Wikipedia:Mentorship noticeboard

Welcome to the mentorship noticeboard

Purpose of this page			Using this page
The Mentorship noticeboard is the central peer-to-peer discussion forum for Wikipedia mentors and editors interested in the Mentorship program. This is a proactive board, where mentors share experience, ideas, and best practices to improve mentoring, strengthen the Mentorship program, and help retain new editors. If you are a new user: this is not the place to contact your mentor or to ask general editing questions. Please contact your mentor via the Mentorship module on your Homepage, or ask any question at the Wikipedia:Teahouse. Topics for this board include, but are not limited to: mentoring tips and techniques ideas for improving mentoring difficult mentoring situations updates to Mentorship, and technical issues recruiting and training new mentors – Enroll now! questions from new or prospective mentors outreach to mentors from other projects escalating suggestions for improvement to the Growth team We remain civil towards all participants and assume good faith. There are other pages more appropriate for dealing with certain specific issues: An issue requiring immediate administrator attention → Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents New user questions → try your Homepage Mentorship module, or the Wikipedia:Teahouse			Start a new discussion. Use an informative title: ==Your topic here==. If a thread is related to an ongoing discussion, consider placing it under a level-3 heading within the existing discussion. You should generally notify a user who is the subject of a discussion; but see the next point. Avoid gratuitous posting of mistakes by new users; this is not a wall of shame; anyone can view this page. Be sensitive about the impact your comments may have on new users, and keep one eye on retention; that is, after all, one of the key goals of the program. If no comments have been made within 45 days, your post and any responses will be automatically archived. Please sign your posts. If a discussion is already ongoing elsewhere or if there is a more natural location for a discussion, please continue the discussion there, and add a link here to the other discussion. Related pages WP:Mentorship, FAQ for Mentors and mentees WP:MENTORLIST, list of Mentors at en-wiki WP:Welcome templates#Mentors, welcome your mentees mw:Help:Growth/Mentorship, feature description at Mediawiki mw:Talk:Growth, central Mediawiki Talk location for discussing Mentorship (and other Growth team features) Phabricator projects: GrowthExperiments-Mentorship; Community Feedback (Growth) Log of mentor assignment changes Want to help more? Try: Teahouse, Help desk, IRC, or Discord.

Click here to start a new discussion

Welcome to the Mentorship noticeboard!

Welcome to the Mentorship noticeboard! I've been enjoying Mentorship, and I finally realized that one thing I was missing was interactions with other mentors. So rather than complain about it, I thought why not just do something about it? And, here we are! I sometimes come across some of you here and there fleetingly, but it's more like ships passing in the night. So I thought we could have this place to get to know each other, trade ideas, or just hang out with other mentors.

To help break the ice and get the conversation started, please have a look at the § Survey below, and take a few minutes to answer the questions. Really looking forward to hearing from you! Mathglot (talk)

• Summoned from my talk page. Here's an observation from me. I've been mentoring for a few months now, and I have to say I don't really feel like I've been "working" with my mentees. By that I mean that most of them don't really ask much beyond the first question, and I'm not sure if that's really a problem on my part. Am I supposed to show more initiative, maybe follow them around, see what they're doing? I don't really mind this arrangement, but it feels to me like my talk page has just become an extension of the Teahouse. Just my two cents. JustARandomSquid (talk) 08:47, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

  JustARandomSquid, about: most of them don't really ask much beyond the first question, I strongly suspect this is the common pattern that we are all seeing, and has nothing to do with you. If you look at Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits, only the top 20% of all users ever get to edit #2. (And that's assuming that their #1 edit was a mentee question to you.)

