This looks great - and it's on my watchlist. :) Martin 15:25, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It's on mine too. Great idea, whoever implemented this. Meelar 22:44, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Looks like it was User:Ludraman - and yes, it's great :) --Camembert

Yep, it was Ludraman's idea, and he set it up. He's done good work with the welcoming committee; he helped a lot with the tutorial too.

When this page was still in the idea stage there was some discussion of renaming it to Wikipedia:Newcomers' help desk. If I remember, no one objected and several agreed. I prefer the name Help Desk since it doesn't imply that we're segregating new users out of the Village Pump entirely. This is to provide an alternative, somewhere a newbie can ask questions without worrying about getting barked and without cluttering up the pump. It's not (AFAIK) supposed to imply that newcomers can't post to the main pump if they have reason. Anyway, if I don't hear objections, I'm going to move it tomorrow. Isomorphic 05:45, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. Apart from anything else, the meaning of "help desk" is clear, while "village pump" is a bit cryptic. --Camembert

I agree that having a different name from the village pump is a good idea. Angela. 16:36, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)

Should I move it, then, and redirect this page? LUDRAMAN | T 18:01, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Looks like Iso's done it already. LUDRAMAN | T 18:08, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It's been under discussion more than once and was always supported, so I just went ahead and moved it. BTW, this page was a great idea Ludraman. Isomorphic 20:21, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Someone suggested it, I just implemented it. Thanks, though. Is the lead section ok? Also, how long should we let this get before we start archiving? I was thinking that as soon as it gets to forty rm the first twenty, or something like that. It shouldn't get ridiculously long like the main Village pump. LUDRAMAN | T 21:04, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The header looks good. I don't have a strong opinion on when to archive. Isomorphic 21:22, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure a lot of this needs archiving. Often, the answers already exist on the relevant help pages, but newbies haven't found these yet. They are no more likely to find them buried in archives than they would on the real help pages, so if an answer is nothing new, I think it would best be deleted. If it is something new, it should be added to a help page. Is there any objection to not archiving this page at all? Angela. 21:54, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)

Hmm. Still, it might be a good idea to keep them as records. It also would be easier for a person to go find a question they asked here (even in an archive) rather than buried in some help resource that they mightn't know about. At least if we keep them they will know it's here and where to find it. LUDRAMAN | T 03:53, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It seems to me that if we kept an archive, it'd be for our own purposes. Might be useful to look over questions and answers any time we're revising a help page or a tutorial, first because it's a quick way of seeing what questions are asked often, and second because some of the responses might be worded better than what we have in the actual policy or help page.

All that said, I'm still not sure I think it's necessary. Isomorphic 15:46, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

An archive for frequently asked questions might be good idea, though there is already the Wikipedia:FAQ. Angela. 17:24, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

Just a quick thought, but given the way that this is currently linked from the pump, how about removing the word "newcomer" from the title altogether, and just having it as a general "help desk"? (The only disadvantage of this name is that it sounds a bit like "reference desk", which could be confusing). This could take an extra bit of load from the village pump without losing functionality - just a place to ask those "how do I" questions that we all have from time to time, but don't really need extended discussion or the attention of every user, like the pump provides. What think you all? - IMSoP 19:25, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I like the idea of just calling it the help desk. Sounds nicer. Helps reserve the Village pump for actual discussion. Isomorphic 19:52, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

If noone objects to the title change, I'm going to move in a day or two (assuming I remember.) Isomorphic 03:12, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

This sounds good to me. :) fabiform | talk 04:13, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Ditto. Angela. 10:44, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)

I'm a little worried that the new name would cause people to believe that it serves the function actually served by Wikipedia:Reference desk. Don't change your plans just cuz of me, but we should think about it. moink 20:00, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well, certainly we'll have to make sure that the text at the top of the page is clear. Should have links to the Village Pump and the Reference Desk, with clear explanations of what should go where. But really, if we have a few misplaced questions it's no big deal. Isomorphic 20:23, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

No, you're right, it's not a big deal. moink 23:05, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm just curious. What happened to this page? Was it moved recently, say in the last 24 hours? The page history seems incomplete. --Voodoo 07:52, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The history looks ok to me. Are you confusing this page with the village pump or reference desk maybe? Angela. 03:58, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

I think the link to experiment when one clicks on experimental in the first sentence on this page is misleading. One would expect to be led to a Wikipedia page explaining what an experimental page is, but instead, one is led to the page that defines and describes a scientific experiment.

