[go: up one dir, main page]

Jump to content

Wikipedia:A nice cup of tea and a sit down

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A nice cup of tea...
...and a sit down.
Wikipedians also recommend biscuits with tea.
Some Wikipedians say that digestive biscuits are the only true biscuit for tea and that hobnobs are not as much biscuity goodness.

A nice cup of tea and a sit down is, in the spirit of WikiLove, a chance to declare publicly what you appreciate about other members of the community or their contributions. As Sidney Clare wrote, and Thumper's mother echoed: If you can't say anything real nice, it's better not to talk at all. That rather idealistic concept is the fundamental rule on this page. The goal is to create goodwill and perhaps assist the dispute resolution processes that occur on other pages – or, if we're lucky, avoid disputes at all.

Of course, this page should not replace complimenting people directly on their talk pages, or on article talk pages. A nice cup of tea and a sit down is for when things have gone beyond that, and there is a need for some more formal and serious niceness.

If you get the urge to say something like "I think that such-and-such has worked really hard on Wikipedia, but...", you should stop there. The rule of thumb when making a compliment is to "stop at the but/however/although". Just the complimentary part, please. When you're done pouring, you may want to leave the {{tea}} template on their talk page, so they know that their tea is ready.

(Note that drinking tea is only a metaphor; if you are living in the heat, you can take a nice cold drink; if these aren't your style, you can sit around a fire and drink beer. If you hate all of these drinks, maybe a nice hot cocoa will do. Or even a glass of water!)

What A nice cup of tea and a sit down is for

[edit]
  • Saying nice things about other contributors, especially those with whom you are currently having problems.
  • Publicly declaring what you like about a person or their contributions.
  • Directing people to, when disagreements on other pages get heated.

What A nice cup of tea and a sit down is not for

[edit]
  • Dispute resolution
  • Mediation or arbitration
  • Arguing
  • Newbie biting
  • Fooling around
  • Baiting
  • Irony or sarcasm in any form
  • Personal attacks
  • Legal threats
  • Wikilawyering
  • Anything that is not 100% positive

Okay, the pot is brewing. Milk? Sugar?

[edit]
Tea ceremony

2005

[edit]

2006

[edit]

January 2006

[edit]

February 2006

[edit]

March 2006

[edit]

April 2006

[edit]

May 2006

[edit]
  • I think EVERYONE who has contributed to any part of Wikipedia and/or the Wikimedia foundation should sit down and have a nice cup of tea for expanding, even if just a little bit, how far human knowleage can go if we all put our heads together. Congrats everyone! Spyco 05:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I had a very enjoyable experience a moment or two ago. See, I created the article matkot, which is still a stub, but nonetheless... having quoted a resource from a travel guide to Israel (don't worry, I'll cite it as soon as I get my hands on a copy again) I was then re-quoted by national newspaper HaAretz.. see this page. Isn't that nice :-) Matthew Platts 16:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I usually have rotten days over here where I reside, but not today. I just completed expanding and referencing Zero (Mega Man) and Mega Man X (character) (with proper citations even!) after they failed GA status about a month ago. Why, I even encountered the Keiji Inafune article on a tour of the wiki and greatly expanded that as well. I feel quite optimistic about the latter two, so I'll re-summit them for GA status. And if they don't make it, I can always make another attempt. -ZeroTalk 17:07, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just another comment. I think praise should be offered to The Land, The JPS and Xezbeth for always being consistently fantastic. Matthew Platts 10:32, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

June 2006

[edit]
  • I want to keep the trend of having compliments every month, so here's my compliment: PHAEDRIAL: You are a very kind and polite contribu-TOR. When I sent you that e-mail, you replied in such an enthusiastic way that I would have never expected. Please run for adminship so I can support you. —THIS IS MESSEDOCKER (TALK) 04:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

July 2006

[edit]
  • My thanks and appreciation to all the editors who have been working on Democratic Underground who came together, despite their vast differences of opinion, to achieve and to honor community consensus and to end the disputes on the article. Well done, everyone -- that's how Wikipedia should work! - CheNuevara 20:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The credit goes mainly to you, Che, for bringing the warring parties together and acting as a, well, voice of reason. VoiceOfReason 21:26, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would just like to thank the good people of Wikipedia for making me feel welcome after a very, very long absence. I promise to pull more weight around here from now on. Jacqui 18:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

August 2006

[edit]

