Wikipedia

Wikipedia talk:Tip of the day/Archive 13

< Wikipedia talk:Tip of the day
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Maxsoa 810 in topic Problems with July 29 Tip, Wikipedia Books
Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13

(September 16) - Featured world of Wikipedia

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 16 - Do you need administrator assistance? (Note: duplicate of March 16 tip)

Tip title: Featured world of Wikipedia

While browsing through Wikipedia, you may have clicked on Featured content from the left menu. Featured content represents the best of Wikipedia, including articles, pictures, and other contributions that showcase excellent results of the collaborative efforts of Wikipedia. Here is the list for each of these features.

Featured content:

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 20:55, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion: * Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 19:43, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

(September 18) - Difference between wikiprojects and portals?

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 18 - Cite your sources (Note: duplicate of March 18 tip)

Tip title: Difference between wikiprojects and portals?

What is the difference and preference for portals as opposed to wiki projects?

  • WikiProjects are for editors to discuss article editing. WikiProjects are linked in talk pages with WikiProject banners like {{WikiProject Politics}} for example, but not in articles.
  • Portals are mainly for readers and can be linked in articles with {{Portal}} in an article's See also sections.

There may or may not be a WikiProject and a portal for the same subject.

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 17:52, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Note:: credit to Situphobos and PrimeHunter for discussion (10 July 2016) of above at the Teahouse.

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 23:40, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

(September 24) - Main page - Did you know

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 24 - Transclusion vs. Substitution (Note: duplicate of March 24 tip)

Tip title: Main page - Did you know

Wikipedia:Did you know... is a section you can see on the Main Page. Wikipedia:Did you know (WP:DYK) is the project page for the "Did you know" section.

The DYK section showcases new or expanded articles that are selected through an informal review process. It is not a general trivia section. For the discussion page see WT:DYK.

Beginners should consult this Did You Know glossary if they don't understand any of the terms used. Beginners may like to start by looking at a summary of our many rules: this provides links to pages with more detailed explanations (which in turn may link to even more detailed pages).

See also:
Did you know/Onepage
Did you know/Supplementary guidelines

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 18:27, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 12:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

(September 26) - Tagging pages for problems

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 26 - SuggestBot is a fun way to pick pages to edit (Note: duplicate of March 26 tip)

Tip title: Tagging pages for problems

Tagging pages for problems

"Tags" are often used to indicate problems. Some Wikipedia editors object to the practice of tagging instead of fixing, but there is value in pointing out an article's problems. Tagging allows editors to specialize, teaches editors and warns readers about subpar or problematic content. It is better if people solve the problems they encounter themselves, but not everyone may be able to. Editors are sometimes obliged to justify inclusion of tags, such as in the case of Template:POV.

Constructive criticism given in a civil, respectful manner is a vital part in a collaborative project like Wikipedia, and it should be welcomed rather than discouraged. Wikipedia values contributions from everyone—novices and experts alike. It is important to listen to readers who find an article biased, confusing or unconvincing. They might not have the expertise to fix those problems, but the fact that they report them probably means that an article needs improvement.

See also:
Tag bombing
Responsible tagging

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

(September 7) - Article construction stages

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 7 - Please fill-in edit summaries (Note: duplicate of February 9 tip)

Tip title: Article construction stages

There are Wikipedia editors who prefer to begin writing a new article "offline" using a Text editor on their own local device prior to posting the content to Wikipedia.

In a nutshell, the article construction stages would follow this path:

Read more:
Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 20:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 12:30, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

(September 9) - Good article reassessment

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 9 - Becoming an Administrator (Note: duplicate of March 9 tip)

Tip title: Good article reassessment

Wikipedia:Good article reassessment (GAR) is a process primarily used to determine whether an article that is listed as good article (GA) still merits its good article status according to the good article criteria, and to delist it if not.

There are two types of reassessment: individual reassessment and community reassessment. Where possible, editors should conduct an individual reassessment, while community reassessment should be used if delisting is likely to be controversial.

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 20:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 01:06, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

(September 11) - Article deletion process

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 11 - How to make links look the way you want (Note: duplicate of March 11 tip)

Tip title: Article deletion process

The Wikipedia article deletion process can be accomplished several ways. Deletion of articles from Wikipedia occurs through one of four processes.

