transform the changing data in Wikipedia into a visual and musical format. Your first visit to this page may be slightly overwhelming. But my main point in mentioning this is that this is the place where new users are identified within seconds of them registering with the username on Wikipedia.
To understand the process of identifying new users on this webpage, scroll down to the bottom of this webpage. There is an explanation of the graphics that are being used on the webpage. Part of the explanation reveals that new users are identified in a musical format by the sound of background strings. I hope this doesn't seem too complicated. It is probably best to watch the website for a few minutes so that you understand what is going on. This musical representation of the addition and subtraction of data on Wikipedia is represented by tones and the appearances of what I call bubbles.
In addition to graphically representing the creation and the editing of articles on Wikipedia, this webpage identifies new users seconds after they have created their account. You will see a blue ribbon at the top of the screen where the bubbles appear. On that blue ribbon there is an announcement of the creation of a new user account. If you click on the blue ribbon and the name of the new user, you will immediately be taken to the new users talk page. Since a user who has just registered probably does not even have a talk page at this point in time, your very first post to the new users talk page will be their very first message. (addendum:This has been interesting to me because since employing this method of welcoming new users, I have an incredible number of new page creations credited to me. I think that this is probably misleading. But I have asked an administrator to help me with this.)
The next step then is:
This is how a brand-new user will be welcomed and immediately (within seconds) directed to the crucial articles on Wikipedia that will help them begin their editing and the creation of new articles. The template specifically welcomes the new user without acknowledging any edits or page creations - they have not made any yet.
Please contact me with any questions that you have about this new welcoming procedure. I suspect that it might change a lot of things, especially the disincentives that exist that affect new users. It is incredibly disappointing to have your first edit or your first page creation be deleted. Hopefully by directing new users to information that they can use before editing or article creation via this template we will save them the trouble and disappointment that so many new users experience.
If you would like to see the application of this template as I have been using it, refer to my editing history.
I have found another welcome template for new users {{subst:NewUser}}, but my identification of new users is probably novel, and besides my welcome message is friendlier....(who writes these things?? Men?? Women are more chatty like me!)
@ Bfpage:Before taking this on, I suggest a read of Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Use a bot to welcome new users. While the first point doesn't apply, the second and third ones do. A redlinked talk-page is a good indicator of a brand-new user, which is handy to know for spotting vandals and spammers. Also, lots of these templates would be pointless, going to vandals, advertisers, and users who never edit, which is a huge number. I'd suggest waiting until the user has made a productive edit. It would be nice to have a tool listing new user with, say, five edits, but I definitely don't have the technical brains to do that. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 22:34, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
You know, another knock against this is people are registered at a foreign wiki, go to an English page by mistake, which registers them here, and then they get a welcome language in a language they don't understand from a wiki they never intended to visit in the first place. I've had this happen after accidentally clicking a wrong link to a foreign wiki. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 03:50, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm looking at a new editor's first contribution, which was a ~600 word list of howto points. It was have made a terrific blog post somewhere. It was posted to the relevant talk page. Someone else, an experienced editor, reverted it. The new editor was upset, thinking at first that the material was just gone. The experienced editor pointed the newcomer to the past version of the page. It seems to me that these cases could deserve something a little less terse and more welcoming than {{ subst:uw-chat1}}. Jeh ( talk) 05:59, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I think it would be useful to add a |BLP-unsourced=
parameter to {{
Welcome-anon-constructive}} for cases where a constructive edit (by content) was also an unsourced BLP edit. Ideally, this parameter would be usable from within Twinkle as well. I hesitate to use the existing {{
Welcome-anon-unsourced}}, template has a negative tone, not {{
Welcome-anon-constructive}}'s positive one. Here is my suggested phrasing:
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your efforts to make constructive edits on Wikipedia. I noticed that some of the information you added was to a biography of a living person, but did not have a source listed. Wikipedia needs such information to be reliably sourced so that other editors can verify its accuracy. If you need help, you can refer to our guide to citing sources or contact me at my talk page for assistance. Again, thank you for your edit! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:
Thoughts? – Philosopher Let us reason together. 19:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi
Are there any welcome templates that link to resources that explain contributing to Wikipedia using visual editor not wikicode?