September 2006

[edit]

October 2006

[edit]

November 2006

[edit]

December 2006

[edit]

2007

[edit]

January 2007

[edit]

February 2007

[edit]

March 2007

[edit]
  • I've recently completed my first month at the LGBT Wikiproject, and I wanna thank all the people I've met there for being so great and helpful with me. :-) It's been a great experience working with Dev920, Jeffpw, Satyr, WJBScribe, Aleta and so on! Raystorm 20:22, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Has it only been a month?! You seem like part of the furniture... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 02:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the cuppa, mate! Much appreciated. :-) Ekantik talk 01:23, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 2007

[edit]

May 2007

[edit]
Wow--thank you! This also happens to be a really nice piece of wiki that I hadn't come across yet (or had and forgotten), and as someone who has recently started to drink tea, I can attest that just the suggestion brought a smile to my face. Miss Mondegreen talk  22:11, May 13 2007

June 2007

[edit]

August 2007

[edit]
A "cuppa" for everyone!

September 2007

[edit]

October 2007

[edit]

November 2007

[edit]
  • User:Mattisse has such a breadth of knowledge on issues about psychology, I learn about things I've never heard of before just from reading the psychology edits and legal edits she makes. She's also a very bold editor who makes a lot of new articles. My first article was deleted about a year ago, so I'm not very confident at starting them, but since I have read more of Mattisse's contributions on wikipedia, it has inspired me to make two new articles in the space of about a week.Merkinsmum 14:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dweller for reminding us that the presence of tea alone doesn't always foster goodwill. We need biscuits too. ---Sluzzelin talk 00:40, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

December 2007

[edit]

2008

[edit]

January 2008

[edit]
The Cup of Tea, Mary Cassatt, 1880

February 2008

[edit]

March 2008

[edit]

April 2008

[edit]

May 2008

[edit]

July 2008

[edit]

August 2008

[edit]
  • Here you go UsaSatsui, heres some tea for beating me here, but this does not mean I withdraw my nom. =) Pie is good (Apple is the best) 16:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is in praise and appreciation for User:Nrswanson. Through his obvious passion and experience, this highly intelligent user has been a significant and enthusiastic contributor to wikipedia. This users knowledge about the workings of wikipedia is amazing. So have a cup of your favorite tea (herbal or caffeinated) on me. Maybe a few biscotti too. :-) / A FANTASTIC RESOURCE. Also just noticed that Nrswanson created an index on his userpage yesterday. Not only does it chronicle his NUMEROUS contributions to this community (which make mine pale in comparison), but it's actually is a FANTASTIC list of resources/information covering the gamut of the performing arts. If the performing arts is your area of interest, this page would be a great one to bookmark. Cheers, Nrswanson! Even if we disagree sometimes, you're all right in my book. :-) Hrannar (talk) 17:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)Hrannar[reply]
  • Thanks Hrannar. I appriciate it. I hope to see you arround more on other articles. You should join the opera project.Nrswanson (talk) 04:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well done to all the IP editors constantly improving Day and Age. It's really refreshing to see IP edits on my watchlist that aren't vandalism. Keep it up. WilliamH (talk) 15:31, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Amazing work by Cluebot, who always beats me to an edit( @#!*% it!). Also to all those Huggle users, helping me crusade against vandalsVinson 23:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

October 2008

[edit]

November 2008

[edit]

December 2008

[edit]

2009

[edit]

January 2009

[edit]
  • I love how much input my new page is getting! —harej // change the rules 01:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've been an editor here for 4 years and 7 months, and an administrator for all but the first five of those. In that time, I've seen the 'pedia grow from being relatively little-known suburb to being the number one go-to source for information on the Internet. Sure, we have a long way to go yet, but thinking about the progress I've seen makes me optimistic about our future. Good job, everybody! – ClockworkSoul 00:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

February 2009

[edit]
  • Recently, there has been a great deal of controversy over flagged revisions. The people supporting flagged revs believe that it is inappropriate to allow vandalism to run rampant on BLPs, perhaps even if stopping such vandalism requires a less open philosophy. Those opposed feel that our "anyone can edit" ideals are more fundamental and more important than our reliability. Recently, the issue was exacerbated by vandalism on the Ted Kennedy article (among at least one other that I can think of). Jimbo publicly requested that the developers enable flagged revisions in response to this vandalism. Except for the vandals, every single person involved in this has the 'Pedia's best interest at heart, and is actively trying to help in some way or another. The only difference between these people is a difference of opinion over which configuration (or lack thereof) would best serve the Wiki's interests. --Thinboy00 @076, i.e. 00:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

