Cross-project comparisons/MediaWiki:Welcomecreation and Template:Welcome comparisons

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

An overview of how various wikis welcome their users, by comparing template:Welcome (or the equivalent, as indicated by interwiki links from the English version) and MediaWiki:Welcomecreation.

Welcoming new users is a common effort to familiarise new users with the particular rules and guidelines for that wiki.

Note comments on design are my opinion only and I'm not a usability expert. This comparison was inspired by my being alerted to the existence of Hungarian Wikipedia's snazzy hu:MediaWiki:Welcomecreation. I subsequently updated commons:MediaWiki:Welcomecreation. :)

Community members are welcome to update under "other comments" if their project has a systematic effort to welcome new users, such as a welcoming committee.

Best so far[edit]

MediaWiki:Welcomecreation[edit]

Template:Welcome (or equiv.)[edit]

Key to table[edit]

  • MW:WC: MediaWiki:Welcomecreation link
  • diff?: MediaWiki:Welcomecreation is different to the default message (Minimal changes such as wording or adding one link are not counted as being different)
  • design: comments on the design of MediaWiki:Welcomecreation
  • T:W?: Template:Welcome (or translated equivalent) exists? (this is determined by interwiki links, so feel free to update this if I'm wrong)
  • #links: number of links on Template:Welcome

Design key:

  • P: plain design (no graphics or table)
  • L: has a list
  • C: uses colour
  • G: has graphics
  • BT: has bold text
  • LT: has large text
  • TR: translations (has links for users who don't speak the language of that project)

Table[edit]

(from Table of Wikimedia Projects by Size - projects with > 1000 articles)