  Otoh, the issue about whether Mentorship is just an extension of the WP:Teahouse is a serious question, and worth raising, imho, in a new section. Mathglot (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

  From many questions, I'm not sure a lot of the mentees realise that they've been paired with a specific human being -- lots of the questions seem to be the sort of thing you'd type into a search engine or at best to a very generic helpdesk. Is there an easy way for us to see what the other end of the system looks like -- I suppose I could just create a sockpuppet and sign up for mentoring, but that seems a bit convoluted. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 09:15, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

  @UndercoverClassicist you did have a mentor, but I have now claimed you as my mentee. Feel free to experiment / send questions as you see fit! You will probably need to enable your Special:Homepage in preferences (Special:Preferences > User profile > Newcomer editor features > check "Display newcomer homepage". Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 10:02, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks -- it does make it pretty obvious that there's a real person there! I wonder if tweaking my "bio" to be more obviously human (e.g. "I've been on here since ... and like to edit articles about ...) might help? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:34, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

• Great idea, and apropos of question 5, this will hopefully be an easy-to-find location for questions and discussions. WHenever I've wanted to look up some detail about the mentoring program in the past, it's taken me a while to remember to look at "Growth team features"!
  I signed up about a year ago (IIRC) around the time I got more involved with AfC and NPP, because I was hoping to have more positive engagement with new editors than just cleaning up vandalism and spam. I was afraid that I'd be swamped with questions, but I also find there hasn't been much ongoing interaction with mentees – only a handful have returned with additional or follow-up questions. That's not necessarily a bad thing, and I do see from my dashboard that some some new editors just keep editing and making incremental progress without needing to approach their mentor. —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 09:52, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

  ClaudineChionh, thanks. In response, I've added the 'Related pages' section in the header above. Please feel free to suggest additional links at the Talk page, or just boldly add them to the header yourself. Mathglot (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

• I've been a mentor for about five months. I've answered around thirteen mentees' questions, which I consider to be the minimum for working with a mentee, but have welcomed a lot more. Overall, I enjoy mentoring and find it satisfying, but I concur with JustARandomSquid that sometimes it feels like an extension of the Teahouse. I think what would really help is some sort of feature that truly takes advantage of the mentorship arrangement (i.e., direct, long-term, one-on-one help), perhaps similar to the existing WP:ADOPT program but in a more organized fashion. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 18:51, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

  Crestfalling, can you elaborate? Do you have a vision for how this might look, and what that organization might be? Mathglot (talk) 10:05, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

  I mostly see mentorship as a distributed version of Teahouse which makes a more personal touch on one hand, and also uneven/quality issue on the other hand. I do think it would be useful of mentor bot would flag/even encourage mentees automatically with reminders to edit again. All of that would make it more likely for mentors to regularly interact with mentees without putting entire honus on mentors to facilitate those relationships from scratch ~ In solidarity 🦝 Shushugah (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

  To start off, new users roughly belong to one of three groups:

  • They'll leave regardless of mentorship (most editors)
  • They'll stay or leave depending on mentorship (few editors)
  • They'll stay regardless of mentorship (few editors)

  I envision mentorship having the biggest impact on the second group. However, right now, mentors get assigned mentees from all three groups. That might not be optimal for mentors, who spend a lot of time welcoming/responding to people who likely won't make a second edit, and it might not be helpful for mentees, such as those who joined just to fix a typo.

  Ideally, there would be some way to increase the match rate with the second group; perhaps some sort of short survey when users first sign up, asking if they're interested in mentorship (with a clear explanation of what mentorship entails), what they intend to do on Wikipedia, etc. Meanwhile, mentorship could shift into mentors taking a more involved role in helping a new user with longer-term work, rather than just a question or two. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 17:19, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

  Crestfalling, that's a classic triage analysis, and it probably works here, too. It implies that in order to further the goals of WP:Retention, we should focus on that second group; the hard part is identifying who they are, but maybe there are some clues. Mathglot (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Survey

It quickly became clear that the section above might get quite long if there were lots of responses to the questions, so I've moved it to a Q&A survey with responses going to the subpage at WP:Mentorship noticeboard/Mentor reflections. Here are the updated questions, and all you have to do is click the button, and you'll be set up with a new section on the subpage with the questions preloaded. Please take a few minutes to fill it out. Thanks!

