Wikipedia talk:Village pump (idea lab)

 Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous 

• Table of contents
• First discussion
• Jump to bottom
• New topic
• All village pumps

This page is for discussion about the page Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) only. You may want one of the village pump subpages above, or one of the links on the village pump main page. Irrelevant discussions will be moved or removed.

« Archives, 1

Right place for initial discussion of proposed new templates

Does the initial discussion of proposed new templates belong in Idea Lab or in Technical? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 13:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

@Chatul, both would be good places. The Idea Lab is perhaps a more theoretical venue, if that helps. EpicPupper (talk) 23:52, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

The initial discussion of a proposed new template generally belongs in the Idea Lab if you are still exploring whether the template is needed, useful, or supported by the community. This is the right place for brainstorming and gathering consensus on the concept itself. Once there is agreement that the template should exist and the focus shifts to how it will be built, coded, or technically implemented, the discussion then fits better in Technical spaces such as the Village Pump (technical) or relevant template project pages. In short, start in the Idea Lab for the “should we do this?” stage, and move to Technical when the question becomes “how do we do this?” AyeshaLearner (talk) 06:16, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

File:Дети -шахтёры.jpg

@Mrfoogles and EEng: I agree that the image is a bit silly, but there's a long-standing tradition that being a bit silly in project space is acceptable, or at least tolerated, as long as it's not disruptive. Probably not worth edit-warring about. RoySmith (talk) 22:47, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Exactly. Maybe, Mrfoogles, when you have more than 267 edits total you'll understand better. EEng 23:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok, will stop messing with it. It does make it hard to figure out what the thing is talking about, though, like a bad cue. Not worth edit warring about. Mrfoogles (talk) 02:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

One function of humor is to exercise the faculty of figuring out what things are really talking about. EEng 02:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@EEng, Mrfoogles, and RoySmith: After some consideration, I've removed the image, as an irrelevant distraction from a serious discussion. As I've discussed with EEng before, humor in its place is a very good thing, but a sense of occasion is also important, and not every conceivable visual homonym-based pun ought to be made. Newyorkbrad (talk) 03:21, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Minor and miner are not homonyms; they're homophones. And you a lawyer. Geesh! EEng 05:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense — thank you for the clarification. I understand your point about maintaining the right tone for the discussion. Humor definitely has its place, but I agree that context and timing matter. Appreciate you taking the time to explain your reasoning. AyeshaLearner (talk) 03:58, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

That’s a very sensible way to frame it. It’s always better to step back rather than risk an edit war, especially over something relatively minor like an image or formatting choice. By acknowledging that it was confusing but ultimately not worth conflict, you’re keeping the tone collaborative and constructive. AyeshaLearner (talk) 06:19, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for flagging this. I’ll stop editing for now and take a step back — you’re right, it’s become confusing and I don’t want to get into an edit-war. If it's unclear what the discussion is about, redirecting it or waiting for clarification seems best. Let me know if you’d like me to help tidy things up or reframe the topic. AyeshaLearner (talk) 03:57, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

It sounds like you’ve worded a careful and respectful explanation for why you removed the image. In discussions on Wikipedia, that’s the right tone: you’ve acknowledged the other editor’s point of view, recognized the value of humor in general, but explained why in this context it was distracting from a serious conversation. That kind of reasoning helps avoid conflict and keeps the focus on improving the discussion. AyeshaLearner (talk) 06:17, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

AyeshaLearner (talk) 06:18, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

How about adding a thumbs up and a thumbs down option for the articles we read or just a like option

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) § How about adding a thumbs up and a thumbs down option for the articles we read or just a like option

 – —Cryptic 07:13, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

An idea for Link Circle visualizations in Wikipedia

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) § An idea for Link Circle visualizations in Wikipedia

 – isaacl (talk) 16:24, 26 May 2026 (UTC)