# LC Project MW:WC diff? design T:W? #links T:W design other comments
1 en wikipedia [1] no [2] 10 P,L Dizzying array of welcoming templates, but most are ugly, many are overwhelmed with links. Welcoming committee exists.
2 de wikipedia [3] yes P, 3 links [4] 12 P, L, BT
3 fr wikipedia [5] yes G, C, LT, TR [6] 27 G, C, LT, TR Looks fantastic! Maybe a bit long though.
4 pl wikipedia [7] yes P, BT, LT, 2 links [8] 12 G, L, BT, LT great use of graphics to point out sidebar links and the signature button.
5 en wiktionary [9] no [10] 11 P, L Also [11] which usefully highlights the differences between wp and wikt.
6 ja wikipedia [12] no [13] 2 G Most welcomes done by c&p boilerplate rather than templates.
7 nl wikipedia [14] no [15] 20 + 17 L, B, TR Useful sidebar with links explaining "Wikipedia terminology".
8 it wikipedia [16] no [17] 22 G,BT,C, TR Red line highlighting copyright. Good size, not overwhelming.
9 pt wikipedia [18] yes P, L, BT, TR [19] G, C, L, TR 15 Really clean looking, great job!
10 fr wiktionary [20] no [21] P, L, BT 13 Pretty plain.
11 vi wiktionary [22] yes L, G, BT, LT, TR, 11 links no Welcomes are done manually.
12 sv wikipedia [23] no [24] Box, L, BT, TR 13 Looks sharp and to-the-point.
13 es wikipedia [25] yes BT, 1 link [26] 18 G, C, TR Like PT.wp + signature graphic, looks very good.
14 ru wikipedia [27] no [28] 14 P,L,TR Long, boring.
15 tr wiktionary [29] no [30] 8 L, BT Has the wikt logo(?). Could be tidied and condensed.
16 zh wiktionary [31] no [32] 37 G, BT, TR Too much unncessary info, like # of articles and 'GFDL', let alone interproject links!!
17 zh wikipedia [33] yes G, C, TR, 17links [34] 17 G, C, TR Short & snappy, I like it. Emphasises the GFDL.
18 ru wiktionary [35] no [36] 8 P, L All but one of the links are to en.wikt?!
19 io wiktionary [37] no [38] 3 BT very minimalist! (two lines long)
20 fi wikipedia [39] no [40] 11 L, TR Very brief smalltext box. Well, it beats plain text...
21 no wikipedia [41] yes P, 3 links [42] 15 L, BT Eh.
22 species wikimedia [43] no [44] 6 L, BT Doesn't emphasise (or even mention) what makes wikispecies different to WP et al.
23 el wiktionary [45] no no?
24 eo wikipedia [46] no [47] 17 L, G, BT Signature graphic, otherwise pretty boring.
25 sk wikipedia [48] no [49] 10 G, L, TR Not very exciting, but nice flower. :)
26 cs wikipedia [50] yes BT, L, 8 links [51] 10 G, BT, L Signature graphic, quite brief.
27 da wikipedia [52] no [53] 18 BT, L
28 pl wiktionary [54] no [55] 8 P, L, BT Seems the PL projects like to emphasise IRC.
29 ro wikipedia [56] no [57] 2 P Remarkably sparse.
30 commons wikimedia [58] yes G, C, TR [59] 21 (+ TR) G, C, BT, TR I (pfctdayelise) wrote these, so I'm a bit biased. :) Bot performs automatic welcomes. Checking of newbie contribs exists.
31 ca wikipedia [60] no [61] 17 C, G, BT, TR Nice use of a "tip" showing link syntax, with links to more.
32 he wikipedia [62] no [63] 12 G, BT, TR Their English welcome is good, succinct.
33 uk wikipedia [64] no [65] 13 P, L, BT, G, TR Looks very much like EN.wp's with a signature graphic, and a nice PS in English.
34 id wikipedia [66] yes G, LT, BT, L, TR (11 links) [67] 15 P, L, BT, TR
35 hu wikipedia [68] yes C, G, LT, BT (17 links) [69] 12 G, BT Nice graphic, classy.
36 it wiktionary [70] no [71] 9 BT, G Sig graphic. I suspect it could be improved significantly.
37 tr wikipedia [72] yes G, BT, 3 links [73] 23 BT, tables Huge waste of space interproject links. Q&A link table looks good though.
38 fi wiktionary [74] no no?
39 de wiktionary [75] yes P (2 links) no?
40 sr wikipedia [76] yes G, L, BT (23 links) [77] 20 L, BT, TR
41 en wikisource [78] yes L, P, BT (7 links) [79] 5 C Assumes familiarity with wikis, restrained prose is refreshing. :)
42 sl wikipedia [80] no [81] 18 G, C, L, BT Similar to FR.wp design. Welcoming, but too large. A bullet list ends in "..." (?!)
43 lt wikipedia [82] no [83] 12 L, G, BT Amusing graphic.
44 hu wiktionary [84] no no?
45 bg wikipedia [85] no [86] 9 P, BT Super boring.
46 ko wikipedia [87] no [88] 10 P, L, BT, TR Pre-signed by the Welcoming Committee, heh. Neat but boring.
