I hope I am one of those "rare exceptions" that Paulo Santos Perneta writes
about. I also wish that welcoming would be neither rare or exceptional.
- For newly registered users, which I define as someone with a redlinked
talk page, I welcome them.
- If I am going to revert that user's edit then warn them (via Twinkle
almost always), I want to ensure that they are welcomed first.
- For IP editors:
- If I am reverting an obviously inappropriate edit by an
un-welcomed IP editor, I typically use one of the Twinkle welcome/warning
combos, such as Template:Welcome-anon-test,
Template:Welcome-anon-unconstructive, or Template:Welcome-anon-delete.
- If an un-welcomed IP editor, makes a revertible edit that is
non-malicious, I usually do a Template:Welcome-anon without the article
parameter, then add a warning
- If an un-welcomed IP editor, editor is doing good, I use a
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 10:58 AM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have a more nuanced view.
The community benefits from new editors who are acting in good faith
and willing to learn.
I agree that treatment of new editors can be problematic.
On the other hand, having become one of the "insiders", I now
understand how English Wikipedia has a limited supply of skilled labor
from volunteers who are trying to defend Wikipedia against vandals,
conflict of interest editors, copyright violations, and other
There is a WMF team working to improve the onboarding experience. I'm
cc'ing Marshal Miller (WMF) here in case he would like to comment.
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org