Wikipedia talk:Help Project/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Help Project. 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.

User:JesseW/WPindex

If anyone knows how the above page was created, please contact me. The Transhumanist 23:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I was wondering how far your scope extended, and whether project banners should be placed on these pages - as most( if not all) help and contents pages have no associated project to provide centralised discussion? LeeVJ (talk) 01:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Still sure that we need a template, I intend to produce a basic template, and will tag it to pages likely to be accessed by a new reader from main page, e.g from the sidebar, common warnings messages,intro,tutorial etc. L∴V 01:15, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Here's a quick attempt ising WPBannerMeta, no picture/icon - any ideas? L∴V 19:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

	Help
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Help, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the help system on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HelpWikipedia:WikiProject HelpTemplate:WikiProject HelpHelp

Looks good. I say go for it. -- Quiddity (talk) 18:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Right, working on it : Template:Help Project L∴V 12:55, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

First draft, have double check it - one thing required is a category, I think! L∴V 13:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

have applied to the first tutorial page as a tester .. L∴V 22:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I recently started editing a file WP:How to use primary sources (biological sciences). My goal here is to try to make it a little easier for non-biologists to track down and use primary sources, especially for breaking news items. I'm not sure how well I've accomplished this so far, but I'm curious what people think. What standard determines when such a page is no longer an essay but a reliable help document? Mike Serfas (talk) 07:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there is a standard as such - just consensus, but the help system should abide by guidelines and policies so first stop is to make sure it does this. L∴V 13:34, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd suggest asking the folks at WP:Wikiproject Biology to check/improve/ratify it. -- Quiddity (talk) 18:39, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Please see Help talk:Images and other uploaded files #Redirect to WP images page?. Eubulides (talk) 22:37, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Page has been moved to :Files

Currently clicking on Wikipedia:Introduction..2..3 discussion tab redirects to the hidden templates discussion, this gives the game away a little , and if you then click on the 'article' ( which is 'template' now ) really gives it away, this could also confuse new users. I'm not sure if it can be done but wouldn't it be better the other way rounf , i.e. redirect the template's talk to the articles talk ? Maybe we could add a template doc for each with a link to a subpage for discussing templates workings specifically away from casual readers ... ? L∴V 01:32, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Y DoneLee∴V (talk • contribs) 00:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi everyone - just saw this WikiProject and knew some people would be interested in this discussion: Wikipedia_talk:Help_desk#Adding_.23wikipedia-en-help_to_the_header. Would love ya'll's (i think i can do that, two apostrophes? ha!) input on the topic. Thanks. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a great idea ... ! L∴V 14:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I think somewhere in the project we could do with a 'what's happening' type section with links to current ongoing discussions that are important, need a broader perspective or would simply like further opinion on an idea ( I know I've suggested things on those quiet pages which just needed a second opinion to confirm it was good enough to act upon). I seen a neat scrollable box in another project before or we stick to a normal section, whether it should be part of this talk page or (gut feeling) on the main project page is another question ? L∴V 18:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds great to me. For it. JoeSmack ^Talk 22:31, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Y Done Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 22:10, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

There is a move request for the Edit summary page from HELP: to WP: space, might have some other viewpoints arrive there... Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 12:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

The request was concluded with 'no consensus' Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 16:13, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

• I have noted that a number of pages (e.g. Help:Displaying a formula ) seem to be directly copied from MediaWiki and still refer to it, which leads me to wonder how wikipedia help works with mediawikis help - after all mediwiki help should be more up to date and comprehensive and provides help for all wikis using it.

It used to. The original concept was for help pages to transclude the MediaWiki help pages and have en.wiki specific help tacked on. The MediaWiki pages were never maintained, so they went out of date. And en.wiki has diverged from the default and other language wikis in so many ways that the MediaWiki help pages were sometimes wildly inaccurate. About a year ago, the transclusions were removed, leaving us on our own.