  1. Speedy deletion involves the scrutiny of only a few people before an article is deleted. The allowable criteria for speedy-deletion are deliberately very narrow. The list of candidates for speedy deletion can be viewed at Category:Candidates for speedy deletion.
  2. Another quick method is the use of proposed deletion: simply add {{subst:prod|reason goes here}} to the top of the article. This is meant for articles where the deletion is believed to be uncontroversial, yet does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. A proposed deletion can be contested by any user by removing the {{prod}} tag within seven days, and if anyone still wants the article deleted the full Articles for deletion process is required.
  3. For unsourced articles about living persons created after 18 March 2010, adding {{subst:prod blp}} will propose the BLP for deletion. If sources are not added within 10 days, the article may be deleted.
  4. Articles which do not meet the narrow criteria for speedy deletion and whose deletion is (or might be) contested are discussed by the community through the Articles for deletion (AfD) process.

Read more:
Introduction to deletion process
Wikipedia:Deletion process

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 13:15, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 12:32, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

(September 13) - Copyright Cleanup

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 13 - Are you lost? (Note: duplicate of March 13 tip)

Tip title: Copyright Cleanup

WikiProject Copyright Cleanup addresses copyright concerns anywhere on Wikipedia. Among its primary activities are tagging potential copyright problems for further action, assisting contributors who do not understand copyright policies, following up on contributors who have mishandled copyrighted materials, and coordinating cleanup of largescale copyright problems.

Everyone is welcome to join the project and contribute.

See also:
Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 13:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

(September 15) - CopyPatrol Tool

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 15 - Wikipedia's top ten power tips (Note: duplicate of March 15 tip)

Tip title: CopyPatrol Tool

For copyright cleaners there is CopyPatrol, a tool from Community Tech, powered by EranBot. The tool monitors recent changes and identifies possible copyright violations.

Login with your Wikimedia account to get started. Use "Page fixed" after removing the copyright violation (or tagging for speedy deletion, if needed), or "No action needed" if there is no violation or it has already been resolved.

You can provide CopyPatrol feedback here.

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 11:56, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

(September 19) - Graphics Lab

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 19 - Link tricks (Note: duplicate of March 19, July 30 tips)

Tip title: Graphics Lab

The Graphics Lab is a project to improve the graphical content of the Wikimedia projects. Requests for image improvements can be added to the workshop pages: Illustrations, Photographs and Maps.

The Graphics Lab helps improve all graphical content stored on Wikimedia Commons and the English Wikipedia. For examples of work done by the Graphics Lab, see the archives of past work. For questions or suggestions, use the talk pages: Talk:Graphics Lab, Talk:Illustrations, Talk:Photographs and Talk:Maps.

Interested in helping out? Check out the uploading standards, then go to one of the workshops you are skilled at, and lend a hand. You can also add your entry to Wikigraphist abilities and yourself to Category:Wikigraphists. You can also add {{User Wikigraphist}} or {{Mbox Wikigraphist}} to your userpage.

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 15:58, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 18:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

(September 21) - How do you pronounce that?

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 21 - Navigate faster using Wikipedia shortcuts (Note: duplicate of March 21, July 6, October 15 tips)

Tip title: How do you pronounce that?

It is helpful for Wikipedia readers to include pronounciation for words with unusual or difficult spelling. For our English Wikipedia this is especially helpful for foreign names and locations.

The {{Pronunciation needed}} template shows as [pronunciation?] and is used to request the audio or textual pronunciation. This template puts pages into Category:Articles needing pronunciation.

See also:
IPA for English
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation
Category:Requests for audio pronunciation (English)

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 13:54, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 12:38, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

(September 27) - What is BRD? the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

  Idea: – New tip to replace: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 27 - Work faster with keyboard shortcuts (Note: duplicate of March 27)

Tip title: What is BRD? the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle

The BOLD is where making bold edits is encouraged, as it will result in either improving an article, or stimulating discussion. If your edit gets reverted, do not revert again. Instead, begin a discussion with the person who reverted your change to establish consensus.

 

The BOLD, revert, discuss cycle (BRD) is an optional method of reaching consensus. It can sometimes be useful for identifying objections, keeping discussion moving forward and helping to break deadlocks. Care and diplomacy should be exercised. Some editors will see any reversion as a challenge, so be considerate and patient.

BRD doesn't work well in all situations. It is ideally suited to disputes that involve only a small number of people, all of whom are interested in making progress. There are other options, and some more suitable for other situations.

See also:
BRD Alternatives

If there are any additions or updates needed for this new tip, please discuss here. — JoeHebda • (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

  * Discussion:

* Done  – New tip posted to TOTD Schedule queue, Alpha list, Tips library. — JoeHebda • (talk) 15:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Making room for more tips

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

@JoeHebda and Teblick: The idea has been posed to merge the styletips scheduling queue 

into the TOTD scheduling queue.

The question is, can we free up enough slots without sacrificing content?

