This page documents an English Wikipedia behavioral guideline. Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. |
| This page in a nutshell: Talk pages are for improving the encyclopedia, not for expressing personal opinions on a subject or editor. |
| To ask a question, see the Wikipedia:Questions page for guidance. |
The purpose of a talk page (accessible via the "Talk" tab) is to provide space for editors to discuss editing that page. Article talk pages should not be used by editors as platforms for their personal views on a subject. While talk pages in other namespaces (such as user talk pages) may be used for broader discussion and communication between editors, article talk pages should be used solely for discussing the improvement of that article.
The names of talk pages associated with articles begin with Talk:. For example, the talk page for the article Australia is named Talk:Australia.
The guidelines below reinforce the prime values of talk pages: communication, courtesy, and consideration. They apply not only to article discussion pages but everywhere editors interact, such as deletion discussions and noticeboards.
There is reasonable allowance for speculation, suggestion, and personal knowledge on talk pages, with a view to prompting further investigation, but it is usually a misuse of a talk page to continue to argue any point that has not met policy requirements. Pay particular attention to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, which applies to talk pages as well as to articles: "Editors must take particular care adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page."
Talk pages are generally created by clicking a red "Talk" tab and creating the page, like any other page.
Do not create an empty talk page simply so that one will exist for future use. There is no need to add discussion warning templates to every talk page, or even to every talk page that contains a discussion.
Although this section is specific to article talk pages, many of the general themes apply to all discussion pages that are used for collaboration.
These guidelines apply specifically to discussion pages which are used for collaboration, which includes just about all talk pages other than user talk pages. The application of these guidelines to user talk pages should be governed by common sense and should not supersede guidelines and policies specific to those pages.
===Example===). Mixing it all into one long post complicates discussion.
Please note that some of the following are of sufficient importance to be official Wikipedia policy. Violations (and especially repeated violations) may lead to the offender being blocked or banned from editing Wikipedia.
It is not necessary to bring talk pages to publishing standards, so there is no need to copy edit others' posts. Doing so can be irritating. The basic rule, with exceptions outlined below, is not to edit or remove others' posts without their permission.
Never edit or move someone's comment to change its meaning, even on your own talk page. Removing others' comments is prohibited, except on one's own user talk page or if the comments violate scenarios outlined above.
Striking out text constitutes a change in meaning. It should be done only by the user who wrote it, or as otherwise provided in this talk page guideline.
You should generally not break up another editor's text by interleaving or interpolating your own replies to individual points. This causes confusion with who said what and obscures the original editor's intent. In your own posts, you may wish to use the {{Talk quote inline}} or {{Talk quote block}} templates to quote others' posts.
Cautiously editing or removing another editor's comments is sometimes allowed, but normally you should stop if there is any objection. If you make anything more than minor changes, it is good practice to leave a short explanatory note such as "[potential libel removed by ~~~~]".
{{Collapse top}}/{{Collapse bottom}} or similar templates. This normally has the effect of ending the off-topic discussion while allowing people to read it by pressing the "show" link. Involved parties must not use these templates to end a discussion over the objections of other editors.— {{subst:User|USERNAME}} TIMESTAMP (UTC) or some even simpler variant. If it contains a coding error, you can fix it yourself or ask the editor to fix the problem in their preferences.<syntaxhighlight>, <code>, <nowiki> and other technical markup to fix code samples{{Reflist-talk}} or {{Sources-talk}} to emit references and notes immediately instead of at the end of the page.{{Moved to}} and {{Moved from}} templates on both locations. While some reformatting might be necessary to maintain the sense of the discussion and preserve attribution, it is essential that the meaning of any comments isn't altered.[[File:Foo.png|...]] to [[:File:Foo.png|...]]).{{Template name}} to {{t|Template name}}) if the poster clearly intended to discuss the template rather than use it. You are allowed to deactivate category links (e.g., change [[Category:Foobar]] to [[:Category:Foobar]] by inserting a colon) to prevent the page being inappropriately added to a discussed category. You are allowed to deactivate interlanguage links (e.g., change [[it:Foobar]] to [[:it:Foobar]] by inserting a colon) when the link to a page on another language's Wikipedia is meant to appear inline rather than to serve as an interlanguage link for the page.{{subst:Empty edit request}} on their talk page.{{Collapse AI top}}. In formal discussions, this sometimes results in the early closure of irrelevant or disruptive discussions; at XfD venues, such discussions can be closed early if they satisfy the first speedy keep criterion. If a worthwhile conversation has already started, it may be left open. The proposer of a closed discussion may be politely invited to start a new discussion using their own thoughts and words.It is accepted and common practice that you may continue to edit your remarks for a short while to correct mistakes, add links, or otherwise improve them, so long as no one has yet responded to your comment. If you've accidentally posted to the wrong page or section or simply changed your mind, you may delete your comment entirely if it's been only a short while and no one has replied to it.