• How long have you been a mentor, and approximately how many mentees have you worked with?
• What do you enjoy most about being a mentor?
• What's one aspect of mentoring that you find challenging?
• Overall, how satisfied are you with the Mentorship program? (1 = not at all, 5 = extremely satisfied.) Feel free to say why.
• Is there any one thing you wish you had known at the outset that might have made your life as a mentor easier?
• Do you follow discussions about the Mentorship program elsewhere (for example, on talk pages, Phabricator, or Growth team updates)? If so, which ones?
• Do you think you'll stick with being a Mentor for the foreseeable future?
• What's one idea—large or small—that you think could make the Mentorship program even better?

— Feel free to also share anything else you wish to! —

Please take the survey by clicking the button. It should only take a few minutes.

Take the survey

To view the responses to the survey so far, see: WP:Mentorship noticeboard/Mentor reflections.

Where would you prefer to view and answer your mentee questions?

I'm going to respond to question #6 from the Welcome section above in the form of a question: Where would you like to view and answer your mentee questions?

In my case, I would prefer that the mentor questions appear on the mentee's own talk page, with an auto-ping to me, so I can view and answer it there. So instead of having fifty mentee questions and answers on my Talk page, they will be scattered on the Talk pages of fifty new users. This has several advantages:

• the mentor Talk page is a great deal less cluttered, making it easier to find all their other discussions
• mentors don't have to remember to ping when replying (or are mentees auto-subscribed, so you don't have to?)
• new user pages are not cluttered by mentorship, as they have only one mentor
• new users can can see exactly when their questions are answered, and can easily find them much later

I can't think of any disadvantages at the moment (other than it being a software change). Since I imagine not all mentors would want the same setup as me, I think new mentors should get the option when they sign up to choose where they want to receive their mentee questions: their own page, or the mentee's page. If you had the choice, where would you want to get your mentee questions? Mathglot (talk) 09:37, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

I would prefer them to be on the mentee's talk page. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:39, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

agree--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:30, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Agree as well. It's generally standard for a user's talk page to contain discussions about their own edits or projects, so this change would bring mentee questions in line with that. Crestfalling (talk/contribs) 18:54, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

I also agree with having questions be on mentee talk pages, for the reasons you mention.

Also, it's not uncommon for newcomers to have various negative messages (warnings, AfC declines, and so on) take up their talk page, so having their questions show up there could better inform others of the mentee's troubles. For example, if a mentee asks an honest question about tables or citations then goes on to make a mess, the prior question could help explain matters (i.e., not vandalism). Kodning 🌸 (talk) 22:29, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

It's kind of just a more convenient {{Help me}} or personal mini-Teahouse at that point, given how little the mentorship program involves. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 22:34, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

I really like this point about mentee questions possibly offsetting warnings on the same page. It sounds like something that could make a real difference to the newcomer experience. —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 03:09, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

right it does make new editors feel more 'welcomed' IMO--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:09, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I think that putting the questions on the mentees' talk pages is an excellent idea that I hadn't considered before! Definitely would reduce the clutter on my talk page and likely would make it easier for the mentee. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs|in solidarity}} 21:38, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps questions may be better asked and answered on the mentee's Talk page; on the other hand, the current placing on the mentor's Talk page may help a new user feel they are making contact with someone in the wider community, and that they now have that consistent outside place to ask future questions. (That said, the necessary rerouting of mentor-is-away queries subverts that consistency.) AllyD (talk) 11:57, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

A couple of related comments are present in § Where would you prefer to view and answer your mentee questions? above. Trizek (WMF) raised a possible objection :

A possible drawback is that then newcomers will want to talk to someone else, they will post at their talk page as usual. If they fail to ping, no one will answer. Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 18:39, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