Upon first glance one can easily notice a few tips that are duplicated. But upon closer inspection, there are quite a few redundant tips. About 10%...

I also found one obsolete tip (I think).

Without further ado, here they are...

duplicate tips

Note: no longer duplicates

tips that can be merged

 
TOTD for Wikipedia:Tip of the day/March 25 has wikilink to May 2 pipe tip

Obsolete tips

In conclusion

How many style tips are there?

Thirty four.

Based on the above, 35 slots can be freed up, if desired.

Whew, more than enough.

I was thinking, if we add the style tips, that their titles be prefixed with "Style tip: "

Should we move forward with this project?

Thoughts?   The Transhumanist 07:09, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

The Transhumanist, Yes, this will be a great addition to TOTD! Prior to you proposing this I had been thinking of finding a way to weed out "stale" tips (those with very few Page Views). So now that can wait until 2018 timeframe. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 00:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

TIP IDEA (draft): Citation templates

Latest comment: 7 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

  Bumping thread for 365 days. — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:45, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

  Idea:

The various citation templates

There are many citation templates that can be used for references in articles and on talk pages. The super majority are what is known as CS1 or CS2 compliant. Here is a list of the CS1 ones:

You can add the above templated list to your user page by adding the following code to your user page (including the four curly braces):
{{Citation Style 1|state=expanded}} (if you removed the state=expanded parameter, the template will autocollapse).

There are a few other citation templates around that are not CS1 compliant. One of them is: {{cite archive}}

More info: Wikipedia:Citing sources#Citation templates and tools

Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 17:56, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Comments:

Error URL at January 27 TOTD

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Today, I removed the url from Wikipedia:Tip of the day/January 27 because it was incorrect. And I was unable to find an equivalent. Below is the wikicode.

Or, run the semi-automated article peer reviewer online http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/view/Peer_reviewer here.

I was able to locate another URL at here that explains a bit.

And at URL here I am not able to locate anything to run Peer_reviewer. If anyone else is able to fix this it would be great. For now it can be removed from January 27 TOTD. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 16:20, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Potential tip topics

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here is a list of items to possibly make tips about. Feel free to add to it. I placed it here as a convenient idea repository for future reference. The Transhumanist (talk) 17:21, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

FYI

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The Tip of the day article is up for deletion again. Nobody seems to be able to find references to prove that it is a notable topic. Ironically, search results about tip of the day features are obscured by actual tip of the day features. Thousands of them.     — The Transhumanist    22:14, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Another one bites the dust: Tip of the day

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tip of the day (2nd nomination).    — The Transhumanist   07:50, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

Smooth Operator

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

This department is operating so smoothly, that I nearly forgot all about it.

So, here's a theme song.

Enjoy.    — The Transhumanist   22:08, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

TOTD needing an update

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hey, Y'alls. This tip for August 29 links to seven year old data. Should we spruce of the landing page, or overhaul the Tip? (courtesy pings to JoeHebda and The Transhumanist). Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:17, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

JoeHebda {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 04:20, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

@Checkingfax and JoeHebda: Updating that stats page would be quite an undertaking. We should probably focus on tips, and portals. ;) Overhauling the tip sounds like a very good idea.    — The Transhumanist   05:50, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Deletion tip

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Why the hell is todays Tip of the day instructing people on how to delete content? Deletion of content is one of the worst procedures wikipedia has. Idiots using it constantly damage our knowledge base on a daily basis. And you are encouraging more people to undertake it? There are far too few of us in the Article Rescue Squadron trying to help retain the valuable contributions from our editors. Sometimes I feel like a one armed paperhanger, overwhelmed by the mass of content under constant attack, frequently with a total ignorance of what is before their eyes. We have a whole class of sharks, who smell blood in the water and take every opportunity to wipe out content. Their army of clones !vote content away with little regard to . . . facts. They wikilawyer even the most prominent of WP:RS into disregard in order to achieve their goal of a successful deletion and a brownie point in their cap. The world's knowledge be damned. The most important step, WP:BEFORE, is ignored by them and is ignored by your Tip of the day. So with this "Tip" you have potentially recruited and released ill-informed new members to join the black army. And because they were encouraged by this official looking source, they probably think they are being helpful.

Wikipedia depends on outside experts for the majority of their content. Many do not know the ways of wikipedia writing. They might not post something in the correct form or use our sourcing system. That does not mean their contributions are invalid, they just need help. WP:BEFORE, meaning a search with your favorite search engine, can help inform you if their contribution is valid or BS. Responsible editors should take the knowledge they gain from WP:BEFORE and help FIX the problem, rather than to destroy the content. Once stamped with the blackball of deletion, even without WP:SALT, that subject may never return to wikipedia. Its addition will be discouraged and potentially fought.