But if anyone has already replied to or quoted your original comment, changing it should be avoided as it may deprive any replies of their original context. Once others have replied, or even if no one's replied but it's been more than a short while, if you wish to change or delete your comment, it is commonly best practice to indicate your changes. An exception to this rule may be permitted if there is only one reply and it invokes mutual withdrawal.
<del>...</del>, which renders in most browsers as struck-through text, e.g., <ins>...</ins>, which renders in most browsers as underscored text, e.g., inserted.You <del>commented</del> <ins>commented in April</ins> after the previous discussion.<del>something</del> or<del>something</del> <ins>something else</ins>[[WP:REDACT|Edited]] ~~~~~, using five tildes, immediately following the original timestamp at the end of your post. However, this will break notifications for anyone who has subscribed to the discussion.[[#New section|<sup>[corrected]</sup>]] to insert a superscript note, e.g. [corrected], linking to a later subsection for a detailed explanation.Persistently formatting your comments on a talk page in a non-compliant manner, after friendly notification by other editors, is a mild form of disruption. After you have been alerted to specific aspects of these guidelines (such as indentation, sectioning, and signatures), you are expected to make a reasonable effort to follow those conventions. Other editors may simply ignore additional posts that flagrantly disregard the talk page formatting standards. You can also expect to have your mis-formatted posts refactored to comply.
If you have a disagreement or a problem with someone's behavior, please read Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.
Closing a discussion means summarizing the results, and identifying any consensus that has been achieved. A rule of thumb is that discussions should be kept open at least a week before closing, although there are some exceptions to this.
Any uninvolved editor may write a closing statement for most discussions, not just admins. However, if the discussion is particularly contentious or the results are especially unclear, then a request specifically for a closing statement from an uninvolved administrator may be preferable.
Any participant in a discussion may request that an uninvolved editor formally close any type of discussion, only if at least one of the following criteria is met:
To request an uninvolved closure, list the discussion at Wikipedia:Closure requests. Ensure that any request there seeking a close is neutrally worded, and do not use that board to continue the discussion in question. If you are requesting attention specifically from an admin, then state that clearly in your request.
When an issue has been resolved without controversy, this may be marked simply by adding the {{Resolved}} template at the top of the thread, adding a brief statement of how the issue was dealt with. If you took action yourself to resolve the issue you may instead use the {{Done}} template in your own final comment stating what you did. Adding one of these templates will help future readers to spot more quickly those issues that remain unresolved.
When a more complex discussion has been closed, to discourage any further comments you may optionally use the {{Archive top}} and {{Archive bottom}} templates (although some particular types of discussion, such as those which concern whether to delete or rename a page, have their own specialized templates) — {{Archive top}} and {{Archive bottom}} templates should not be used by involved parties to end a discussion over the objections of other editors. For example:
{{Archive top|result=Consensus below is in favor of this proposal, (detailed explanation) ~~~~}}
Discussion text...
{{Archive bottom}}
... which produces:
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Discussion text...
If a discussion has been so disruptive or pointless that it is better for editors to waste no further time even looking at it, the alternative templates {{Hidden archive top}} and {{Hidden archive bottom}} can be used instead, to produce a similar "closure box" around it, but collapsed to hide the content, as with off-topic threads. If a particular unconstructive block of an otherwise useful discussion should be hidden, use {{Collapse top}} and {{Collapse bottom}}.