Thanks
John Cummings ( talk) 11:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Heading pretty much describes the question here. John Carter ( talk) 01:09, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Good idea about merging this to Standard user greeting. Oleg Alexandrov ( talk) 17:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
I created a table with the welcome templates and a "preview" at Wikipedia:Welcome template table. If you think your welcome is unusual enough to merit inclusion, go ahead and add it to the table. TheJabberwock 00:24, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
Why link to the template, when whe could use Template:tl. -- George Mon e y Talk Contribs 03:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Of the templates would be great.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:05, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
We need at least one late welcome template IMHO (see my welcome) for users that have not been welcomed despite quite a number of edits. Nil Einne 00:01, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Should we trim some of them? The big user warning template movement should take this opportunity to do away with a few duplicate ones. Xiner ( talk, email) 18:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I have a graphic template that points new users to several locations. If you would like to look at it, it's located at
User:Cremepuff222/Greeting. Let me know if there are any problems! --
Cremepuff222 (
talk,
sign book)
19:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
We have an entirely new set of welcome templates; see Wikipedia talk:Welcoming committee#New welcome templates. Λυδαcιτγ 00:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
The user Stlchickenwings is vandalising and is a new user. What templates should I use to welcome him/her?
-- Kid Evil 1 01:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
This newly-added template is colorful, which is nice. (It was recently added at Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates/Table.)
The closing line, though, is confusing. Why direct new users specifically to other new users?
“If you want to get other Wikipedians' attentions, go to the New user log.”
- Pete 00:48, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
We could use a 'welcome but copyvios are not welcomed' template...-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 18:19, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
There is something wrong with one or more templates, it's adding the [[Category:Welcome templates]] to peoples user talk pages, I removed one but there are many others, which I left alone for now In case someone wants to investigate which template is causing the error. ▪◦▪ ≡ЅiREX≡ Talk 22:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello. Could some people please review, discuss and improve Category:Poor English welcome messages, and the associated template? Thank you, Tualha ( Talk) 18:14, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Category:Welcome templates - do we need 113? Should we try and standardise them like we did the user templates? We could perhaps start by subst-ing and redirecting those which are barely used. Neil ム 21:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi everyone! I'm a member of
WikiProject Accessibility, a group formed to improve Wikipedia's accessibility to disabled users. One of the ideas that we would like to see implemented is the addition of a link to
Wikipedia talk: Accessibility to the welcome templates, so that users who have disabilities would know where to look for assistance. I am writing here first to ask if it would be okay if I made these changes. If you like, I can make a subpage where I show you what I intend to do to each template. (since the way I would fit the link in would vary by template)
Thanks very much for input! --(
L'Aquatique: Bringing chaos & general mayhem to the Wiki for
One Year!)
02:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Is there a template to welcome new users who are registered but have been vandalizing? I see the anonymous vandal one, but not one for registered people. If I'm missing it... sorry. Brbigam ( talk) 21:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
WP:WT is listed as a shortcut to this page and I've used it many times, but now it sends me to Wikipedia:Shortcuts to talk pages!!! The history of the shortcut shows it being a redirect to the talk page list since 2005. I'm very confused. Lyrl Talk C 16:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Using WP:Twinkle this welcome message put my name in the message above the Happy Editing line, which looks odd because the very next line is my signature. Anyone know how to fix this? Also, it seems there ought to be a comment in the template so that when you look at the subst code you can tell the name of the template that was used as is with user warnings.-- Doug.( talk • contribs) 19:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
These templates should be used but i did not have these greating as new user, wrote an article AL-kitab as per Quraninstead of welcome i had problems and problems by old users and they did not gave any help.but removed my whole text of article and forcely they changed the name of islamic Holy books but not with my whole text which contained arabic text in references of claims. No discussion bu forced every body and they donot want to have text of Quran about verses of Quran which is not fair for wikipedea truth policy. knowledge and research references were also given even then i have lost the text of whole article which is different from Islamic holy books. in wkipedea all topics describing Quran must have title "Quran as per research" and not as per text of Quran, because they donot want to accept the text of quran as a reference for claim which ia talking about Quran and citing it's verse. this type of citation can only be verified by its arabic text and not by any scholar.