If you are going to inform people how to do something, give them the complete story. Do it right, or don't do it at all.Trackinfo (talk) 20:00, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

I added a couple of things to the tip that should be done before deletion. Perhaps someone also wants to add WP:BEFORE. Shouldn't the first step before deleting be: try to fix the issue? We shouldn't use "Do it right, or don't do it at all." as a reason for deletion, even for a tip on deletion. WP lives on incremental improvements. StrayBolt (talk) 23:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
The sentiment behind WP:BEFORE is to inform yourself before you act. Obviously the intent is to fix the problem, rather than to destroy all that is before you, which is what deletion does, but if you don't understand the subject, you have no business commenting in the first place. With no understanding, you have no idea IF a problem exists.
My sentiment behind the Do it right, or don't do it at all. statement is with the tip displayed yesterday, you have now potentially released onto wikipedia, a new horde of half informed helpers. Face it, there are a lot of people who want to help and don't know how. You have told them how to do it, WRONG. They now have the tools to destroy wikipedia incrementally as you say, without the understanding of what to do BEFORE they destroy. If they knew about doing BEFORE, they could actually turn into real helpers. There are not nearly enough editors on the other side to retain the rationality of our content against the destruction. It takes far more work to save an article, with research and editing even before litigating, than it does to drop it into the AfD system, where it will get immediate support from the echo chamber of uninformed !voters who get their joy out of destroying content. Trackinfo (talk) 22:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

October 19 tip - Translating content

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Greetings, While visiting Teahouse (WP:TH) today, there was an inquiry about language translation. Thanks to Pretended leer (talk) for the answer. The previous October 19 tip was a duplicate for January 19, so I replaced with this new one for translating. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 13:40, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

Totd template in Nederlands.

Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

There should be a template in the Dutch Wikipedia! Dr. Sroy (talk) 07:57, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@Dr. Sroy: First, you need a set of tips for the template to display.
You set them up on a yearless year, so that they repeat year after year, indefinitely.
Once the set is created, it is fairly easy to keep up with the maintenance of the tips at one tip per day, especially if there are multiple editors monitoring them.
Not all of the English Wikipedia tips will translate, because not everything that is in the English WP is in the Dutch Wikipedia.
So, you'll need a team to write tips, and also at least one translator if you want to reuse the English WP's tips.
Feel free to ask any further questions you might have.    The Transhumanist 09:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
Greetings @Dr. Sroy: and @The Transhumanist: In my wanderings of Wikipedia today I found Wikipedia:Translation page and WikiProject Intertranswiki for Translating content from foreign language Wikipedias. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 12:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks,@JoeHebda:. This must help in some way! But since I am busy with my studies in my real life, I would like to have worked in collaboration. Else it is challenging for me alone.
I was very disappointed from my experience in the Tsonga wiki where I gained temporary adminship to technically reform the wiki... But I was alone!
Anyway thanks, enjoy! Happy editing!Dr. Sroy(aka.ARKA) (talk) 14:13, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

"Six of one, half-a-dozen of the other" tip

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

In the second section ("Half-a-dozen power tips:"), the first link is incorrect. I don't know what "link tricks" is supposed to point to, but the link actually leads to Wikipedia's Quick directory. Also, with item 3, "Wikipedia shortcuts" leads to Wikipedia's Manual of Style (not the full manual but a brief introduction to it). Eddie Blick (talk) 02:10, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Eddie Blick (talk) for feedback. Looking at tips this is for Wikipedia:Tip of the day/October 18, so I located the correct days and updated. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that, JoeHebda! Eddie Blick (talk) 15:48, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Now that the Mediation Committee has been disbanded...

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Someone should probably either update this tip (last edit was on 27 December 2015) relating to dispute resolution or replace it with something entirely different. Thanks. theinstantmatrix (talk) 00:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

@Theinstantmatrix: - Thanks for the heads-up. I updated this Nov.14 tip. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 02:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

November 15 tip shows broken formatting in templates

Latest comment: 5 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Basically the layout and formatting is broken when displayed in {{totd CP}} and {{totd b}}for today's tip (but {{totd}} is fine). This can be seen in action on the template page and at the top of this page. — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 02:49, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