Those MediaWiki help pages were supposed to be the contents of the Help namespace. Now that the connection has been removed, there is a lot of blurring between the Help and Wikipedia namespaces. For example, we have both Help:Footnotes and Wikipedia:Footnotes. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 02:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Is it possible to re-appropriate the help space? I think it would MASSIVELY help by a) making it clear where to get help and b) allow us to focus/pretty much start over. I think we're at that point. JoeSmack ^Talk 02:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I think there needs to be some discussion on what should be in Help and Project (Wikipedia) namespaces. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:28, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Gadget, very informative - do you have any other nuggets of information on how the help system has deveoped, maybe we can identify some other areas which may have been superceded? I agree - it would be a good first step to have the namespaces defined... L∴V 11:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Resolved.

A number of articles have cropped up that need attention, but before they get lost I have just added this section Wikipedia:Help_Project#Articles_needing_attention linking to a subpage Wikipedia:Help Project/ArticleTLC listing articles that need work. Maybe we can turn it into a work list, but for now it serves as a useful way of quickly tracking articles that need some TLC. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 16:00, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

A main entry point, we have four tabs introducing wikipedia, linked from 'anyone can edit' and used as a 'start here' point for many a header/index/template: These are

• Introduction
• Learn more about editing
• Explore Wikipedia
• Tutorial

The first page is fine, but 'more on editing' and 'explore are' just a bunch of links, not very good for a brief overview! I also feel Explore might have lost its way somewhere ( between how to browse articles vs community). I think for the purposes of a providing a quick overview, the second tab should be how to browse wikipedia articles, the third should be an introduction to the community side of WP. The tutorial itself covers the links in the current 'more on editing tab' in much better context, that's why I suggest we drop it / merge it with the last page of the tutorial (which needs some work too!). Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 00:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe we could adopt Wikipedia:Simplified ruleset or sections of it as a part of the 'more on editing' page - instead of dropping? Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 01:16, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

We have WP:Talk page and WP:Talk page guidelines, both marked as guidelines. At WT:Talk page I've suggested making that one into a help page so we have one help page and one guideline. What do people think? (Might be best to respond over there.)--Kotniski (talk) 14:53, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Have commented there, but the moves look good to me. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 22:00, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The page has now moved into help space, cheers Kotniski, that's another piece of the puzzle close. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 22:41, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Resolved.

I have the applied the project banner to a few more pages, I see you have too quiddity, I am now look at the help desk and reference desk, these seem to work as a wikiproject on a page, maybe we should invite them...as, although the pages are actually part of the help system, I'm not sure if they'd appreciate being tagged - and help project couldn't handle redirected and misplaced questions without support ... L∴V 01:22, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I'd agree with your hesitation. Outside of the main index pages (which now seem to be covered), it gets into overlap territory quickly. Do we include the MoS pages, or other policy/guideline pages? Helpful (as opposed to humourous) essays? etc. I'd say no to each, for now at least.

I'm not sure about the Help: namespace pages themselves though. We should possibly cover all of those? eg Help:Section, Help:Link, etc. Search for all "prefix:Help:" pages (344 pages currently, including redirects). Insufficient data coffee. -- Quiddity (talk) 18:05, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Gonna need pure cofee beans to chew :) I think anything that hasn't got a home - or an established team, although we could provide a nudge link for inter project communication. Logically the project should cover Help: even though it's a lot of articles ( where's that coffee), I am hoping the more pages covered the more interested editors are drawn to the project, I get the feeling there's a number of freelancers who'd chck in occasionally if they knew where to go. L∴V 13:05, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

With more articles to cover, we could add an importance category to the template if needed- to seperate articles that get more attention / views, I'm also keeping in mind the assessment option if the number of articles get large enough - primarily so it is easy to see if an article has been checked over recently, and maybe later to ensure standard of help pages is up to scratch. L∴V 13:05, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Maybe not so much coffee is needed ... a number of those pages are subpages, redirects etc, so not such a headache... L∴V 01:48, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

I have started working through Search for all "prefix:Help:" pages and tagging relevent pages, cleaning up a few on the way, There are a quite a few with active editors, I hope this drive brings them together... If you are one of those editors please add your two cents/pennies all contributions, ideas and suggestions are welcomed L∴V 01:44, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

current position Help:Monobook L∴V 01:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Currently paused, Arbitarily0 is looking in to using AWB to speed up the process (AWB is down at the moment but should be working again soon)... L∴V 00:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Alas AWB doesn't like help: namespace :( back to the quill.. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 01:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