it can be checked on talk pages what happened to my article which is now as AL=kita.... thanks Farrukh38 ( talk) 15:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Am I overlooking something, or is there no welcome message which combines wikipedia policy and help links with a "don't be discouraged" message to new users who've had their first contribution deleted? If there really is no such template, I'd propose that one be made-- well-intentioned bad edits seems extremely common among new users, and {{subst:Firstarticle}} does little to set them on the right path. Fullobeans ( talk) 18:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
{{ Welcomeh}} is my preferred welcome templates, but I use {{ WelcomeIP}} for anon users. So I've created a version of the former, with the additional content from the IP template: {{ WelcomeIPh}}. Will someone check it, please? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:07, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
Template:Welcome-name from 2005 is now quaintly obsolete (it encouraged the user to use their real name, reflecting a policy which did actually say that three years ago) and slightly confusing (it advises against using the name of a "fictional character" as a pseudonym). The template isn't linked from this project page - should it be cleaned up or deleted? I'm not entirely sure what purpose it was originally created to serve. -- McGeddon ( talk) 11:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
WikiProject Classroom coordination would like to ask for help in designing templates for course leaders and their students, welcoming them to Wikipedia and informing them of Wikipedia:WikiProject Classroom coordination and Wikipedia:School and university projects (linking Wikipedia:School and university projects/Instructions for teachers and lecturers for course leaders and Wikipedia:School and university projects/Instructions for students for students). We could also use a third template, for the course leaders and students who misunderstand what Wikipedia is and are creating articles that are on the fast track for deletion, combining welcome with a warning. Could you help? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:26, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if it would be worthwhile if the welcome templates were to warn newbies away from articles tagged "NPOV", "unbalanced", "dispute", etc. It's too easy for a bold and earnest newbie to feel picked-on when their bold changes are speedily removed. Then, before they've had time to learn about edit warring, they've violated WP:3RR and been accused of being a sock puppet. I just saw it happen recently. It was a tough environment for a newbie to be making typical newbie mistakes. I don't know if the newbie has been disuaded from contributing further to Wikipedia. It would have been easier if he had started on something less contentious. -- SV Resolution( Talk) 18:40, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I like {{tl:welcomemenu}} the best, as it is most informative since it has lots of good policies all in one neat box. However I often give it to people who either have no contribs, or their first contribs aren't very promising (but might not fit within any existing welcome/warning template). In the past I have added it and then simply removed the "thanks for your contribs" section. However I think it may be appropriate to have a permanent alternative and I have copied the existing welcome menu to {{ wmnc}}. The only change is in the contribs sentence. Any thoughts or concerns? 7 07:00, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
As a new pages patroller, a template that says welcome and congrats to new Wikipedians for their first article surviving without being speedily deleted might be nice. Tehw1k1 ( talk) 05:35, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I would like some help with a few templates I have copied from another template: I copied (and modified) Template:MedInvitation to Template:PhyInvitation, Template:MedWelcome-reg to Template:PhyWelcome-reg, Template:MedWelcome-anon to Template:PhyWelcome-anon and finally also Template:MedWelcome to Template:PhyWelcome. However, PhyWelcome doesn't really behave as I want it to behave.
If the user is registered, I get {{subst:PhyWelcome-reg||}} on the screen when I write {{PhyWelcome}}
. However, I don't get anything on the screen when I write {{subst:PhyWelcome}}, and after I have press "Save page" the page source will contain a lot of code, althoughy nothing shows up on the page. When I insert {{subst:PhyWelcome-reg||}} directly on the page instead, it works perfectly well; I get a lot less code in the source of the page and the welcome message shows up as it should.
If the user is unregistered, {{subst:PhyWelcome}} almost works, however it fails in the end of the template; the PhyInvitation template doesn't show up and instead a "{" sign appears. If you look in the code it has produced, you will see that all the code for PhyInvitation indeed is there.