@AfroThundr3007730: - Thanks for reporting. I updated Nov.15 tip to use {{Wikipedia's sister projects (fluid)}} instead, and checked/tweaked allthe Totd templates. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:26, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
@The Transhumanist: - Greetings, After making change to fix Nov.15, I went through TOTD templates & updated. Mainly size of lightbulb image, now image is missing from tips. And I'm totally at my whits-end how to fix. Purging pages does nothing. Asking if you could help please. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 21:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
The image was never on the individual tip pages. It is inserted in the tip templates.      — The Transhumanist   23:38, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
P.S.: @JoeHebda: (ping)
@The Transhumanist: - The problem is when clicking on "Next tip" or "Prior tip" the lightbulb disappears. It never did that before. When at tip templates page, & clicking on a template, the lightbulb shows once only; then disappears at click of "Next" or "Prior" buttons. JoeHebda (talk) 01:05, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
If you check the histories for the individual tip pages, you will find that the lightbulb file has never been on them. If it was, then two bulbs would pop up on the daily display of the tips: once from the tip pages, and once from the display template.    — The Transhumanist   01:53, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

November 18 Tip

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The tip titled "How to provide a Google search in a link" includes the suggestion "... then use a tool like WP:LINKY to open the searches all at once into separate web browser tabs." That suggestion could prove to be a problem because the Wikipedia:Linky tutorial says, "Unfortunately, Linky stopped working with Firefox version 44 (September 2015)." Perhaps the mention of Linky could just be deleted, ending the paragraph with "... entire search session." Eddie Blick (talk) 02:02, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

February 26 Tip

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I don't know how old this tip is, but it links a nonexistent Special:Courses and an inactive and retained for historical reference Wikipedia:Course pages. Is it just way past its sell-by date or can it be fixed? – Athaenara ✉ 00:54, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

How to get a list of a page's subpages

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This tip, due to appear soon, states that portals always have subpages. That's no longer true. Certes (talk) 19:11, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Certes - I changed Wikipedia:Tip of the day/March 8 accordingly. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:15, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Possible addition to "Where to post requests" tip

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request might be a good addition to the list of links for various kinds of requests. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:01, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

tip:Citing sources

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

to cite a source while making an article, click on the "cite" button at the top of the editor. its icon is a quotation mark. Qwertydude56 (talk) 22:23, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

TotD: March 22nd (Searching Wikipedia with regular expressions (regex))

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

OK, so Wikipedia:Tip of the day/March 22 really flops. It needs a simple introduction to explain how useful what we're about to tell you is going to be (rather than diving into technical-speak right from the start). I simply lost the will to live when I tried to understand what this 'tip' was telling me. Am I alone in thinking that? Nick Moyes (talk) 01:29, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

TotD: March 27 (shortcut keystrokes)

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Notwithstanding that many of the keystrokes shown in Wikipedia:Tip of the day/March 27 don't work on Google Chrome for me, neither does the English.

"⇧ Shift+Alt+M to move the current page and its talk page..." (shouldn't this read: "to move between the current page and its talk page..." ?

"⇧ Shift+Alt+Y to open a list of your user's contributions..." (shouldn't this read: "to open a list of your user contributions..." ?

Nick Moyes (talk) 22:56, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Nick Moyes: - Recently I've organized accesskeys for the Chrome browser. For my own personal wikipedia contributions here's my shortlist:

  • Alt+c - Display content page
  • Alt+t - Display Talk page
  • Alt+← - Browser page back


  • Alt+⇧ Shift+e - Edit current page
  • Alt+b - Jump to Edit summary
  • Alt+p - Preview
  • Alt+s - Publish (save)


  • Ctl+⇧ Shift+r - Reload current browser page
  • Ctl+w - Close browser window (tab)
  • Ctl+9 - Go to Last browser window (tab) - on the Right.


  • Alt+n - My talk page
  • Alt+. - My user page
  • Alt+y - My contributions


In addition to above there is the comprehensive Table of keyboard shortcuts that might be added to the TOD tip as a "Read more" line. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 23:53, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, JoeHebda. Useful. I'll still leave this TotD for someone else to correct, I think. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

TotD: March 28

Latest comment: 5 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Wikipedia:Tip of the day/March 28 misses out the Teahouse, and focuses too much on the rather esoteric WP:REFDESK.

Would this be better:

Ask intelligent questions

When asking a question at the Teahouse or Help desk, please include all the facts needed to answer your question - especially the page title you're enquiring about. At the Reference desk, for example, do not ask "who was president in 1900?" without mentioning the country you are interested in. This prevents volunteers at those help fora from having to ask follow-up questions before providing answers. Friendly reminder: the Teahouse and Help desk are for questions on how to use or edit Wikipedia, while the Reference desk is for questions about anything else (real world questions).