But I have twisted it's arm! I am over half way through now, hopefully once complete we can move on - I am hoping I we can set up some sort of article table that lists articles within scope that require attention, things like merge and delete etc that might make the whole picture a bit clearer! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 01:03, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I think I'm mostly done, well at least the majority, if anyone spots whle categories that I have missed. I have left out essays and most guidelines for now ( a couple were purely how-to-s so i just tagged, which I'll leave for further contemplation. THere's also a huge amount of help which we shouldn't try to cover e.g. template documentation, I'd suggest for now as an ad-hoc for very common templates or something. I'll leave tagging and scope for a bit, and see how what comments come back ( if any) from the new tags. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 02:05, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Great work! :) JoeSmack ^Talk 02:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Cheers, it was quite a mission! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 03:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

• Identify correct the place to ask questions related to the article and have BIG pointers to that place e.g. help substitution, pointers to New contributors' help page and mediawiki help desk for more technical questions.

Yeah, that's a good idea. Even I am a little confused there. So, we have:

• Wikipedia:Help_desk
• Wikipedia:New contributors' help page

• Wikipedia:Requests_for_feedback - light
• Wikipedia:Peer_review - medium
• Wikipedia:Featured_article_review - heavy

• Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)
• Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)
• Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)
• Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)

...of course this doesn't include watched pages for disputes, editor critique or violations connected to content/policies. See Wikipedia:Where_to_ask_a_question and Wikipedia:Requests. This is a lot for any new editor to soak in, geez. JoeSmack ^Talk 16:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

It's a lot for any established editor to take in ;)! L∴V 18:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:Questions should have links to every place to ask questions - I edited it a while ago to try and simplify it for new users, if we find there are more avenues not covered we should maybe link to a fuller 'where to ask questions' or maybe a general FAQ type article where a user finds the sort of question they want to ask and click on the link next to it, this takes them straight to the correct place to ask that type of question. e.g. 'I have a media file I would like to give to wikipedia, how do I do this? (link to file upload or wherever)' etc ? Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 22:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Just found Wikipedia:Help Project/Link repository by accident, a historical list of every link editors could find... think I'll start a new one that is more general - Wikipedia:Help Project/Overview, Don't think we need to list every link - just a general idea and maybe a few important pages. I have no idea how it may shape out. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 20:50, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem could be improved quite a bit. Any thoughts/volunteers? Rd232 ^talk 16:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

It now redirects to this project but see [1] for some history of how this project started and there may be some useful ideas to use from that page... -- œ^™ 03:47, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou Oe, I think we should have a history section - there have been several bashes at improving the system haven't there! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 12:42, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I think we'd have some people interested in this RfC.... Wikipedia:Requests for comment/new users... JoeSmack ^Talk 15:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Quinticential to the aims of help, infact Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 13:58, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I ran across Wikipedia:How to edit a page for the first time in ages and slapped a how-to on it, but it looks like it could use some TLC. I mentioned it to Kotniski and they suggested I mention it here. It's a pretty ugly page for one that's pretty important for newcomers, if you ask me. I remember finding it rather ugly back when I first encountered it as a newbie. Hiding T 17:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Ouch, its quite detailed. My gut feeling is that this would serve as a comprehensive guide, maybe a little tidying, but have directions to ( or create) a simpler version article for newcomers before they run to the hills... Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 22:04, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Ouch indeed. I usually provide Wikipedia:Tutorial which is more clear and manageable. JoeSmack ^Talk 22:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't really see why it's in Wikipedia: space. It looks like one of the less newbie-friendly Help: pages to me. Rd232 ^talk 23:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

..but it aims itself at a new editors quote 'Editing most Wikipedia pages is easy. Simply click on the "edit this page" tab at the top of a...' The page makes me queasy just looking at it - the only way I can see at the moment to save it is to strip it down to the 'wiki - markup' section and rename as 'advanced cheatsheet', maybe the remainder could be cleaned up to provide an overview but I am sure there are better pages that cover this already. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 23:52, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Double arg! this page is linked from several 'welcome' templates and has a hit rate of about 1000 per day, think we've struck a nerve! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 00:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

