Wikipedia talk:Teahouse/Host lounge/Archive 12

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Here is the wording of a new welcome Teahouse template that I use when people register their username. I felt it was important to highlight the Teahouse. "So here it is:

Hi Teahouse/Host lounge! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing!

What if the new editor does not want to create new articles, or lacks the competency to do so? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 21:37, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Isn't that what the Teahouse is for?

  Bfpage |leave a message  00:37, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

• Nope. Some new editors are just here for help with formatting to add a detail or a ref to an already existing article. There are much more to do on Wikipedia than create new articles. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 02:22, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

@Bfpage: I've commented on your talk page about this template, but you haven't responded there, so I'll bring the discussion here:

1. First and foremost, why do you have it at all? Wikipedia has multiple welcome templates (see Category:Welcome templates) that have been reviewed and improved by the community over the years. It seems that if you're going to use a welcome template at all, it is better to use one that has the community seal of approval.
2. If you insist on using your own template (and I can't say there is a policy or guideline against it), you should substitute it:

   {{subst:User:Bfpage/Registering new users}}

   otherwise, every time the user's talk page loads, it has to load your template page as well, which might cease to exist at some point, leading to a broken format.

3. Again, if you insist on using your own template, it should be stylistically and gramatically correct. Herewith some suggested changes:
   1. The sentence

      I look forward to your editing and seeing you creating your first new article

      implies that a) only you care about this user (I should be we) and b) that the user is expected to create a new article. Very few users ever create an article, and there is no reason to place that expectation on them.

   2. You are receiving this message from me -- well, yeah, who else would the message be from, other than the person sending the message?
   3. From now on, you are an editor: someone who creates articles and does editing on other articles. Or not. Perhaps they'll never edit a thing. That's fine, and again, no need to add an expectation. But if you're going to retain this sentence, replace does editing with the much simpler edits.
   4. The best one of the places to ask questions if you need help, is the Wikipedia:Teahouse.

      I think you want that to read If you need help, one of the best places to ask is the Wikipedia:Teahouse.

   5. It's here where you will find other, experienced editors that will answer your questions with courtesy and understanding.

      Should be: That is where you will find other, experienced editors who will answer your questions with courtesy and understanding.

I hope these suggestions are useful to you. Again, I think you should stick to the community-approved templates, but I suppose to each his own. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 20:13, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Hey hosts. I was thinking we should consider indefinite semi-protection of the host landing page. A common issue that a few of us have dealt with, namely SuperMarioMan ChamithN, Charlesdrakew, and myself, is the case where a new editor, with no clear experience with which to advise guests, creates a host profile (instead of a guest profile). There are any number of reasons why this happens. Given that this behavior has been fairly steady and continuous, I propose semi-protection for the host landing page to prevent some of these cases. Sockpuppet accounts have also created host profiles here early on, possibly in an attempt to appear more established early on. Maintenance of the page will still be necessary, but I think we can prevent some of these cases with indefinite semi-protection. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 18:56, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

• I'd like to hear from J-Mo and Heatherawalls on this idea as they are kind of the Teahouse heads. I remember something like this being proposed at some point before, and I remember the outcome being no because it is entirely possibly for an IP editor to have been on wiki for a long time and have the required "statistics" to be autoconfirmed but because they don't want to register an account for whatever reason, are not. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 19:17, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

  I considered that before posting this; dynamic IPs simply wouldn't be appropriate in hosting as they are always changing and can represent different people over time. The likelihood of a static external IP also being a host, while possible, seems fairly remote. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 19:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

• I wouldn't be averse to indefinite semi-protection. I think that in the long term, however, a better solution would simply be to agree on and impose a few hard, basic requirements for Teahouse hosting – I don't believe that the guidelines at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host start are particularly useful in helping users to assess their suitability for the role. Semi-protection would prevent anonymous users and the newest registered users from making profiles, but what about users with one or two months of editing yet only a few dozen edits overall? Few such users have the level of experience that we are looking for. However, having to evaluate a user's experience based purely on subjective opinion inevitably leads to uneven standards. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 20:30, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