Do you know why the template behaves like this? I have no idea, but I think it should work since it is basically just a copy of another working template! -- Kri ( talk) 16:08, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Just a heads-up about this proposal. Anybody interested in trying it? Maryana (WMF) ( talk) 18:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
WP:TWINKLE gives users the option to instantly add many of these templates to userpages by presenting a menu of choices of welcome templates. It asks for a "Linked article (if supported by template)" so that the template can reference an article on which the user to be welcomed had been working. I noticed that for some templates this field works and for others, such as Template:Welcome-COI, even when the field is completed the automated mechanism does not populate the template and instead just gives the default response.
I was thinking of fixing this, but I wanted to ask first - is there a reason why things are as they are? Also, does anyone know offhand where I am going to look to fix this and make it consistent for all templates? All of this works on the template side and TWINKLE knows how to respond, right? Has there ever been a "Best practices" talk about this? Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
How's my template:
|
-- Ankit Maity Talk • contribs 05:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Recently, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง told an inexperienced editor to refrain from welcoming users who have made few or no contributions:
"Hi, I understand your enthusiasm, but please refrain from welcoming users who have made few or no contributions. We don't know if their intentions are honest, and we don't want to encourage people who register for the wrong reasons. It's best to wait a while and see if they are making constructive edits. Thanks." [1]
To which I replied:
"Kudpung is dead wrong. See WP:AGF. Please do welcome new users. WP:WT has some templates you can use." [2]
Kudpung took exception to this, writing:
"HI Guy; Before criticising experienced editors in a dismissive tone, please get your facts straight and AGF yourself. Join the WP:WC [Note: I am already a member -Guy] and read the recommendations: 'Our main activity is to welcome new users who have made constructive edits.' It is 'dead' logical that there is absolutely no point whatsoever in welcoming people who have made few or no edits, or if their only edits are to their own user space, or worse, vandalism. It's all common sense really. Happy editing!" [3]
The first thing that strikes me about this is that the section of WP:WC that Kudpung quotes was added by Kudpung himself. [4]. This change does not appear to be based upon any discussion or consensus, but rather Kudpung's opinion. On the other hand, nobody objected or reverted the change either...
It also struck me that many of the existing welcoming templates are specifically designed for new users who have not made constructive edits. For example:
Template:Uw-vandalism1: - Welcome for vandals
Template:Welcome-anon-vandal: - Welcome for IP vandals
Template:Welcomespam: - Welcome for spammers
Template:Welcome-COI: - Welcome for users with a conflict of interest
Template:Welcome - Copyright: - Welcome for copyright violators
Template:Welcomenpov: - Welcome for users who violate
WP:NPOV
Template:Welcometest: - Welcome for users who post editing tests
Template:First article: - Welcome for users who create a deletable article
Template:Welcomeauto: - Welcome for users who write articles about themselves.
Template:Welcome unref blp: - Welcome for users who create an unreferenced BLP
I don't see anybody objecting to the existence or use of the above templates.
In the case of a newly registered user who has made no edits at all, I agree that posting a welcome is not appropriate. (is it even possible for an ordinary editor to find those?), and I agree that welcomes to vandals should not thank them for vandalizing (but note that we do thank people for making test edits).