Thanks for pointing that out. As the page has been around for a while now anyway, I've removed the experimental note. Angela. 01:47, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah. It's not really an experiment anymore. It's more like a "success."  ;-) Thanks to everyone who've been maintaining it. Isomorphic 02:17, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

I'm going to be bold and archive this--there's no reason not to, really, and it needs to be cleared out (for this week only I'm on a dial-up). Meelar 03:16, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Is there any point have both the archive and the summarised questions section? Perhaps the summarised ones should have been archived instead? It might confuse people to have both. Angela. 03:22, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

How about a rename to "General tips"? Meelar 03:27, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

I think that would be best in the tutorial or FAQ. I'm not sure it's beneficial to repeat it here. People won't want to feel they are expected to read too much of an intro before posting a question. It might be best to just remove the summarised section, though some links to things like the Wikipedia:Tutorial would still be useful. Angela. 03:33, May 15, 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps just a few links at the top--to Wikipedia:FAQ and Wikipedia:Tutorial. Meelar 03:39, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

I like this page very much. I agree that the summarized section isn't necessary on this page, but it might be useful to keep it at the top of the archive page -- make it easier for people browsing to see if a question has been asked before to find quick answers. Then again, I don't know whether we need to go out of our way to construct summaries for future archives -- might be enough to make sure the TOC headings are clear and useful when archiving.

I do think we should continue make an effort to make sure that useful or well-written tips generated here are integrated into the FAQ or tutorial -- it would be a shame to have all this good advice languish in archives. Just dumping the summary section into one or the other is a bit disorganized.... Catherine - talk 04:54, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Did some archiving today; my first WkikiMaintenance attempt. Wheeeee!! hope I did it right. . . . . Soundguy99 17:05, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've just been looking over this talk page and it really strikes me as a big success and an example of Wikipedia editing at it's best. Starting off as someone (I think it was MyRedDice) having an idea to take traffic off the Village Pump, it developed through co-operative editing to a highly successful page which gives everyone, not just newcomers, a place to have their queries about editing or anything else answered quickly, and takes these queries off the Village Pump, leaving it free for discussion. Well done, everyone who helped make this page what it is. LUDRAMAN | T 16:20, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I like the new (is it new? I don't remember its being there before a week or so past) left frame/right frame in - at least - Cologne Blue. Unfortunately in Firefox, when I'm editing a section of a page and especially if I'm previewing, if I pull the right sidebar of a page down, the editing text does not move in sync with the page as a whole, producing worrisome (what if the browser crashes?..) effects that are also difficult to read. Any ideas? Ways I can clarify? Thanks! Schissel - bowl listen 05:25, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC) (who sees he has just posted this is the wrong spot, was wondering why that took such a brief time to load after pressing submit, washes the egg off his face, and looks for the other page. Yep. Whoops.)

There is different categories for songs and singles. Can you place the same song in both songs and singles?

I'll Be Missing You is placed in both Category:1997 singles and Category:1997 songs. Is this allowed? • Thorpe • 16:27, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, this is allowed--a Single (music) is not the same thing as a song. Hope that helps and happy editing. Meelar (talk) 16:34, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hello, I just used a content fetching script to display wikipedia content in my website. It runs for some weeks and displayed properly. But recently It didnt work on my page. I think lack of copyright notice leads wikipedia to prevent me from fetching. What I want to do get things back well

Urgh. Please don't use scripts like that - they're incredibly wasteful of wikipedia's bandwidth and server capacity. You can download the whole thing (in an hour or so) at Wikipedia:Database download. Most likely one of our developers has noticed the traffic generated by your script and has blocked it as abusive. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 9, 2005 17:42 (UTC)

Hello, I've recently started the WikiProject help desk which is for help with software which is used to help contributers. Because of the similar names I have provided a disambiguation link from that project to this one; I came here intending to add a disambiguation but I was not sure where the best place to put it is. Would it be possible for a member of this project to add a little advertising to WikiProject help desk since you would know the best place to place it? Thanks. Triddle 17:28, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

I've been trying to make it easior for clueless newbies, as well as impatient old-timers, to get quick answers to questions.

So far, my attempts have met with frustrating and even hostile thwarting. "Don't touch the help pages" is the message I'm getting here.

What's up with this? Don't we want to help each other? (Or am I missing something which everyone else but me already knows?)

Signed, An Old-Timer: Uncle Ed 14:30, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Could you give examples? -- Essjay · Talk 14:38, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

What sort of attempts do you have in mind? I'm all for improving respose time for questions... JesseW 21:24, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

See here and the relevant discussion. No need to open another thread about it here. —HorsePunchKid→龜 21:47, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Seems to me like the reference desk is the one no one can find. --Dmcdevit·t 21:55, July 18, 2005 (UTC)