There are a few cases:

1. If the mentee posts directly on their talk page (i.e, not via the module) in the same discussion as their original question, then this could be resolved by auto-subscribing the mentor to the question placed on a mentee TP. (Auto-subscription is my Preferences default, but what about mentors who do not autosubscribe; maybe a second preference?). Alternatively, they could be tracked in Category:Open mentorship questions to MentorName, in which case it would be very similar to an open {{Help me}} section, with the mentor responding via their category, and removing it once answered, or leaving it open if additional back-and-forth was expected or encouraged.
2. If the mentee posts directly in a new, top-level section (kudos to them, for learning how to do that), the mentor will not see it, true. But if they know how to create a new discussion on their Talk page, they are not quite brand new anymore, and maybe they know how to ping. Or maybe not; this could be tested (see below).
3. If they use the module again (the most frequent case I have seen, with multiple questions in a row by the same user, who probably only wanted to modify their previous question on my TP, but didn't know how), then it ends up like case 1, with a new message on their UTP and the mentor pinged (or the question category-tracked).

If we want to permit it, as in case 1 or 3, then implementing it is straightforward. Only case 2 is not so clear at first glance, imho.

Given the tiny number of mentees who ever ask a second question (excepting rare cases of an initial, connected flurry) or even any further edit at all, I suspect case 2 will not be a problem. However, this scenario is possible, and should be examined. I have some ideas about how to set up some A/B testing to shed light on that question to see if it is really a problem or not. It would involve designating a small percentage of mentees to have their questions appear on their Talk page, and then after the test period was over (a month or two, probably) compare the results with a randomly selected cohort of mentees whose questions go to the mentor TP. The ideal way to do that would be programmatically, but that would likely be a serious programming effort (possibly mitigated if Wikimedia has an A/B testing platform like Amazon WEBlab).

It would be possible to simulate a small A/B experiment manually, simply by asking for a few mentor A/B volunteers who would agree to move a fixed percentage of their mentees' questions (say, all questions from mentees whose username started with D-E-F) to the mentee talk page and answer them there during a certain interval. (I do this anyway, sometimes, when I think it's important for a mentee to have the question and response on their Talk page, where they can find it more easily.) I believe the location of the Q&A would be mostly transparent to mentees in a manual test, despite the fact that the link to the Published question displayed to the mentee in the 'Your mentor' module points to the mentor's Talk page (i.e., would be wrong for that test group), as I don't believe mentees see or understand that link or what it's for anyway, and won't notice if it points to the wrong place. (It points to the wrong place now; has any mentee complained about it yet? I just added phab:T432064, in case they didn't.) Also, that could be mitigated by simply posting a link from the mentor TP section to the mentee section (or, a {{discussion moved to}} template). Mathglot (talk) 22:30, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

I prefer to answer on my talkpage as (1) that's where the question was asked, (2) other Newbies can view other Newbie questions (and my answers), and (3) pinging is part of the learning (some will learn quickly how to do it and others slowly or not at all, but that is the same with all wiki learning).

What I'm thinking of creating is a separate archive on my talkpage which would only contain Newbie questions plus my answers, and add a link to it in my "Newbie Central" box in the top left corner of my talkpage. Hoping to get some feedback on this idea: pros and cons. --Rosiestep (talk) 23:11, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

What's if it's a regular subpage instead of an archive, where ALL questions posted via the module automatically land at User talk:Test/Mentorship? You can still archive of course of it gets too cluttered, but that would allow both mentors and mentees to look through all recent mentorship questions in one place, rather than mixed up with their regular TP - and without mentors having to move everything manually. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 02:24, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