[edit]

May 2009

[edit]

June 2009

[edit]

July 2009

[edit]

August 2009

[edit]

September 2009

[edit]
  • I have learned a lot from several editors since coming here, especially Benjiboi, Yobmod and Rebecca. Coppertwig was very helpful when I found myself in an edit war situation. Even editors I have clashed with have their good sides: Born Gay, for example, does hear what is said, and when we have disagreed, I have found him accommodating some aspect of my point after a few days. JoshuaJohnson I don't often agree with, but I have not found him offensive or difficult to work with, and he is willing to find a way of arriving at an agreed edit. Destinero I find difficult, because while I might be sympathetic to some of his edits, he goes about editing in a very confrontational way, so while I might want to support him I find at times I cannot because it does not conform to what is expected of editors. Tobit2 is somebody I quite enjoy editing with, even if we have some divergent views, because he is always willing to accept a solution if it ticks all the right boxes in terms of policy and guidelines. James Cantor is somebody I have certain issues with outside the encyclopedia, and specifically on one particular article, but I have come to respect the way he approaches editing on another article we are both involved with. Oh yeah, Cameron, I didn't like the way he cut out the deadwood at first, but now I think he has a cool approach, and wish I could be as ruthless. I do aspire to editing in ways that conform to policy and guidelines, and have found it hard to place my own interests in second place to NPOV in a way that produces better articles and improves the encyclopedia - to this end, I have learned that avoiding WP:SYNTH, and WP:OR are very important, in conjunction with WP:RS. I am sure that there are editors I have not mentioned, and only one or two of those will be because I cannot think of a good word to say for them - but I am grateful to all those I have interacted with and come to learn from. Sorry if this is a bit long. Mish (talk) 22:47, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

[edit]

I got great help today from Chzz and fleet. They were great Thanks a million-

- Pageedit123

2010

[edit]

January 2010

[edit]

February 2010

[edit]

March 2010

[edit]

April 2010

[edit]
Greatly appreciated - but you did all the hard yards. It was nice to work with you. "Have a nice day" :p  Chzz  ►  18:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010

[edit]

June 2010

[edit]
With the feedback sorted out, Wikipedians can relax and enjoy themselves.

July 2010

[edit]

August 2010

[edit]

September 2010

[edit]

October 2010

[edit]

November 2010

[edit]

December 2010

[edit]

2011

[edit]

January 2011

[edit]

February 2011

[edit]

March 2011

[edit]

April 2011

[edit]

May 2011

[edit]
  • A big general thank you to everyone who's working so hard all over Wikipedia because they feel like it, without the barnstars and trumpets. I'd like to pour you a nice cup of tea and offer some homemade oat and raisin flapjacks fresh from the oven (the sugar free one's are on the left, the almond ones are there behind the milk). I raise my mug to you! Woot! Span (talk) 02:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2011

[edit]

August 2011

[edit]

September 2011

[edit]

October 2011

[edit]

November 2011

[edit]

December 2011

[edit]

2012

[edit]

January 2012

[edit]

February 2012

[edit]

March 2012

[edit]

April 2012

[edit]

May 2012

[edit]

June 2012

[edit]

July 2012

[edit]

August 2012

[edit]

September 2012

[edit]

2013

[edit]

January 2013

[edit]

April 2013

[edit]

Thank you to everyone who makes essays on how new editors should act. Origamite (talk) 01:01, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

[edit]

November 2013

[edit]

2014

[edit]

March 2014

[edit]

September 2014

[edit]
  • Thank you to all our copy-editors at the GOCE, new and regular alike. As of my timestamp, the Requests page is down to 21 requests and these are from only this month—that's probably the fewest requests I've ever seen there. Accordingly, I've temporarily removed the backlog template. I know the Drives and Blitzes can sometimes bring their own problems to the fore, but I think you're all doing a grand job there. Thanks to everyone for your hard work; long may it continue! Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 01:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll be more than happy to pour, :-) since you've done most of the heavy lifting. You're right; this is the best I've seen in almost four years, and I'd love to whittle the backlog down to two weeks (a reasonable wait, IMO, for a GAN or FAC). In light of recent events, I can't believe how neat the list is now. Thanks, all! Miniapolis 17:34, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