Read more:


Nick Moyes (talk) 23:12, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

as I've not seen any response, am now pinging @JoeHebda, Ammarpad, The Transhumanist, Thinker78, and Teblick: - as this tip is currently live today, any chance of a quick consensus on whether you'd be OK to see this small improvement made to the wording made? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC) (Teahouse Host)
It looks really better. And you can just apply it per WP:SILENCE. – Ammarpad (talk) 11:55, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  Done Thanks Ammarpad. I didn't want to step on any collective toes here. Perhaps I'll do the same with my post immediately below this one, as that got no response either. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:48, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

TotD: April 19 - Setting Wikipedia time to your time zone

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Would this addition of a time userbox be a worthwhile addition to: Wikipedia:Tip of the day/April 29? See below:

Setting Wikipedia time to your time zone

Wikipedia's servers record activity based on Coordinated Universal Time (UTC for short). You can set your user preferences to display time for the time zone you are in.

If you do this, Wikipedia will show all times in Recent changes, page histories, and contribution histories based on your local time zone. However, when you sign a talk page with ~~~~, the timestamp is created in text, so it has to be displayed in UTC. Automated logs such as image file uploads are also shown in server time (UTC).

To show other users what time zone you are in, you could even add a time userbox to your own user page.

Read more:
oops. I forgot to sign this suggestion. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:56, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

  Done I've added this one line addition as there were no objections. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:53, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

New TotD suggestion - Syntax highlighting

Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I can't find any Tip of the Day which explains Syntax highlighting, which I find immensely useful. So I'd like to propose something along these lines for discussion and development:

Can't see the wood for the trees?

When editing a page with classic editor, it can often be hard to tell article text apart from other text, such as references, wikilinks or template text. Try turning on 'Syntax highlighting' to show different types of text in different colours. Simply toggle the marker pen icon ( ) in the editing toolbar. It's just left of the 'Advanced' option. Article text now stays black, but wikilinks appear blue, templates purple, whilst reference commands appear green.

Thus, without Syntax highlighting, this sentence:

Over 7,500 cultivars of the culinary or eating apple (Malus pumila) are known.[1] Those varieties marked agm have gained the Royal Horticultural Society's Award of Garden Merit.[2]

appears like this in source editor:

Over 7,500 [[cultivar]]s of the culinary or '''eating [[apple]]''' ('''''Malus pumila''''') are known.<ref name="Elzebroek">{{cite book|last=Elzebroek|first=A.T.G.|title=Guide to Cultivated Plants|publisher=CAB International|year=2008|page=27|isbn=1-84593-356-7|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YvU1XnUVxFQC&lpg=PT39}}</ref> Those varieties marked {{smallcaps|agm}} have gained the [[Royal Horticultural Society]]'s [[Award of Garden Merit]].<ref>{{cite web | url= https://www.rhs.org.uk/plants/pdfs/agm-lists/agm-ornamentals.pdf | title = AGM Plants - Ornamental | date = July 2017 | page = 63 | publisher = Royal Horticultural Society | accessdate = 2 April 2018}}</ref>

With Syntax highlighting turned on, it looks like this:

Over 7,500 [[cultivar]]s of the culinary or '''eating [[apple]]''' ('''''Malus pumila''''') are known.<ref name="Elzebroek">{{cite book|last=Elzebroek|first=A.T.G.|title=Guide to Cultivated Plants|publisher=CAB International |year=2008 |page=27 |isbn=1-84593-356-7 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=YvU1XnUVxFQC&lpg=PT39}}</ref> Those varieties marked {{smallcaps|agm}} have gained the [[Royal Horticultural Society]]'s [[Award of Garden Merit]].<ref>{{cite web | url= https://www.rhs.org.uk/plants/pdfs/agm-lists/agm-ornamentals.pdf | title = AGM Plants - Ornamental | date = July 2017 | page = 63 | publisher = Royal Horticultural Society | accessdate = 2 April 2018}}</ref>
Read more:

I'm sure my demo would need a better (and shorter) sample of wikitext, but it gives something to go on. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:56, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Elzebroek, A.T.G. (2008). Guide to Cultivated Plants. CAB International. p. 27. ISBN 1-84593-356-7.
  2. ^ "AGM Plants - Ornamental" (PDF). Royal Horticultural Society. July 2017. p. 63. Retrieved 2 April 2018.
  • Yes Nick Moyes (talk), a good idea for a tip - helpful for new editors. For me, I've got that Syntax Highlighter turned OFF because it slows down the editor & rarely needed. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 15:49, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
@JoeHebda: OK, glad to know it might be useful. Forgive me, I'm not quite sure of the process or the next steps. Could you elucidate? I can work on it further to reduce the example size of text, if you wish, or leave it to the team here. If I did it, I'd probably need a steer as to what's the maximum acceptable length of such a tip. Obviously, this one's rather larger than most. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:36, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Totd: October 14 - out of date?