  Well, for those of us doing patrolling, we've operated on judgment calls without much trouble as far as I can tell. I'm not sure we'd be doing ourselves or potential hosts any favors by creating an edit count or account age threshold; I just don't think these are useful enough as indicators. I'm open to hearing other ideas, of course. I generally look through their contributions to see if they productively interact with other editors and if their work demonstrates understanding of some policies and guidelines. A lot of the time, as you note, there just isn't enough to look at when they make a host profile. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 22:18, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

  I too would be very interested to hear other people's suggestions. However, I think that the AfC WikiProject had the right idea when it created Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants/header (incidentally, WP:WPAFC/P is another page that I patrol regularly). Two non-negotiable criteria (account age and namespace-specific edit count), two non-quantifiable, more flexible criteria (understanding of policy) and the provision that "editors who do meet the criteria may nevertheless be removed after a removal discussion". I could envisage something like that working for the Teahouse. Of course, there would be no reason to restrict the edit count threshold to mainspace edits. SuperMarioMan ( talk ) 00:00, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Maybe; I still think I'm a bigger fan of the flexible side, and I think that perspective stems from the fact that hosting does not grant any permissions, and more of a declaration of how you intend you spend some of your time as an editor rather than some kind of "status". The designation is meant to be casual, because the Teahouse is a casual space. By creating a decidedly structured system of edit counts and account age for becoming a host, I think we lose something important. The place starts to feel more like WP:PERM. I realize my proposal for semi-protection is a structural requirement, but that's a very low bar and a preventative measure to evidenced socking behavior and new editors creating profiles in the wrong spot. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 08:42, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

• I think that would be a good measure to prevent new editors from creating Host profiles. I think most of them create new Host profiles due to misunderstanding. They might be thinking that creating a Host profile is like registering on a forum. In my opinion semi-protecting is the best available method to solve this issue. Getting autoconfirmed is easy. It just needs 10 edits and 4 days of account availability. So if someone is really looking forward to contribute to Teahouse chances of his/her account being an autoconfirmed one is really high.--Chamith (talk) 02:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
  • What about an IP editor with a static IP that has made 10K edits and been around 4 years? Would we really want to exclude such an experienced editor from being a host? IPs are human too after all. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 03:05, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I don't see any problem with making exceptions when they're brought up. I've looked over the history of the Host landing page, and I count 14 unique IPs who have edited since August 2012 since the page was created (one of them was from the WMF). Of the 13 remaining, 10 were static IPs, none of whom had sufficient experience to host, and 3 were dynamic IPs. While I am surprised by the number of static IPs, I am not really convinced there is a substantial interest in hosting by static IP editors who are also experienced editors. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 07:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
      • It's not about making exceptions, it's about setting the barrier to entry unfairly higher for those IP editors. I'm actually fairly neutral about this, but I think there has to be a better way. Perhaps a guided tour questionaire that assesses competence and basic wiki knowledge for all new Teahouse hosts or restarting HostBot moving inactives to the Break room to make new additions easier to see or HostBot removing new profiles for users failing to meet some arbitrary threshold of edits or whatnot with a notice on the user's talk page welcoming them and asking if they meant to add themselves to the host loung... maybe an edit filter of some kind... There has to be a better way than just protecting the page. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 08:15, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
        • I would not want to see new good faith editors being removed by a bot. The Teahouse is to a large degree about human contact and support. If a few experienced editors insist on remaining unregistered they know it is going to have some disadvantages and that is their choice.Charles (talk) 09:00, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
          • My idea would the bot would only remove newly registered users, it would not remove unregistered anon IPs. It could still leave a friendly message on the IPs talk page and ping a task force in doing so to do a manual review. Just some ideas, not sure any one is better than the others, but I'd lean towards the guided tour style script that "interviews" hosts.  :) — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 14:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
            • That's a good idea. I'm pretty sure we won't run into problems with IP users as creation of IP host profiles are very rare. At the same time newly registered users won't be able to create unnecessary host profiles. If you can re-program the bot to do so then I'd say go for it.--Chamith (talk) 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protecting Host Landing makes most sense to me. Having the bot remove profiles after the fact seems like it would be a more negative/confusing experience for the newbies. Not sure when I'd have time to code it either--though as always I'm happy to take on collaborators. If IPs are an edge case anyway, doesn't make sense to me for us to code around them. Rather, put a notice somewhere that we are happy to add their profiles, or a local admin can temporarily open the page for them. Cheers, - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 01:27, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Update: Jethro semi-protected the Host Landing page on December 21. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 02:41, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I do want to make it clear that I am sympathetic to T13's position with regard to IPs. At whatever time the bot is able to remove host profiles coming from very new editors (a definition we'll need to figure out, BTW), I think it makes sense to remove semi-protection. I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 09:53, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