In the case of those who have only made a few edits, I think Kudpung is dead wrong, and that his edit to Wikipedia:Welcoming committee that discourages welcoming should be removed. His reasoning for making that change ("please refrain from welcoming users who have made few or no contributions. We don't know if their intentions are honest") is a clear violation of WP:AGF, and his "It's all common sense really" and "It is 'dead' logical" arguments are simply WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I don't see any logic or common sense in not welcoming new editors. Such a change in welcoming policy should not be made without consensus. Comments? -- Guy Macon ( talk) 17:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
That is not the only reason we don't use a bot. The discussions that reached that conclusion also mentioned that it was pointless welcoming accounts with no edits who could very well be vandals, dead accounts or sock puppets. I would also argue that slapping a template down is cold and un-personal and that most new users wouldn't be able to tell a bot account from any other, but we do it because it would be extremely monotonous to hand type dozens of welcome messages. I tend to agree that we should not be placing welcome messages on accounts with no edits—it's just unnecessary. As for welcoming accounts with few edits: it really depends on the type of edits they are making, if they appear to be attempting to make legit edits then a welcome template is clearly appropriate, perhaps backed up by some personal comments by the editor placing it. On the other hand, if a new users' efforts seem to be to try and insert the word 'poopyhead' into as many articles as possible then it should be off to AIV with them... Pol430 talk to me 19:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I am quite happy with my new design. Perhaps we should mainspace it and move it up on the list here? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 20:25, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
Perhaps we do have too many welcoming templates, but I think we have a gap in the range, consideringconcerns over child editors and their safety. Today I welcomed a young editor, but found that I couldn't find a really approporiate welcome, including links to Wikipedia:Child protection and related pages. I did find Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors and added a message linking to it. I think we might need a child-specific welcome template. As per my section title I suggest Template:Welcome child or similar as a name. If I have missed a suitable template please advise. Regards, 220 of Borg 04:34, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Many of these templates begin by thanking people for their contributions. Sometimes with a link to the contributions themselves. Which are often copyvios, POV, and unsourced [5] [6] [7]. Perhaps we should remove this from some of the specialized welcome templates? NTox · talk 08:07, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
I would find it very helpful to have a welcome template for a user who's first contribution was to delete content with an explanation. Perhaps it could combine Template:welcomevandal and Template:uw-delete1, something like:
I'm not sure what the procedure is for doing this. I'd appreciate any comments or suggestions. Joja lozzo 18:30, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
Please see User:Jojalozzo/Welcomedelete and User:Jojalozzo/Welcome-anon-delete for proposed registered and non-registered versions. Does this seem useful to anyone else? If so, I welcome suggestions for improvement or simply bold improvements. Thank you. Joja lozzo 04:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
What about putting a small video in Welcome notes to teach newcomers that how they can follow articles, and add articles to their watchlist. That helps a lot as learning this function may be take time for new users because some users even don't know such things is available in Wiki. KhabarNegar ( talk) 08:55, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I could have sworn that when I was around WP during a previous life there was a welcome template or new user template directed at users whose first contributions are at WP:AFD or other !Vote discussions. Something along the lines of:
If something like this ever existed outside my imagination, I'm having trouble finding it now. If such a template doesn't currently exist, what would anyone's thoughts be on creating something like this? It would be a message that would fall under WP:WT#Specialized messages/Potential problem users. I could have used something like this a few times in just the past couple days.
If there is something like this elsewhere, would someone please point me in the right direction? Thanks. - Wine Guy ~Talk 20:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
I suggest we add a link to Special:GettingStarted to our various welcome templates (with exceptions if appropriate), worded something link "Here are some things you can do to help". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:16, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
I recently noticed that the popular Welcome template, {{
Welcome to Wikipedia}}
, treated the newer, longer
IPv6 users in the same manner as registered users. So I fixed it by using the {{
IsIPAddress}}
template as noted at
Template talk:Welcome to Wikipedia#IP contributors. I thought I would mention it here so other editors and templates might benefit from its use. –
Paine Ellsworth
CLIMAX!
04:23, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
No, I'm not saying that this should be an automated process. The issues is that a lot of our new editors think the messages are automated - the flow research has shown this. When I made my own template ( User:Oiyarbepsy/welcome), I specifically mentioned that it wasn't placed by a bot, and this might be a good thing to message on all our other welcome templates. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 04:34, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
I have created a new template that welcomes new Users before they make their first edit or create their first article - {{Bfpage/registering new users}}. Typically, a user receives a welcome message after they have made their first edit or after they have created their first article. This often leads to difficulties, deleted articles and discouragement leading to a possible decision to end their participation. Creating a new User account is a critical period of time because with the right "welcome message", the new User will be directed to: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - WP:FIVEPILLARS, How to make your your first edit - WP:Tutorial/Editing, and How to make your first article - WP:Your first article.
I have discovered a method that identifies new users who have created a new user profile within seconds of the creation of the username.
Just to let you know, this particular webpage was designed by a couple of programmers who wanted to transform the changing data in Wikipedia into a visual and musical format. Your first visit to this page may be slightly overwhelming. But my main point in mentioning this is that this is the place where new users are identified within seconds of them registering with the username on Wikipedia.
