Wikipedia talk:New user landing page/Archive 1

Do we need the "Welcome to Wikipedia!"

@Drewmutt, Forceradical, and NKohli (WMF): It seems a bit odd to me to start the page with "Welcome to Wikipedia!". If they've gotten as far as this page, they are probably relatively familiar with the site, i.e. they've created an account and either followed a redlink or tried to go directly to a non-existent page. What if we just got straight to the point and started with "The article that you're looking for doesn't currently exist"? Kaldari (talk) 20:55, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't have a strong preference either way. Your call. -- NKohli (WMF) (talk) 20:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

@Kaldari and Forceradical: Totally agree. I made some changes to the top copy here, since this is protected now. Welcome to thoughts, at the very least I agree that topmost line should be changed. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 21:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

I like that version, Drewmutt. Addresses my earlier concerns@JJMC89:, would you be able to implement the changes suggested by drewmutt if no one objects? TonyBallioni (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

That looks good to me. I can import it if no one objects. Kaldari (talk) 22:03, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 14 September 2017

<copyright violation removed>--Rgrrgrsd (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Rgrrgrsd. This was copied and pasted content, and as such, copyright infringement. Don't do that again. Your request above is not actionable. This page is for discussing the associated project page, Wikipedia:New user landing page, which is protected, but it not where any article content would go, and in any event, such article content cannot be copied and pasted from anywhere.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:51, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Help button overlapping text

@Drewmutt: When the window is small, the "Get Help" button overlaps the "The article that you're looking for doesn't exist" text. I made the text slightly shorter in the meantime to mitigate the problem, but we should figure out how to get the text to wrap. Kaldari (talk) 23:33, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Alternately, we could remove the "Get Help" button. Kaldari (talk) 23:38, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

My vote is to dump it for now, it's in a weird place, anywho, imo. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 02:34, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

The "Get Help" button has been removed for now. Teahouse has already been linked anyway. Alex Shih^Talk 03:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Help desk

Please see this query about the help desk by Timothyjosephwood. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:02, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 15 September 2017

Bymiguel09 (talk) 06:16, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

i wanna be administrator on wikipedia

Bymiguel109, this page is for discussing the new user welcome page. If you have questions about getting involved in Wikipedia the Tea House is the place to go. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Talk page protection

Alex Shih, this might be one of the rare occasions we want to semi-protect a talk page. I have a suspicion we'll be getting a lot of edit requests. Possibly with an page notice template of some sort directing people to the teas house? TonyBallioni (talk) 06:24, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni: I agree. I've added a notice on top of this page and semi-protected the page. Alex Shih^Talk 06:56, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia: New user landing page

I'm told there's a way to remove this title from the page. It's not really helpful and it takes up real estate. Just a thought. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 19:14, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to be late at the discussion.It is my suggestion to the WMF team that instead of redirecting to a page it would be good if we could create a editnotice such as shown in this file commons:File:Wikipedia screenshot of page.png.Forceradical (talk) 06:14, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

It needs a link to the deletion log

For those who click on a red link. RhoLands (talk) 06:17, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

• I agree; now that this page exists, it's possible to go all the way to creating a draft, without a warning that page with the same title has been deleted. It would have been better if the message at MediaWiki:Noarticletext (or is it MediaWiki:Noarticletext-nopermission?) had been changed instead of redirecting here. Peter James (talk) 21:48, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

• Also if a non-autoconfirmed user has created a page before this trial and the page is moved to a different title or namespace or deleted, and that user clicks on the red link to find out what has happened to it, does it goes to this page or is there something that checks whether the user created the page and displays the log or a different message instead? Peter James (talk) 21:58, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
  • As I said at WT:ACTRIAL adding the deletion log would be a net negative for the overwhelming majority of the 250k+ people who use this page daily: it's designed to be welcoming and show people how they can get involved in Wikipedia. The deletion log for pages created before ACTRIAL is a better point, but typically those users just go to the NPP person who tagged the article. It's also an issue that will sort itself out within a month, and I don't think is a good reason to alter what is a better design without it. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:13, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
    • If its purpose is to provide data to determine the effect of a change, I think it would it be better to avoid making other changes such as this that are likely to affect results. Peter James (talk) 20:19, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
    • Another option is to link from the editnotice for the draft namespace, which could remain linked after the trial if it is likely to affect comparison - there would them be a link to the deletion log whether an article is created in the main namespace or not. Peter James (talk) 20:51, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
      • I would support finding a way to link draft space to main space deletion logs. I don't see it as an issue affecting the trial since the landing page itself is an equal part of the trial to the limitations on creation, but I see other positive benefits of linking to the logs from draft space. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Ability to search

