UESPWiki talk:Messages/Welcome

Show Preview

Perhaps it would be worth mentioning the "Show Preview" feature in the welcome message since it's something that a lot of new users ignore and end up using multiple saves which the poor patrollers then have to go over. --Volanaro 09:59, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

Most of the time it'd be too late. Besides, the vast majority of new users don't do multiple edits so I'm not sure it's necessary. –Rpeh^{•T•C•E•} 11:01, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

I concur with Rpeh, since the mediawiki tweaks done by Nephele, occurrences have gone down considerably. Although this sometimes seems like an irritant, I think we want to limit "negative" interactions with users in general. --Benould^•T•C 11:29, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

New addition to welcome message?

I've been welcoming a lot of new users so I had a thought; would it be appropriate to edit the generic welcome message to also include link to the forums? I believe a considerable number of new users would prefer to use the forums instead of the wiki. Just a thought really. --AKB ^Talk 00:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree. People having more direction toward the forum could also keep forum type edits off the wiki. Perhaps something like:

• If you prefer to discuss Elder Scrolls related topics with other users, see our Forums.

Unfortunately it seems that the link is giving me a 404. It wouldn't do any good to be posting bad links all over... --DKong27 ^{Talk Cont} 04:27, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense, although DKong27 is right about the forum problems at the moment. Once they're back up I don't see a problem with adding a link to the forums. rpeh •T•C•E• 08:58, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

I added it, the only downside is that we will have to do a recaptcha check from now on. --AKB ^Talk 15:18, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

That can be fixed. I'll ask an admin to make the necessary change. rpeh •T•C•E• 15:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

New Version

Per this new version created by Elliot. I prefer the old version as it more fully explained the reason to join the forums, while also being more prominent then it was right now. Though the newer version is less cumbersome, it also makes the message to join the less prominent, making it more likely to be ignored. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 01:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

A shiny link to the forums is all that is really required of us to provide (its in the sidebar too). The only way we could force people to read everything is to create some twisted form of forum-view-skip-captcha. Stick a link in it and say our due diligence is met. Elliot (talk) 01:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

And constantly reverting mid-discussion is a seriously lack of decency. Elliot (talk) 01:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

First, there is no reason to claim that I am being impolite by reverting your edit. I did not violate 3RR, and I followed the common tactic of reverting, then discussing. I already started this conversation it is true, but as your version is the new contested version it makes since to go back to the older version while this is discussed. Claiming that prominence isn't an important issue when it comes to alerting new users to something is a hard argument to make. You can't assume that new users know about the help files or have read through them just because it is on the sidebar for example. The entire point of that message is so that we would have an early preventive measure against forum-like edits, by reducing its prominence on the message we reduce the chance that we will have a new user better suited for the forums would be aware of them. We shouldn't force new users to read a message to join the forums, and we can't, that doesn't mean we shouldn't do everything in our power to assure that they are aware of the forums. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 02:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The fact that "forum-like posts" are so few makes me hate talking about it. You aren't arguing over the content, you are arguing over the style. If you want an all inclusive welcome message, make one like Wikipedia's; it'll only take up the entire page... Elliot (talk) 02:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I have to disagree with your statement entirely this time. Forum-like posts are somewhat frequent events, heck we just had a user who frequently made them yesterday (Server time). I never suggested a more thorough welcome message besides the inclusion of this message, brevity does have its uses. There is no reason to not use the current version though. You are arguing over its style, not I as I'm entirely satisfied with the current version; claiming that I am supporting a much larger welcome message because I support the inclusion of a single sentence is ridiculous. If you are still dissatisfied with the number of bullets as you said in one of your edit summaries, feel free to tweak the message as you see fit, as long as you maintain the original message of reminding new users to use the forums (Which I do not believe is satisfied with only seven words, crammed between a message to contact the mentors and to use the sandbox). --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 02:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The wiki does not bow to your ideologies. This conversation is essentially useless as it is a message that should be aimed at certain users, not all. Create a specific welcome for this, such as the one for multiple edits. Elliot (talk) 07:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

(←) There, I went ahead and made it appropriate. Elliot (talk) 08:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't agree with taking the forum link out entirely. It's clear from the site's history that some people join in order to chat, so it's worth including a forum link to help people who are looking for that kind of thing. rpeh •T•C•E• 08:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Seriously? How is this about my ideology? Are you incapable of telling the difference between a difference of opinion between editors and a conflict between two ideologies? I was already working on my own notice for this specific situation but fine, thank you for making that. But look at the welcome message, the part about using edit summaries is aimed at people who wouldn't use edit summaries to begin with, the bit about multiple edits being annoying is aimed at people who are going to make multiple edits, the bit about signing your posts is aimed at people who aren't going to sign their posts, the bit about userboxes is aimed at people who want userboxes. With your logic we should remove all but the opening salutation and the following two sentences as the rest is aimed at certain people. The entire message is pretty much intended to make sure people do things that they otherwise wouldn't do. Arguing that linking to something to get someone to do something they wouldn't do otherwise (In this case joining the forums) is impossible as that is the entire point of the majority of the message. My point is that the entire message is aimed at certain people (People who make multiple edits, people who don't use edit summaries, etc.) I offered you a reasonable compromise, you instead decided to create a notice that was already in the works, that doesn't make my opinion inert and it doesn't make that part of the message useless. Just glancing at our available notices will lead to you seeing the show preview notice. Despite this we already mention it in the welcome message, so are you arguing that we remove that as well? Also, if anything my "ideology" is the more popular one as both rpeh and DKong27 agreed with the inclusion of this specific note, meaning if anything consensus lies with me and my opinion on which edit is the better one. I've offered you an alternative by rewriting the note about joining the forums so it would flow better with the rest of the message, as long as you didn't remove it's prominence. So unless you plan on creating an entirely brand new welcome message aimed solely at new users already fully aware of all site facilities and resources, I believe that the link to the forum still stands. --AKB ^{Talk Cont Mail} 12:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not going to pretend I read that, just so you know. A mention is fine, but there is no need to have a bullet point shoving it in the face of a user (hence the specific note). Don't get so defensive... and that's coming from a defensive person. Elliot (talk) 02:18, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Add Name

I'd like to propose a small change to the message. Basically it would be, Hello {{PAGENAME}}!, to make the message more personal, as that adds the name of the user to the message. The Silencer has spoken^Talk 05:03, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Done. • JA^Talk 05:10, 8 June 2012 (UTC)