47 et wikipedia [89] no [90] 2 P In dire need of expansion. Or they have the smartest newbies ever.
48 pt wiktionary [91] no [92] 11 P, L Spells out key policies at least.
49 nostalgia wikipedia [93] - - - - - Not a real project.
50 hr wikipedia [94] no [95] 17 + 14 BT, L, box Too long and irrelevant. Tutorial box looks interesting though.
51 sv wiktionary [96] no [97] 7 italics How many times can you say Välkommen in one message? And why italics??
52 te wikipedia [98] yes TR, 3 links [99] 14 C, G Useful sitenotice TR link to 'Setting up your browser for Indic scripts'. Sidebar. Email link!
53 ku wiktionary [100] no no?
54 nl wiktionary [101] no [102] 2 LT, BT Too brief, needs fleshing out.
55 bg wiktionary [103] no no?
56 en wikibooks [104] no [105] 17 P, L, BT Too scattered. Needs tightening. 4 options for asking questions without an explanation of which channel is appropriate when.
57 ar wikipedia [106] no [107] 10 P, L, TR Plain transplant from EN.wp.
58 es wiktionary [108] no [109] 9 P, L Learn from your Wikipedia compatriots! Needs overhaul.
59 fr wikisource [110] [111] 7 G Needs to be condensed, and then expanded.
60 gl wikipedia [112] no [113] 6 L coloured box background. pretty boring.
61 nn wikipedia [114] no [115] 3 P Needs major work.
62 th wikipedia [116] no no?
63 es wikisource [117] no [118] 8 L, BT Red box looks a little alarming. Red usually implies deletion, doesn't it?
64 el wikipedia [119] yes P, 7 links [120] 12 L, BT, TR Offers English welcome - but it's just a translation of the Greek! Not very clever.
65 fa wikipedia [121] no [122] 12 L Likely transplanted from EN.wp.
66 ceb wikipedia [123] no no?
67 ms wikipedia [124] no [125] [126] 7 LT, L Of the 4 main links, one is on policy, 3 are on tech help.
68 eu wikipedia [127] no [128] 14 L, TR
69 gl wiktionary [129] no no?
70 id wiktionary [130] no no?
71 sr wiktionary [131] no [132] 8 L
72 bn wikipedia [133] no [134] 13 L One link in English - a help page on displaying and using the fonts.
73 vi wikipedia [135] yes L, G, BT, LT, TR, 15 links yes 16 P, L, BT, TR Five additional welcome templates to choose from; vandal template has a big smiley face.
74 io wikipedia [136] no [137] 2 ... Extremely short.
75 simple wikipedia [138] no [139] 11 P They especially should use the sig graphic. Otherwise, very good direction for newbies.
76 ka wikipedia [140] no [141] 18 G, BT, TR Modelled on FR.wp.
77 sq wikipedia [142] no no?
78 ja wiktionary [143] yes 2 links [144] 6 G, L, TR Looks good, but I'm sure it could be more efficient.
79 ko wiktionary [145] yes G, LT, 3 links no? Check out the mad toggle menu on their MW:WC!!!
80 is wikipedia [146] no [147] 7 L, TR Looks pretty light on policy links.
81 bs wikipedia [148] yes 2 links (one to tutorial) [149] 9 C Love the colour, but make the centred text go away!!
82 lb wikipedia [150] no [151] 6 P
83 nap wikipedia [152] no [153] 0 P One line! Is it so hard to type?
84 br wikipedia [154] no [155] 16 C, G, BT, TR Looks like Spanish transplant. Even with a redlink. That should be useful for a newbie...?
85 bpy wikipedia [156] no no?
86 et wiktionary [157] no no?
87 fa wiktionary [158] no no?
88 la wikipedia [159] no [160] 10 L, TR Good translation documentation for this dead language.
89 meta wikimedia [161] no [162] 7 P, TR Uses Meta:Language select, which must be mystifying if you truly don't speak English.
90 pt wikisource [163] yes P, 2 links [164] 11 L, box Crying out for graphics!
91 en wikiquote [165] no [166] 12 P, L Pretty decent for what it is.
92 mk wikipedia [167] no [168] C, G, BT, TR 14 Looks heavily borrowed from Commons. Brilliant! Go, Macedonian!
93 su wikipedia [169] no no?
94 wa wikipedia [170] no no?
95 sh wikipedia [171] no no?
96 zh wikisource [172] no [173] 16 L, BT Looks pretty clean, but also looks like a lot of detail gone into explaining progress boxes.
97 en wikinews [174] yes L, BT [175] 14 P, L, BT A bit long, but looks like a good overview. I like the 'things to do' section that invites the user to dive in. Welcoming committee exists. Also different welcome for anons Canadians and Australians [176]
98 scn wikipedia [177] no no?
99 ku wikipedia [178] no no?
100 lv wikipedia [179] no no?