Please see [1]. It might be confusing to a new user if they were merely trying to search a term within Wikipedia, and aren't yet aware how to wait for the drop down that says "containing...". Can we add a button that links to Special:Search? Thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:47, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Article wizard proposal

Just wanted to drop a note, since I imagine there's a good deal of interest overlap between this and the article wizard. The discussion is here, if there's any interest. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 01:12, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Protected page edit request: Add icons and add early notice about acceptable articles

• Add icons for "Your first article" and "Need help" links. The bottom icons draw attention too strongly away from these important items.
• Less important: I suggest adding a Help:Menu entry to the list, for people who prefer self-searching.

Proposed replacement for the matching wikitext at the top:

The article that you're looking for doesn't exist.

You can create it, but...

Before you create an article, you should read Wikipedia:Your first article.

Need help? You can ask a question at the Teahouse, help desk or through live chat.

Search for editing information, Wikipedia policies, and more at Help:Menu.

• Before sending people to the Article Wizard, we should add simplified notice that non-notable articles won't be accepted. We really do need to repeat this as early as possible for new users.

After "you'll be on your way to contributing to Wikipedia" and before the DIV, insert a blank line and "Important: Your article will not be accepted unless you cite significant coverage of the topic in independent reliable sources."

Here's an interesting alternate icon that could be used for "Need help": Alsee (talk) 14:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

@Alsee: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. It's an interesting proposal, but such a large change to a highly visible page needs some discussion first. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 15:08, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose those icons, and the layout. A lot of back and forth went into the current design: the sandbox is preferred by the editathon people, and the article wizard has steps that deter people from creating non-notable drafts. Drewmutt has suggested an article Wizard rewrite (you can find a link to the discussion above). That would probably be the best place to discuss changes like these rather than the landing page. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:55, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I just found the discussion on building the landing page. It looks like there was an small blue icon on the top section just before the end. I don't quite see why it was removed. Alsee (talk) 06:39, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Page view statistics

I found the drop in the page views by a few hundred thousand overnight to be interesting: [2]. My assumption here is that it was caused by IPs clicking on redlinks the first few days, but did want to point it out here in case anyone was curious. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:15, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

The tail end of this discussion shows that this bug and its correction did indeed coincide with the massive peak in page views between 15 and 18 September: Noyster (talk), 17:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Following on from this it may be interesting to examine changes to pageviews on pages linked to the new landing page. I have looked at three periods: Sept 8-14 (baseline), Sept 15-18 (when the landing page was offered to unregistered users), and Sept 19-25 (landing page offered to registered users only). The trends over the period can be seen graphically here.

Here are the figures for average views per day:

	Page	Baseline	15-18 Sept		19-25 Sept
		Daily views	Daily views	% change	Daily views	% change	Numerical change
Landing page		--	271,454	--	2,796	--	2,796
Before you create an article...	Your first article	1,498	2,711	81.0	2,245	49.9	747
Need help?	Help desk	1,119	1,320	18.0	1,256	12.2	137
	Teahouse	991	978	-1.3	852	-14.0	-139
	Live chat	75	263	250.7	94	25.3	19
Different ways to edit	Try editing	407	465	14.3	421	3.4	14
	Improve	3,467	6,332	82.6	4,229	22.0	762
	Create new article	1,390	2,087	50.1	2,016	45.0	626

The indications are that around a quarter of newly registered users hitting the landing page were bent on creating an article; about the same number were interested in improving Wikipedia; there was no significant extra traffic to help pages, although some IPs went to look at live chat. It stands out that a couple of thousand IPs each day were interested in improving Wikipedia when this was offered as an option, enough to click through to the community portal: Noyster (talk), 12:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