• I would prefer them on the mentees' pages, for the reasons discussed here-- I especially like the way that they could make the page more friendly-looking to the mentee and more informative to other editors trying to gain context on their edits-- and I think an option allowing mentors to choose is a fantastic idea. ~ le 🌸 valyn (talk) 23:02, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Newbies wanting to write about themselves

i seem to be receiving an increasing number of requests from newbies on how to write their own profile or biography. In some cases, they simply ask me to help with an article or draft they have already written. I think it would be useful if we could have a page specifically explaining why newbies are not encouraged to write autobiographies but offering them encouragement to embark on other areas of editing. I usually try to explain in a few words why it is not a good idea to write about themselves and invite the to read Wikipedia:Autobiographies -- but that page is rather long and complex and not easy for newbies to absorb. I would also be interested to hear how other mentors have been dealing with this problem.--Ipigott (talk) Ipigott (talk) 08:47, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Oh, man, that is so true. It would be great to have some data on the incidence of this, but anecdotally, I sometimes have runs when I am welcoming mentees after they appear on my dashboard, of four, five, six in a row that are all mentees writing about themselves. The location varies: sometimes a Draft page, sometimes their sandbox, sometimes a user subpage, a handful were on their User page (and writing what was clearly intended as an article: infoboxes, bolding the topic, etc., not just a user 'profile'); and even one (so far) writing their autobiography in their common.css. (I had to get admin help to get that moved to their sandbox, as even my pagemover perms were not strong enough to move it.) I haven't tried to tally these in any organized manner, but the percentage that are autobiographies seems very high.

The next question, is what to do about it. I sometimes use template {{uw-autobiography}} (but I have a thing about not leaving a warning template as the creation edit on a user page), so in those cases, first I welcome them, and then I leave the {{uw-autobiography}}. The WP:Welcoming committee also has some hybrid templates, which both welcome a user, and gently point out a problem at the same time; the very first one listed, is {{Welcome-autobiography}}, so that is always a possibility. Would love to hear how other mentors deal with this, and also, how frequently.

There is one other angle here, possibly worth a separate section. Namely, a lot of the stuff we do as mentors also comes up at the WP:Teahouse (or WP:Help desk, or simply at User talk pages), and to what extent is the best response common to the "Helper community" that includes all of us, and to what extent do we, as Mentors, have a different role, and if so, what is it? To an extent, this goes to the remit of what Mentorship is for, how it defines our role, and how it differs from my role as a Teahouse host as well. But this is perhaps best raised in a new section. Mathglot (talk) 09:22, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

To be honest, I just direct them all to Help:YFA. JustARandomSquid (talk) 10:18, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

God, yeah, it seems like every other question I get asked is basically "Hey how do I do a COI" and I have to keep saying over and over again "You don't". If there's some way we can make this more clear that'd be fantastic. feedmepaperr (talk) 13:15, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I've had the same thing. Or others asking me to publish them an article, which they generated using AI. See this thread. Fortek67 (talk) 09:46, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, this is very common. WP:YFA and WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY are good things to show them. Not much discussion after that usually. I have helped editors with other types of COI to prepare drafts for AFC. At least one has been successful. ~Kvng (talk) 20:10, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

I am not a chatbot

One thing I've noticed is that a lot of people seem to have this conception that I am a chatbot who knows stuff about Wikipedia. They'll maybe send a mentor question that's just "Hi" or something incredibly basic and then go offline and never come back. I assume they're wanting an immediate response, and more of a chatbot type experience, and when I don't respond until I wake up or get off work 6 hours later they're already long gone and I feel a bit pointless typing out my response anyway.

I'm not sure how feasible it would be to have mentors assigned at the moment the question is asked, and priority given to people most recently online? This solution has flaws I haven't thought of I'm sure, but at least for the first question a newcomer has it'd get a quicker response and be more likely to lead to a conversation.