December 2014

[edit]
  • Hello everyone, just taking a moment to wish all users and Wikipedians a Happy New Year. I've made a return after a sustained period of relative inactivity, and it's nice to be amongst you all again. I hope 2014 has been good to you all. :) Orphan Wiki 13:52, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2015

[edit]

January 2015

[edit]

Just kicking off the New Year with a swift mention of User:RegistryKey. In their first four months (approx) of editing, RegistryKey has been of immense help to our community. Keep up the great work! Orphan Wiki 17:22, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

May 2015

[edit]

July 2015

[edit]
Carnism article
[edit]

@Sammy1339: Thanks so much for everything you've done to rescue, build, and improve the article, and for your great patience in talking through 13 and many more picayune quibbles. I can't wait to meetup with you!

@SlimVirgin: Your contributions to the project are beyond compare! You're great with sources, utterly fluent in WikiText, and most importantly thrice the writer I'll ever be. Thanks for putting up with my gadflying.

@DrChrissy: I don't think I've even mentioned how wonderful it is to have a real expert helping out. Your professional eye for facts and sources is irreplaceable. I've heard it takes a deeply altruistic commitment to your field for an academic to tolerate the foibles of WP, and I can't thank you enough for doing so.

@Martin Hogbin: I know you've been trying to fix these articles for a long time, mostly without getting the results you want. I'm frankly impressed at how well you keep your cool in the face of all the cumulative frustration. Your dedication is an inspiration.

@Snow Rise: Thank you so much for the time and effort you put into jumping in, and on a tight schedule yet! I'm sorry we're not working on dance right now.

The article is a fine testament to the amount of positive effort that's been undertaken. I know we can all find ways to make the 'pedia reflect the sources; we have all the guidelines we need, and plenty of sources. This is a great opportunity to create a neutral, fair, informative locus of information on a rhetorically-fogged topic, and I can't wait to see where it ends up. FourViolas (talk) 01:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 2015

[edit]

Thank you Deb (talk) for all the hard work you! --MarkYabloko 16:34, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2016

[edit]

February 2016

[edit]

@2602:306:3357:BA0:2DCC:2A84:9C2E:FBB3: Thank you for all your contributions so far! Editors like you are the bread and butter of Wikipedia. Thank you, again! Boomer VialHolla 00:20, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2017

[edit]

January 2017

[edit]

@Rmhargrove: is doing a great job researching Cyborg Anthropology and Digital anthropology! Tburress (talk) 18:51, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2019

[edit]

@Websurfer2: thank you for all your significant contributions to the Timelines of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections and journalist articles. I look forward to you hopefully regrouping and returning to help at the Timelines. X1\ (talk) 01:21, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2020

[edit]

@The Drover's Wife: is a tireless contributor specialising in Australian content, and provides detailed and thoughtful suggestions around categories and article approaches. I'm grateful to learn from your contributions, thank you for everything you do! SunnyBoi (talk) 14:23, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SunnyBoi: This user has sadly retired due to "bullying on Wikipedia without being paid." Hope she comes back. Firestar464 (talk) 04:27, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

[edit]

2021

[edit]

May 2021

[edit]
  • I would like to thank Steggy1 and Eckey1 for their hard work and collaborative contributions to our class project. Wikipedia editing is a new experience for all of us, and I'm so grateful to have learned a lot from both of you. - Bg4134 23:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

June 2021

[edit]

July 2021

[edit]

2022

[edit]

January 2022

[edit]

March 2022

[edit]

2024

[edit]

February 2024

[edit]

I would like to thank User:Kittyroseandtheart for trying to save an article I have worked very hard to improve. On their first day, they took the time to read through many citations and provided constructive feedback despite not getting the results they wanted. Instead of a thank you, or at least an acknowledgement of the time taken to check 20 citations, your presence and opinions as a new editor were treated in a suspect way. I'm frankly impressed at how well you keep your cool in the face of first edits frustration. I hope you don't give up on the basis of this single interaction. Wikipedia needs more editors that are not just passive aggressively picking fights and vandalising (you will learn what that is). But people who are knowledgable on subjects, taking the time to edit and defend articles in spite of hostile manoeuvring are appreciated. This cup of tea is on me. Signed, Avignonesi

See also

[edit]