ACTRIAL-related question

The language on this page says, "You can create it, but...". However, in my understanding, which is incomplete, new accounts can't currently do so while ACTRIAL is underway. So if follow a redlink (or other means) and get directed here the language says I can, but in reality I can't? It is very likely I'm missing something and would appreciate it if someone could clarify. Thanks. Ckoerner (talk) 20:30, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ckoerner: New accounts can create the article in draftspace (or their sandbox) and submit it to be reviewed by an Articles for Creation reviewer, who will move it into mainspace should it be accepted. jcc (tea and biscuits) 20:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

@Jcc: Ah, I thought it was something like that I was missing. I appreciate the answer. Ckoerner (talk) 13:46, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 30 March 2018

As written the first big sentence of this page says: * Before you create an article, you should read Your first Wikipedia article.". This is could easily be misinterpreted. It sounds like you are telling the potential editor to read their first wikipedia article. This was how I first read it and then took a double take.

I think instead of saying "read Your First Article" it should say "read these instructions" or "read Writing an Article." Thanks! Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 18:51, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

•  Done I changed it to "this guide" Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:14, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 8 March 2019

Please prepend <noinclude>{{pp-template|small=yes}}</noinclude> to the start of the page. It is currently template-protected (see the protection log) but the page is not currently tagged as such. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 06:11, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

I'll let someone else decide, but I actually disagree with this. The page is designed to be as clean as possible for a new user, including removing the page title with {{hidden title}}. We should keep this as streamlined as possible; adding an obscure, brightly-colored icon won't help make things clearer for a new user landing here. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:35, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

 Done I think a little icon is unlikely to distract — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:04, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Where should the "start helping" button link?

Following up from the above, where do you all think the "start helping" button should link? I submit that the WP:Task Center is a better destination than WP:Community portal#Help out; it was designed pretty much precisely for this situation (new editors wanting to know how they can help), and if it can't be used here, it might as well be deleted. Sdkb (talk) 03:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I would be ok with this....but the task center links to a page like Category:All stub articles over the Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask that lists some examples and also links Category:All stub articles. Can we work on the WP:Task Center to list examples over (−1)F for a new editors 3rd click. Moxy 🍁 05:18, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Agreed, Moxy. If it's alright, I've copied your comment over to there so we can keep discussion centralized. Sdkb (talk) 15:17, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Edit request 25 March 2020

Please update the "start helping" button to point to the WP:Task Center, a better resource for new editors seeking to find tasks to help with.

Sdkb (talk) 23:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit template-protected}} template. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@JJMC89: I put out an invitation at the Help Project, but I'm not sure if anyone else is going to comment on this. Sdkb (talk) 02:35, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Please understand, Sdkb, the requirement is to garner consensus before we use the edit request templates. Then once consensus has been achieved, that is the time to use the edit request template, that is, after general agreement for the change is assured. So please don't reactivate this request unless and until there is consensus for a change of the "start helping" button link. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 14:47, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: I understand, and apologies that I've been having to use the edit request system a lot recently, but I do think there is consensus for this, largely per WP:SILENCE. It's important context that the Help space is a really sparsely watched area — if you look at recent discussions there, it's largely just me and Moxy. No one else responded to the invitation to this discussion I put out at Wikipedia:Help Project, but just Moxy and I agreeing is a plurality of the most active contributors, and no one so far has expressed opposition. Would you be willing to consider enacting the change, with the caveat that it'll be reverted if anyone comes along to object? I'll escalate this to Village Pump Proposals if I really need to, but I'd prefer not to have to clog up that page with something like this. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:12, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

To editor Sdkb: to be brutally honest, I'm not so sure this would be an improvement. The task center page seems to be a good intermediate page, with its link to the experienced-editor page at WP:WM. Both pages might be overwhelming for new users, while the existing link is much shorter and simpler. It gives new users a good place to start without blowing their minds with longer and greater lists of things that need to be done here. At least, that's my take. We should probably give this a bit longer than just nine days to try to garner consensus. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 15:36, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: That's fair. We're working on making the Task Center less overwhelming (and could certainly use help if anyone is inclined), so I may come back to this once it's been made better. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 15:44, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

That's fair or more than fair, too. And I would also ask you to have no qualms about using the request system when you feel its needed. The system is a boon for those of us who don't have the tools to make a particular edit. I've also found that the more we use the system, the more contacts we make with helpful editors, including admins. I've learned a lot from many of them by using the edit request system and consider them friends. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 16:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Documentation?

Could we add some documentation to this page which details how exactly it's showing up for users? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:57, 28 May 2021 (UTC)