{{pb}} ("paragraph break") template inline in the text without manually linebreaking on either side of it: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.{{pb}}Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation.| This page in a nutshell: WP:LISTGAP fixes: don't change list type, don't skip indentation levels, no extra spaces between replies. |
*), which make bulleted lists;#), which make numbered lists;;), which make the first half of an HTML association list (rendered as bold-faced text); and:), which make the second half of an HTML association list, but which are popularly used for the resulting visual indentation effect.== on either side of the words, as in ==Heading==. The "Post a comment" feature can be used to do this automatically. (If you are using the default skin, you can use the "New section" tab next to the "Edit this page" tab instead.) Enter a subject/heading in the resulting edit page, and it will automatically become the section heading.{{subst:Anchor}} before the new title as so: == {{subst:Anchor|Old title}} New title ==. Wikimarkup such as links and templates may be removed from section headings as they create technical issues.{{Hidden}}.)Large talk pages are difficult to read and load slowly over slow connections. As a rule of thumb, archive closed discussions when a talk page has numerous resolved or stale discussions – see Help:Archiving a talk page. Apart from the exception described in § User talk pages, discussions should be archived, not blanked.
If a thread has been archived prematurely, such as when it is still relevant to current work or was not concluded, unarchive it by copying it back to the talk page from the archive, and deleting it from the archive. Do not unarchive a thread that was effectively closed; instead, start a new discussion and link to the archived prior discussion.
In the past, it was standard practice to "summarize" talk page comments, but this practice has fallen out of use. On regular wikis with no "talk" tab, the summary would end up as the final page content. Wikipedia has separate tabs for article content and discussion pages. Refactoring and archiving are still appropriate, but should be done with courtesy and reversed on protest.
Often, there are a number of related pages that would benefit from one single talk page for discussions. For example, a list article may have grown too large and was split alphabetically. Or there may be a set of templates that are used together or interrelated MediaWiki interface pages.
Before implementing a centralized talk page, consider first gaining consensus for your proposal. The main discussion would usually be on the proposed centralized talk page with notices on the pages to be redirected. Notices may be placed on related pages as needed; for example, a relevant WikiProject page or Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). {{Centralize notice}} may be used to note the proposal.
If consensus is gained, then:
{{Centralized talk page}} is useful for this.{{archives|banner=yes}} is useful for this.{{Editnotice central redirected}} is useful for this.{{Editnotice central}} is useful for this.Examples of centralized talk pages: Talk:List of aircraft, Help talk:Cite errors, Help talk:Footnotes, and MediaWiki talk:Common.css.
If the same issues arise repeatedly, it may be desirable to preserve a list of frequently asked questions and their answers using the {{FAQ}} template.
The {{FAQ}} template is especially useful in cases in which:
It may be useful to add hidden text into the article (in the portion(s) of the article where an edit against the existing consensus would most likely occur) alerting editors of the FAQ, to discourage the edits against the existing consensus.
User talk pages are subject to the general userpage guidelines on handling inappropriate content (see User pages § Handling inappropriate content).
While the purpose of article talk pages is to discuss the content of articles, the purpose of user talk pages is to draw the attention or discuss the edits of a user. Wikipedia is not a social networking site, and all discussion should ultimately be directed solely toward the improvement of the encyclopedia. User talk pages must serve their primary purpose, which is to make communication and collaboration among editors easier. Editors who refuse to use their talk page for these purposes are violating the spirit of the talk page guidelines, and are not acting collaboratively.
The length of user talk pages, and the need for archiving, is left up to each editor's own discretion.
Although archiving is preferred, users may freely remove discussions or comments from their own talk pages. Users may also remove some content in archiving. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user; this is true whether the removal was manual or automatic, and includes both registered and unregistered users. Note that deleted comments can always be retrieved from the page's history, as user talk pages are almost never deleted (although a courtesy blanking may be requested).
There are certain types of notices that users may not remove from their own talk pages, such as declined unblock requests and speedy deletion tags.
You can use the search box below to locate Talk pages. See Help:Searching for more information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/, and Wikipedia's robots.txt file disallows /w/.