I'd love to hear if other mentors have also noticed this and if you guys have any other possible solutions or ideas. Cheers, feedmepaperr (talk) 13:12, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

But that would just be the Teahouse then. The mentorship programme aspires to be an actual mentorship programme, closer to WP:ADOPT. Why it might fall short is another topic altogether. JustARandomSquid (talk) 14:26, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@Feedmepaperr: I included my response time in my mentor message (whatever that's called) that shows up for all my mentees. I haven't looked at yours, so sorry if I'm being redundant, but including something like that might help manage newcomers' expectations? Just a short-term solution. Hopefully they'll realize Wikipedia moves at a much slower pace (in some areas) than social media does. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 05:55, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

As a mentee, the button with the question mark that appears on the bottom right for talking with your mentor appears an awful lot like the button you would use to talk with a chatbot on other websites. I think that might be part of it. Map Enjoyer (talk) 18:04, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

I ignored it for months for that reason, and only clicked on it to check what it actually does before disabling it when I found that option 😂 ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 02:01, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Five mentees, no questions

I'm new to mentorship (signed up a few weeks ago) and I've been assigned my first 5 mentees in the past week. However, none of them have asked any questions. I've been looking through the mentorship docs, especially "How to interact with newcomers", and it seems like the whole model is that I'm supposed to wait until they ask a question?

Why not put a welcome template on their user page and explain the mentorship releationship proactively? audiodude (talk) 13:43, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Template:welcome mentor is designed for this purpose. SomeoneDreaming (talk) 15:00, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Awesome thank you! audiodude (talk) 19:33, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I prefer {{welcome mentee}} with all its options. More at WP:Welcome templates#Mentors. Mathglot (talk) 20:12, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@Audiodude @Mathglot @SomeoneDreaming I use the visual one I developed a number of years ago WelcomeVisual. FULBERT (talk) 20:31, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Currently, only these three welcome templates are designed specifically to say anything about mentors and mentees. There is just one other mentor-aware template, {{Welcome-retro}}, that was originally just a generic welcoming template, and not designed specifically for welcoming mentees, that is capable of doing so, and also capable of identifying the welcomer as *their* mentor when that is the case. If deemed desirable, mentor-awareness could be spun off from it as a welcome-helper template, and then included in other welcome templates, such as in {{WelcomeVisual}}. If this achieved consensus and was implemented, you wouldn't have to do anything different—when you used {{WelcomeVisual}} with a mentee of yours, it would say so, and if they weren't, it would just skip that part, and look the way it does now. Is that something you would like to see? If so, that should probably be raised at WT:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates. Mathglot (talk) 20:52, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Add missing ping. Let's continue at WT:WT, if you would like to see this as an enhancement to {{WelcomeVisual}}. Mathglot (talk) 23:34, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

@Mathglot Thanks; I developed that template as most of the templates I saw at the time were too text-heavy, and while most of the time I use this almost exclusively with people I mentor, I do not really have a sense if people actually follow the guidance there. FULBERT (talk) 12:00, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Not sure what percentage of mentees ever ask a question, but the number is tiny. Guessing 1 to 2%, but I'd love to see stats on this. Keep in mind that the majority of registered accounts never make an edit after creating their account, but will be assigned a mentor anyway. Those users won't even show up on your dashboard until they make their first edit. (There is usually a several-hour delay until they show up there.) You can view those zero-edit mentees included in this Recent changes list if you want to, but there is rarely any point to it. Mathglot (talk) 20:19, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm actually perfect for answering this question, as I have around 100 mentees at this point. So around 6-8% of mentees actually ask a question, out of a sample of 100.

Given that your username is Mathglot, please ignore my poor statistical skills. End (talk) 23:05, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Last I counted, I had about 720 mentees and had answered 50 questions. So about 7%, which aligns well with your sample. ^{In solidarity,} 🏳️‍🌈JohnLaurens333 ^{(They/them • Talk • Contribs)} 18:28, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

EndTheWikiEditor, lol, no worries; and thanks for that, John. One thing to think about if we are going to collect stats about this, is to carefully define what we mean when we say 'I have X mentees', so that the ratio mentee-questions/mentees is well-defined. There is probably more than one possible definition, and it may not matter which one we pick, but whatever it is, in order to have valid comparisons among users, we have to all use the same definition.