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikipedia:Tip of the day/October 14 seems to be out of date. I have just tried, and failed, to follow it. I cannot find alternative search options in the way this tip describes - only by going to Options>Search can I modify which individual search engine is used (which does include Wikipedia). I have Firefox version 69.0.3, though infrequently use it. Pinging The Transhumanist, who created it. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:58, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Totd October 16th - out of date?

Latest comment: 4 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Wikipedia:Tip of the day/October 16 now seems out-of-date in its current form as we have had 'Hovercards' (Page Previews) enabled by default for every editor since it came out of beta in 2018. Selecting 'Navigation popups' from one's own special preferences overrides the default Page Previews, which I think for many editors could be a retrograde step. The wording was fine at the time (2015) but now merits an update. I offer an alternative text for consideration below, and have also created a new Navigation popup screenshot (the previous one was from a time when there were just over 1 million articles on Wikipedia! Pinging @JoeHebda and The Transhumanist: for your thoughts. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:09, 12 October 2019 (UTC)


Power tool: Navigation popups versus page previews
 

By default, every user can hover their mouse over blue wiki-linked text and see a 'page preview' of the linked article. They can then decide whether to click to go there.

But if you activate the 'Navigation popup' tool instead, it empowers your mouse arrow! Now, when you hover over a link (e.g. Wikipedia) you not only get a preview as before, but also have extra page information, plus various actions you can perform.

A useful menu option for power users is "actions". When you select one, it applies that action to the page specified in the link you are hovering over. Examples include edit; view history; add linked page to your watchlist; view last edit; see what else links there, or go straight to its talk page.

You can even get popups within a popup (by hovering over links in the preview)! If the article doesn't preview, simply activate it from the menu provided within the Navigation popup box (just hover over the word "popups" and select "enable previews").

To activate this feature, click on the gadget tab of Preferences and check the 'Navigation popups:' box. This overrides the standard 'page preview' function that all users see. You must be logged in to activate and use Navigation Popups.

Hi @Nick Moyes: - Just my option, the October 16 tip might still be valuable as-is for people like me who have that thing turned off to get more WikiPedia editing speed. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 15:33, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh, you rather surprise me by saying that, JoeHebda. It was only my aim to highlight the existence of the normal page preview, whilst still clearly advocating Navigation popups as a potentially valuable tool worth trying by some editors. My feeling was that the as-is version seemed to imply this was the only way to get a page preview by hovering over a link, when that's clearly not the case nowadays, as it was when this tip was originally written. (I have to say, since activating it today, I am finding the extra functionality of Nav popups quite nice, even if the preview is a bit on the small side. I might stick with it for a while.) Meanwhile, I've slightly precised my alternative suggestion, in case that's any better. I'll leave the decision with you as I'm still unclear on the processes of gaining consensus on whether and how updates/ changes are made here. Meanwhile, I'll still carry on make the odd tweak to existing Totd's if you're happy with my contributions? Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:51, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Answering @Nick Moyes: - From some of your previous improvements to T-O-D, I would say to just go ahead & make whatever changes you feel are necessary. Because there is no huge community of editors here at TOD, there would be no need for consensus for the day-to-day updates. Any major structural changes would probably call for a consensus. I've moved on to other wikiprojects although all TOD are still on my massive Watchlist. JoeHebda (talk) 20:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
JoeHebda OK thanks. I'm not precious about my suggestion for Totd October 16th, but I do think it should be seen as an improvement. Given there are only two days to go to get a consensus to keep as is or to update, I'm pinging @Learnerktm, Blackhat999, Checkingfax, Zppix, Teblick, Ammarpad, Thinker78, and The Transhumanist: for their input here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 09:02, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
My first impression is that this change would be useful. Thinker78 (talk) 23:14, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

New TotD Suggestion | Creating User Sub-pages

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

You may have seen some users have a guest book with an address of User: Jimbo Wales/guestbook or a page of the user's prized barnstars with an address of User: Jimbo Wales/Barnstars. These are called User Subpages. To create one, simply write in the search box User:your username/subpage name. Then click create user subpage and voilà, you have a subpage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Porthysek (talk • contribs) 23:09, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Comments re "Finding stubs and making them grow"

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Here are a couple of thoughts about the tips in this article.

1) The article says, "Then try Wikipedia:Requests for page expansion ..." That page, however, has a template saying, in part, "This page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference." It seems to deal more with tagging articles as stubs than finding articles that have been tagged.