As a newer Teahouse hostESS (she said jokingly,) I thought I would go through the "Play the Wikipedia adventure game". I couldn't get it to work. Is it me or is something wrong with the 'game'?bpage (talk) 11:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi Bfpage, welcome to the Teahouse! Let's ping Ocaasi, he created the Wikipedia Adventure and may have some idea why it is not working right now, or at least not working for you. What browser/operating system are you using, btw? Cheers, - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 22:47, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Hi all, HostBot sends out invitations to about 100 new editors every day. To give the invite a personal touch, each of these messages is "signed" with the username of a Teahouse host who has agreed to have their name on the Teahouse invites. It's been a while since I last updated this list of hosts, so I thought I'd check in: if you would like to have your name included on the list (or removed), please respond below. Thanks! Cheers, - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 23:59, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

The list

• Rosiestep - confirmed
• Jtmorgan - confirmed
• SarahStierch - confirmed (as MissVain)
• Writ Keeper - wikibreak
• Doctree - confirmed
• Osarius
• Nathan2055 (on wikibreak)
• Benzband
• TheOriginalSoni (now edits as User:Soni)
• Ushau97 (retired)
• Technical 13 - confirmed
• I JethroBT - confirmed
• Dathus - confirmed
• AmarylisGardener - added
• 78.26 - added
• Lightbreather - added
• ChamithN - added
• Worm That Turned - added
• Samwalton9 - added

@Jtmorgan: Can I be on the list? --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 02:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely! Thanks, - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 16:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

• 78.26 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 15:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

@78.26: done! - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 20:05, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

• Lightbreather (talk) 22:11, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
• Feel free to drop me on :) Worm^TT(talk) 15:36, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
• Me too --Chamith (talk) 17:49, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@ChamithN: @Lightbreather: I've added you! @Worm That Turned: added you too... also welcome back! Nice to see familiar signatures around the 'House. - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 01:19, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

@Jtmorgan: In the above list you've got my name wrong . I hope it won't cause any problem.--Chamith (talk) 07:03, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Jtmorgan! Glad to get back to the fun stuff on Wikipedia - helping the new people! Worm^TT(talk) 08:45, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• I haven't been overly active on the Teahouse recently but happy to be on this list :) Sam Walton (talk) 11:26, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

• Samwalton9, great! I added you in. ChamithN, good catch--your name is correct in the code. Cheers, - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 20:27, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Not really too active, but i'd be happy to be on it. Need an excuse to do more teahouse work anyway Lor^Talk 14:00, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Wikipedia:Tea House/Host landing has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I Sanjay Chakraborty (talk) 13:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

 Not done - you have made no request and the page is not protected in any case - Arjayay (talk) 14:36, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host landing has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please, Why couldn't I make my own peofile on Teahouse page although,I'm a new editor ,I'm a new host and why my nameKagemaru2022 doesn't appear on the host list Thanks , Everybody Kagemaru2022 (talk) 09:52, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi there! Welcome to Wikipedia. While it's nice of you to offer to be a host, being one requires experience editing the wiki. To create a guest profile, click here. Thank you. Zhaofeng Li [talk... contribs...] 14:12, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Hey I've noticed many users leaving great replies, but forgetting to leave a Talkback on the new users talk page. Remember these are new users who are still getting used to watchlists and wiki etiquette. There is a great script that makes it super easy over at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host lounge/User scripts called Teahouse Talkback Links. Check it out! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 20:27, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

You can also {{ping|Username}} ping the user in your reply, if that's easier! Cheers, - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 00:03, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Dear Hosts,