XfD it, see what comes of it. Maybe a redirect to the tutorial would be best... JoeSmack ^Talk 00:34, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I've suggested a split for the wikimarkup section - currently no dedicated page. What to do with the rest will require more contemplation. Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 02:06, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Particularly changing "Image:" to "File:" and other little things. -- œ^™ 01:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Did some restructuring. Can still be improved! Rd232 ^talk 16:23, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I stumbled upon [Help:Starting a new page] and was dismayed, info ony really relevent to advanced editting at the end and overcomplicated redundent stuff for newbies at the front ( a hangover from mediawiki help). Following the links I saw a lot of redirects of 'create an article' sort came here. so I cut the technical stuff to a new page Help:Empty pages, and redirected Help:Starting a new page to Wikipedia:Starting an article, altered the shortcuts ( creating a new WP:EMPTY for empty pages, and think that the whole 'user looking to create an article' situation is drastically improved. The goof - I see that a few editors have been at the article this year trying to fix it. I am hoping you editors where also trying to work out just what to do with this help file and I have now solved it, failing that if there really is a need for how to create a new page we should have this incorporated into creating article/template type help. Let me know if I've made a mess and I'll fix... Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 02:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

We definitely need this kind of exploring to find all the cobwebs, thanks lee. JoeSmack ^Talk 08:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I thought with a possible new influx of editors I'd make the intro and headers more descriptive / friendly - I hope that's alright, but as always, please modify to your own heart's ..., hopefully I'm judging the sentiment of everyone correctly and not causing any offense or annoyance. In case anyone missed i - I I prefer to be bold and take no offense at being reverted! right onto a few more project banner taggings .... !Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 00:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

The introduction is quite good, nice. Let me futz with it a bit as well, see what comes out. JoeSmack ^Talk 02:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Done, broke the lead into a brief intro then Main Goals section. Hope this is kosher for those who watch. JoeSmack ^Talk 02:39, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

P.s. you've been maintaining our front WikiProject page beautifully Lee, thanks. JoeSmack ^Talk 02:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou :) like the copyed, looks great - I didn't like the scream and its wikilinks - but then I saw it - genius JoeSmack - a pictue paints a 100 wikilinks! Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 03:10, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I've capped it with a sentence that links the scream to feeling overwhelmed by help pages. JoeSmack ^Talk 04:24, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Several 'sets' of help pages ( whilst trying not to duplicate ), for non-logged in users start with the very basics, some basic editting and all the questions, some form of tutorial which at the end shows how to set a preference / edit the monobook / quickly access full help. Full help - which can skip any these startup help pages ( leaving say one link to access them again) and provide the options a new editor might need, maybe a further set which gives quick access to technical areas for advanced editors ... This would be some task but would enable us to write pages to address the needs and information level of that level of user... L∴V 18:49, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm not quite getting what you're saying. Do you mean there should be special help for non-logged users that is real real basic? If I had to take a shot in the dark about that, what of Wikipedia:Article wizard 2.0? JoeSmack ^Talk 22:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Erm, basically minimalised help that is accessable from main screen, advanced help covering more issues, somehow switchable. I should probably concentrate on grokking how the system currently fits together before coming up with madcap ideas ! ( The article wizard looks promising - and it is being developed at great speed recently )!L∴V

Gah, have you looked around Category:Wikipedia_help? So much of it is just garbage, there is very little maintenance in the help part of EN. JoeSmack ^Talk 22:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Yep, its scary out there, but there are some dedicated editors improving it over time, so I dread to think what it was like a year ago! L∴V 13:32, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I've refined my opinion slightly on this - I was slightly picturing two articles with differing levels of detail for some of the help subjects, but a help on article on a particular subject should be able to be written so that it starts off easy and goes into further details later - allowing readers to read to their own level. L∴V 12:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Changed my opinoin - besides the into / tutorial pages perform this function Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 22:15, 11 October 2009 (UTC)