2) Wikipedia:Find or fix a stub, which is also suggested as a place to look, redirects to Wikipedia:Stub, which in turn offers little help in finding stubs. Fortunately, it contains the subsection Locating stubs, which includes in a bulleted list Category:Stub categories.

It might be more useful to readers of this tip to remove those two existing links, replacing them with a direct link to Category:Stub categories

Eddie Blick (talk) 03:35, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Tip of the day for 20 December

Latest comment: 4 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hey all, not sure where the best place to bring this up is, but looking at today's tip, Wikipedia:Tip of the day/December 20, it claims that if people use profanity on talk pages, they could wind up quickly banned. When has that been true apart from in personal attacks? Seems like an outdated tip (2006?) that needs to be modernised. Also seems like we're equating "blocked" with "banned". Thanks and regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:36, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Good call. Here's my first quick attempt to update it:
Sometimes the question is posed whether Wikipedia allows freedom of speech regarding profanity. Our primary goal is to build an encyclopedia. Freedom of expression is valued, but only to the extent that it does not get in the way of that goal. Including information about offensive material is part of Wikipedia's encyclopedic mission; being offensive is not. We have many articles about profane and sexual subjects‍—‌prick, fuck, shit, fart, and so on.
Although Wikipedia is not censored, you should avoid the use of profanities when interacting with others here. Not only is this unprofessional, it may well cause offense and could be deemed as harassment if directed at particular individuals. This could result in warnings and an eventual block or ban. Usernames containing offensive words are also swiftly blocked.
(Do we still need this in?: Repeated off-topic comments on article talk pages may also constitute a breach of policy.)
Thoughts? Nick Moyes (talk) 10:33, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
Hi @Nick Moyes: I can't tell if the existing language of the tip is actually a tip or a warning. It's also a little unclear what the focus is of the topic--are we trying to manage talk page behaviour or explain our stance on article censorship? I'd probably rewrite it entirely:
Wikipedia is a community editing project, and as such, it is crucial for editors to participate in talk page discussions. While profanity is not disallowed on talk pages, please consider the effect it may have on the quality of the conversation. Excessive profanity can often be perceived as hostility, which might be counter-productive to our overall goal of [[Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia|building an encyclopedia]]. To learn about other talk page guidelines, see [[WP:TPG]].
I'm not married to any of the language, but we need some fucking focus on what the goddamned tip is! Oh wait, sorry. That's counter-productive.   Cyphoidbomb (talk) 12:31, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

2020-11-18 TOTD has a wikilink to a deprecated Firefox add-on.

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

[...] and then use a tool like WP:LINKY to open the searches all at once into separate web browser tabs.

LINKY is a firefox add-on that hasn't worked since September 2015. The alternative suggested by the add-on's page is also deprecated. I suggest removing the problematic part of the TOTD. Thank you for your consideration. Opalzukor (talk) 13:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Upgrading today's tip

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Today's tip is "Good article nominations" (Wikipedia:Tip of the day/January 21) and I'd say it's a bit out of date. In my experience, articles don't need to undergo a peer review before GA, and articles don't need to be GA before FA. I don't know if that's controversial or not, which is why I thought I'd post here instead of making changes directly. The GA criteria have probably been refined over time as well, so all in all I'd propose this new version below for the tip, based on Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria and Wikipedia:Good article nominations/Instructions:

Good article nominations

Anyone may nominate an article to be reviewed for Good Article status, although it is preferable that nominators have contributed significantly to the article and are familiar with its subject and its cited sources. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article on the article talk page prior to a nomination.

A good article is...

1. Well written: Prose and layout are clear, and comply with certain aspects of the Manual of Style (MOS).
2. Accurate and verifiable: Reliable sources are provided, and cited where necessary. There is no original research.
3. Broad: It covers the main aspects of the topic without going into unnecessary detail. It is encyclopedic.
4. Neutral: It represents viewpoints fairly and without bias.
5. Stable: It does not change significantly from day to day.
6. Illustrated: if possible and relevant, by relevant images with acceptable copyright status, fair use rationales where necessary, and suitable captions.
Mujinga (talk) 16:18, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Problems with "Wikipedia-specific searching with Firefox" tip

Latest comment: 3 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The link on that page is dead, and I think the whole tip is irrelevant, because Firefox now includes Wikipedia as one of it's search engines, from my experience. Thanks.EighteenFiftyNine (talk) 09:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Problems with July 29 Tip, Wikipedia Books

Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This tip is outdated and will be completely useless in a few days when the books are deleted. The tip should probably be removed and replaced. Danre98(talk^contribs) 01:49, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

How to take images from wikicommons to edit an article Maxsoa 810 (talk) 12:59, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Tip_of_the_day/Archive_13&oldid=1194750919"