I turn to you for an advice and assistance, after months of desperation and a bunch of tries :)
My article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Stormy_Atmosphere was declined few times, every time for a different reason, and sometimes these reasons confronted one another. One of the editors (Arthur goes shopping) recommended me to take my chances here with you.
Please advice me how to improve my article, I am a great fan of the band, and the fact that it hasn't been noted by anyone in Wikipedia yet in spite of it being active for almost 13 years, performing on tours out of Israel and participating in internatonal festivals, bothers me a lot.
I saw recently, that the band is going to another festival at the end of April, this time in Georgia:
https://www.facebook.com/events/787161791322472/
This is such a wonderful news! Maybe the event will finally give my article a legitimation to be part of the Wiki family.
Still your help is so needed now, so feel free to contact me as soon as possible.
Sincerely yours,
Silverray123 (talk) 06:09, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

If you become a host, what are you supposed to do. I am interested but I don't know what being a host means. Dragonmagicediter (talk) 19:50, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Morning all,

No idea if this is the best place to post this but a relativley new user TYTA Mahesh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) seems farily keen to edit but is doing so in a bit of a haphazard way. Anyone here able to offer them some more detailed advice/guidance it looks like thy could be a decent contributor but they are liable to end up getting blocked for issues that appear to be competence based. Amortias (T)(C) 10:36, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh wow I don't even know where to start with that... Warning users for testing in their sandbox, telling users "your account will be blocked forever", jumping past warning levels 1,2,3 and going straight to 4... I guess I message on their talk telling them to focus on editing articles and not reverting and warning for awhile... I would give it a shot, but I'm on mobile so I cant get the diff links and type well enough for that. EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 16:09, 11 April 2015 (UTC)

There's a request at the Gadgets talk page to update the Teahouse Q&A gadget description. Could one of our local admins update it to say something like "Ask a question" feature for Teahouse project ? Thanks, - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 20:57, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Done. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 21:10, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! - J-Mo ^{Talk to Me} _{Email Me} 21:42, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello all. I'm DocTree, a member of the English Wikipedia Account Creation Team (ACC). As of April 2015^[update] our project has a persistent backlog in creating accounts for new users. Over 100 people are waiting up to a week for an account on the English Wikipedia. If you can spare some time to do a few requests a day, you can help us clear the current backlog and then keep the wait for an account to a day or less.

ACC helps people who are unable to self-create a user account. Some may be sight impaired, others are collateral damage caused by blocks of shared IPs. We use the Account Creation Interface, usually just called the Tool, to screen out attempts to create inappropriate accounts. If this interests you and you're willing to help, and you match the following description, then please do apply per the procedure at Registering. Ideal candidates:

• Are Identified to the Wikimedia Foundation
• Are experienced, knowledgeable and in good standing with no recent blocks
• Know and are able to apply the username policy
• Have worked with new contributors
• Have a good record of civil behavior even while in a dispute

The full list of requirements is here.

We have a very friendly team to help you get started and we have an IRC channel. If you have any questions for us or about the process, feel free to ask at the talkpage. If you can help, we would greatly appreciate it. For the ACC Team, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 15:12, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

@Doctree: As much as I would love to help out with my experience at AfC, NPP and here, I think the identifying requirement is stopping people (like myself) from joining. If you don't mind, why is that a requirement? As far as I know, AC requires no serious personal information, unlike CU or Oversight which I understand. I can't find any official policies stating it either, but maybe I'm just not digging deep enough. Thanks in advance! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 03:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

@EoRdE6: The ACC tool shows email addresses and IPs of requesting users. Sam Walton (talk) 10:35, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host landing has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Abadat Ali Malik (talk) 11:24, 24 June 2015 (UTC) Abadat Ali Malik <social media links removed>

Hello Abadat. This is the talk page of the Teahouse's Host lounge. It is a place for discussing the Teahouse project. That is the way it works across Wikipedia – projects like this one, as well as encyclopedia articles and users like myself and you have a talk page. Your request is unclear to me overall, but it does not seem related to this project. That is, unless by posting links to your social media, you were intending something like adding yourself as a host, and wanted those links to be associated with you? But we don't do that; our activities are here and we generally communicate only here. Such links would not belong as part of your Teahouse Host profile – even if you were experienced enough to be a host, which you're not as a brand new user. I suspect though that your edit request is simply misplaced. Can you describe what it is you were seeking to do?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host landing has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Hello, I'm quite interested in your Forum and would like to submit a request to become a Host. Its a little hard to convince someone via PC but i would be dedicated, polite, precise and simple. I look forward to your prompt response with great anticipation. Nerd Ghost (talk) 12:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry and thanks but no. We need people with extensive experience of editing. There are plenty of other useful things you can do though.Charles (talk) 18:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