To understand the process of identifying new users on this webpage, scroll down to the bottom of this webpage. There is an explanation of the graphics that are being used on the webpage. Part of the explanation reveals that new users are identified in a musical format by the sound of background strings. I hope this doesn't seem too complicated. It is probably best to watch the website for a few minutes so that you understand what is going on. This musical representation of the addition and subtraction of data on Wikipedia is represented by tones and the appearances of what I call bubbles.
In addition to graphically representing the creation and the editing of articles on Wikipedia, this webpage identifies new users seconds after they have created their account. You will see a blue ribbon at the top of the screen where the bubbles appear. On that blue ribbon there is an announcement of the creation of a new user account. If you click on the blue ribbon and the name of the new user, you will immediately be taken to the new users talk page. Since a user who has just registered probably does not even have a talk page at this point in time, your very first post to the new users talk page will be their very first message. (addendum:This has been interesting to me because since employing this method of welcoming new users, I have an incredible number of new page creations credited to me. I think that this is probably misleading. But I have asked an administrator to help me with this.)
The next step then is:
This is how a brand-new user will be welcomed and immediately (within seconds) directed to the crucial articles on Wikipedia that will help them begin their editing and the creation of new articles. The template specifically welcomes the new user without acknowledging any edits or page creations - they have not made any yet.
Please contact me with any questions that you have about this new welcoming procedure. I suspect that it might change a lot of things, especially the disincentives that exist that affect new users. It is incredibly disappointing to have your first edit or your first page creation be deleted. Hopefully by directing new users to information that they can use before editing or article creation via this template we will save them the trouble and disappointment that so many new users experience.
If you would like to see the application of this template as I have been using it, refer to my editing history.
I have found another welcome template for new users {{subst:NewUser}}, but my identification of new users is probably novel, and besides my welcome message is friendlier....(who writes these things?? Men?? Women are more chatty like me!)
@ Bfpage:Before taking this on, I suggest a read of Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Use a bot to welcome new users. While the first point doesn't apply, the second and third ones do. A redlinked talk-page is a good indicator of a brand-new user, which is handy to know for spotting vandals and spammers. Also, lots of these templates would be pointless, going to vandals, advertisers, and users who never edit, which is a huge number. I'd suggest waiting until the user has made a productive edit. It would be nice to have a tool listing new user with, say, five edits, but I definitely don't have the technical brains to do that. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 22:34, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
You know, another knock against this is people are registered at a foreign wiki, go to an English page by mistake, which registers them here, and then they get a welcome language in a language they don't understand from a wiki they never intended to visit in the first place. I've had this happen after accidentally clicking a wrong link to a foreign wiki. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 03:50, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm looking at a new editor's first contribution, which was a ~600 word list of howto points. It was have made a terrific blog post somewhere. It was posted to the relevant talk page. Someone else, an experienced editor, reverted it. The new editor was upset, thinking at first that the material was just gone. The experienced editor pointed the newcomer to the past version of the page. It seems to me that these cases could deserve something a little less terse and more welcoming than {{ subst:uw-chat1}}. Jeh ( talk) 05:59, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I think it would be useful to add a |BLP-unsourced=
parameter to {{
Welcome-anon-constructive}} for cases where a constructive edit (by content) was also an unsourced BLP edit. Ideally, this parameter would be usable from within Twinkle as well. I hesitate to use the existing {{
Welcome-anon-unsourced}}, template has a negative tone, not {{
Welcome-anon-constructive}}'s positive one. Here is my suggested phrasing:
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I greatly appreciate your efforts to make constructive edits on Wikipedia. I noticed that some of the information you added was to a biography of a living person, but did not have a source listed. Wikipedia needs such information to be reliably sourced so that other editors can verify its accuracy. If you need help, you can refer to our guide to citing sources or contact me at my talk page for assistance. Again, thank you for your edit! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might like to see:
Thoughts? – Philosopher Let us reason together. 19:14, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi
Are there any welcome templates that link to resources that explain contributing to Wikipedia using visual editor not wikicode?
Thanks
John Cummings ( talk) 11:34, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Heading pretty much describes the question here. John Carter ( talk) 01:09, 7 June 2016 (UTC)