Template talk:Welcome

Anyone that is willing to help out newcomers can do so by adding "{{subst:Welcome}} " (without the quotes) to the newcomers' talk pages. --Jimmcq

Suggestions

• I think that a strong recommendation to read 3 articles will probably scare new contributors off.
• Creating a (e.g.) PinataIsland.info:Editors page might make it useful to say "if you need help, feel free to contact [[...:Editors|any of these people]]. (Talk pages can be specifically linked on the Editors page.)
• Perhaps separate the Manual of Style from the general help, and say something like "If you're already familiar with wiki editing, feel free to refer to ... for specific site style conventions.
• Could we call it Site-specific Style guidelines or something, so they realize it's specific to this site, instead of a "general" thing they could ignore?
• Perhaps mention their User page can be edited with {{{gamertag...}}} or other details (to make it easier to contact people).

In general, it's a great addition, and hopefully will help both new and experienced visitors to the wiki. --FeralKitty 17:09, 18 November 2006 (EST)

Those are all very good suggestions. There is also info on greeting newcomers on Wikipedia --Jimmcq 17:13, 18 November 2006 (EST)

Proposed change

This change would add a heading, properly subst the user's name and the sitename, and include the welcomer's signature at the time of subst'ing. Thoughts? –xenocidic (talk) 04:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I've committed this change. You no longer need to sign your name but the template must be subst'ed. –xenocidic (talk) 04:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I like the heading. What was the problem with the member name and site name not being correctly done? I thought they were showing up correctly already. And why do you say it must be subst'ed as wasn't that what always had to be done to use it? *confused*

While I understand using things like includeonly tricks, I'm not too familiar with subst tricks. The first subst of the template replaces what would have been transcluded, with the actual contents of the template, and... because there were two subst's includeonly'd in the included template, they then get evaluated and then replace the variable with the value of the variable? --FeralKitty (talk) 04:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Because it was just pasting the magic words onto the user's talk page. In the editing window we are saying to them, "Welcome, {{BASEPAGENAME}} !" - not very personal. (Look at how jim welcomed me versus how I welcomed GamingDaze. The <includeonly>subst:</includeonly> subst's the magic words BASEPAGENAME and SITENAME at the time of transclusion. So yes the trick will subst whatever it is presently transcluding, be it a magic word, etc. As for having to subst it now - before you could've gotten away with transcluding and signing next to it. Now you have to subst because if you transclude it it'll display four tildes instead of your signature. Hope that explains things. –xenocidic (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I had never really paid much attention to the document as it would look, edited, and just viewed the talk page. So, yep, it's certainly nicer to actually have their name there, than a variable that gets evaluated each time the page is viewed. Gotcha. Good catch/improvement! :) So, the included substs to swap out the variables get evaluated... as the page is being saved, or is it the mediawiki that sees the contents and evaluates the second subst? in other words, are you forced to preview first before saving, or is it the save that evaluates things and does the initial subst and then variable substs? (At the time of transclusion? Isn't this considered including, instead of transcluding?) --FeralKitty (talk) 06:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, at the time of save, it will subst the magic words (the subst's within the subst's). No need to preview first. –xenocidic (talk) 06:09, 23 August 2008 (UTC)