After our pilot back in March-April and after making some tweaks to the space, the Co-op mentorship space is now officially open and we're looking for additional mentors. Our final report is still being reviewed by the WMF, but it is more or less done, and you are welcome to check it out. Here are some of our more prominent findings:

1. Editors who engaged with a mentor remained active longer, edited more articles, and made substantially more edits overall than editors who were not mentored.
2. Editors waited far less time for a mentor thanks to our matching system. Getting matched with an editor took less than five minutes, thanks to the use of HostBot. Waiting times for a mentor to actually contact an editor took less than a day, but was as low as an hour or two.
3. A minority of experienced editors sought out mentorship despite not receiving an invitation during our pilot. These editors may have gotten the most out of mentorship, as they interacted more frequently with their mentor and in more complex topics compared to newer editors.

Based on our results, the Co-op seems to be working in the right manner to provide editors the support they need to edit and stick around. But the Co-op will not work if we lack mentors. And while mentoring does require more time and effort than replying to a question here at the Teahouse, I think we are all aware of how meaningful that time and effort can mean to an individual who is just getting started here. If you're interested in becoming a mentor, please consider joining us. Thanks, I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 20:50, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

...to stop by I JethroBT's talk and offer him some congrats on his successful RfA. It will be nice to have one of our own in the ranks of the mopkeepers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by John from Idegon (talk • contribs) 04:14, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi all, I wanted to share some research that EpochFail and I are doing on the impact of the Teahouse on the retention of new editors. We recently presented our initial findings during the October Research Showcase (slides, video). Basically, we've found that new editors who are invited to the Teahouse are approximately 15% more likely than a control group (new editors who did not receive a Teahouse invite) to still be editing Wikipedia 3 weeks to 6 months later. This is especially encouraging because it's the strongest positive evidence either of us have seen for any new editor engagement initiative on English Wikipedia, from Adopt-a-User to GettingStarted. There are still a lot of questions that we'd like to dig into more deeply, and I'll post updates here as we continue with this research over the next couple months. But I wanted to let you all know the exciting news, and thank you for all your hard work. By participating on the Teahouse, you are helping train the next generation of Wikipedians and ensure the future of the project. Cheers, Jtmorgan (talk) 20:55, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

That's great (and also interesting) news, Jtmorgan! I've seen plenty of anecdotal evidence of Teahouse interaction correlating with editor retention, but as we all know the plural of anecdote is not data. Thanks for sharing, and please keep us apprised of your findings. —GrammarFascist _contribs^talk 23:59, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi there. My user name is Swadyaha I've chosen. I have a real name as well and edited my first Wikipedia article yesterday. I'm intrigued with the way things seem set up and don't quite catch the gist of it yet, but feel interested to try. Will try to return to the TeaHouse frequently to see if any communication with anyone results. Am glad that folks here are into knowledge and objective, impartial articles. Have much to learn, have autism, so learn slow. Have a great day and wonderful life, everyone! Swadyaha November 7, 2015 9:31pm — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swadyaha (talk • contribs) 05:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

Welcome, Swadyaha, and thanks for your message. If you have any questions as you go about learning about Wikipedia, the place to ask them is at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions. Good luck! Cordless Larry (talk) 09:08, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host landing has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

188.211.153.122 (talk) 10:37, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

 Not done as you have not requested a change, but I suspect you are in the wrong place, as this page is only to discuss improvements to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host lounge.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Given the nature of this page, you will also need to reach consensus before any significant changes are implemented. - Arjayay (talk) 11:50, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I have noticed that many users ask the same question again and again and expect others to reply, this is wrong something should be done on this thing!BOTFIGHTER (talk) 10:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

If it is thought that someone who has signed up as a host doesn't have the appropriate level of experience and knowledge, is there a suitable way to deal with this situation, other than politely asking them to reconsider? Cordless Larry (talk) 19:48, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, not unless they do something wrong. User:Otaku_G perhaps? He hasn't offered any advice at all. Hopefully he will learn a lot before he offers any. I think that there are enough experienced hosts and other experienced editors who monitor the Teahouse to correct any bad advice that he might ever post. My opinion is that he's not harming anything so AGF and watch, deal with any problem if one occurs. Just my view, DocTree (ʞlɐʇ·ʇuoɔ) WER 22:40, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts, DocTree. I agree it's not a major issue and I wouldn't want to stop people from helping out. What concerns me is that by being listed as a host, the user's host profile appears at the top of the page and new editors might approach them directly for help. This is the user I have in mind. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:46, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, if you look through the archives of this page you will see that the issue has been discussed several times before. No consensus has really ever been reached. IMO, the best way to deal with it is to politely redirect them to something more appropriate, like WP:CVU or WP:GOCE. John from Idegon (talk) 23:48, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I agree with John and Doctree that it's best handled on a case by case basis, which is what we've done traditionally. Occasionally I've seen other hosts revert new editors' host profiles because they thought the person wasn't ready. Although I'm more inclined to AGF (and competence) unless the newcomer proves otherwise, I don't see any problem in principle with the revert-first approach, as long as it's done with kindness and tact (and ideally an explanatory message on the newcomer's talkpage). J-Mo 00:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Just a quick update: I have tried to communicate with this editor, but am unable to understand his responses. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:21, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Unaware of this discussion, and intending to leave such a note myself after seeing the profile pop up a number of times, I decided not to comment at the talk page after seeing the existing posts there. I then found this discussion. This is not the first time similar issues have presented themselves. There have also been a few hosts that were highly unsuitable by temperament – I am thinking in particular of one former host (currently indefinitely blocked) but let's not dredge up ancient history. I'm just thinking that some minimum requirements might be useful to weed out those who are clearly unsuitable from the start, and thus avoid having to ask people to withdraw as hosts. Being well aware of the mores the Teahouse is steeped in, I don't know that any such requirements would be adopted in any form, as some have indicated above, but I always think talking about something concrete is better than mulling the abstract. So, I have tried my hand at creating a first draft, possible launching point, if at all. Please feel free to make changes → User:Fuhghettaboutit/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Host requirements.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:32, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I am not aware of the exact policy, but I know there have been times when juvenile users have been blocked for their own safety. I think this applies to the individual being discussed immediately above. John from Idegon (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I think that a good clue that someone is not ready to be a host is that they still frequently have to ask questions about how to edit themselves. Sure, hosts might occasionally want to post a question, and that's fine, but in some cases it is clear that an editor is still learning the basics. I don't know how you would stop people who don't meet the requirements from responding to queries regardless, though. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:02, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

I don't think we could (or should) discourage a class of people (those who don't meet edit count or language proficiency criteria) from answering questions. TH was set up as a "peer support" space, which was explicit in the invite until a few weeks ago (I removed that language during the template redesign, solely for the purpose of making the sentence flow better). When it comes to quasi-official "membership", as signified by having a host profile, I'm more ambivalent. On one hand, it's my impression that our current process of revert & explain (in the edit comment, or even better, on the user's talkpage) works fine, at least in the case of overenthusiastic good-faith newbies signing up. Editors who are disruptive should obviously be asked to alter their behavior or go elsewhere, or censured by an admin if necessary--whether they're newbies or not. On the other hand, if dealing with insistent overzealous types is taking time away from doing important stuff, or making it less fun to be a host, policy or process improvements make sense.

Fuhghettaboutit's essay is clear and reasonable, and I support its adoption somewhere within our host onboarding process. But there's one thing that concerns me a wee bit, which is that groups on EnWiki that are perceived as having Cabal-ish tendencies may come under enhanced scrutiny. And having official, locally enforced membership criteria might be seen by some in the community as setting up a walled garden. When we started, we had to deal with a lot of Esperanza backlash, for this reason. Then again, other WikiProjects have official rules and roles too, and Teahouse has built up a store of good faith within the community that I don't expect people to immediately cry foul if we formalize things a bit. I'm sure others here know better than I do how we could walk the line between expectation-setting and wall-building in the context of a more official policy. If we do set thresholds for edit count and/or language proficiency, I hope we make them as low as possible, in keeping with the "mores the Teahouse is steeped in", as Fuhghettaboutit so eloquently put it. Cheers, J-Mo 22:37, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

The particular user who caused me concern, Lukaslt13, has now been blocked indefinitely. Thanks to Theroadislong for subsequently removing him from the list of hosts. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2016 (UTC)