I suspect that the first definition of mentee that comes to mind for most of us, is, 'an editor listed on my dashboard'. But that is somewhat problematic, for two reasons. That definition works fine until you have about 1,000 mentees (40 continuation pages of 25 mentees each), but after that, it appears that it isn't accurate anymore. You will keep getting new users assigned to you after you have 1,000 but afaict, your dashboard will not show more than 40 pages (see pending question at mw:Talk:Growth about this) so your actual number of mentees will keep growing, but it seems the dashboard count will not, so the ratio will become more and more inaccurate as time goes on.

The second reason, is that new users are assigned a mentee as soon as they register for an account, some of them to you, but most of those will never ask you a question and those will never show up on your dashboard until they do. But strictly speaking, they are still your mentee, and that can be proved by using the magic word {{#mentor:TheirUsername}} and showing that it gives your username. Of course, on any given day they might break silence and ask you something, so we can't count them out permanently. So how should we deal with mentees assigned to you who have not yet asked a question and therefore are not (yet) on your dashboard when calculating the ratio?

Note that you can look for your newest mentees using this RecentChanges search. If you pick some of those red linked usernames near the top of the page listed next to the label '(User creation log)', they are all your mentees, and almost all of them have not yet asked a question, and will not be on your dashboard. (To prove this, click any of those user-creation red links, paste {{#mentor:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}} onto the page, and click the 'Show preview' button, and it should display your username.)

Whatever the definition, I think it would actually be useful to have some stats about this, and maybe the Growth team already has some. It would also be useful to watch the percentage over time, as it may give us one useful metric about the usefulness or awareness of mentorship among new users. Mathglot (talk) 19:02, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

You can find out all the mentees assigned to a mentor with this API request:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&gemmmentor=SunloungerFrog&list=growthmentormentee&format=json

(put the name of the mentor as the value for the gemmentor parameter).

For statistics, it's more useful to count the number of entries in the list. That can be done on a command line with, for example curl and jq:

• curl -s "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&gemmmentor=SunloungerFrog&list=growthmentormentee&format=json" | jq '.growthmentormentee.mentees | length'

Or, via the web-based jqp Playground, by putting:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=query&gemmmentor=SunloungerFrog&list=growthmentormentee&format=json in the Fetch box (top), and
• .growthmentormentee.mentees | length in the Transform box (bottom)

While I was writing this, my mentee count went up from 15608 to 15610. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 04:46, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Should mentees have mentorship outlined to them

I, like I suppose many of you, have been receiving many mentor questions that are either asking how to do things they can't/shouldn't, asking how to write about themselves, or asking generic Wikipedia questions best directed to the Teahouse. Of the relatively few mentees I've had who do come with 'I want to start editing how can you help' attitudes, some seem to expect me to have a list of tasks for them. Mentorship here, as I understood it, is to effectively be support staff when new editors are creating or editing articles. That they just start editing same as everyone else and, where they're unsure, ask us to check on their work and maybe discuss with them. I've had, unless I'm forgetting, exactly two such messages. Is there a way to encourage newbies to use the best appropriate method of support (Teahouse, article talkpages for very specific questions, reading Help pages) and asking for mentor support for what we're best at? Kingsif (talk) 20:20, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Grain of salt, because I haven't gotten a question yet. But for the honest "what should I do?" or "how should I do X?" I would say you should try to answer them directly! One of the things that overwhelms newcomers is the "wall of links" help paragraphs that get dumped on them, and the perception that there's a "right" place to read about or ask about everything. People feel shy and self conscious that they're asking a question in the "wrong place", or they feel doubtful of themselves if they can't find the right help article and then ask and then 2 seconds later someone replies WP:THISONEYOUDUMMY. audiodude (talk) 20:47, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

In my first hundred edits, a personal touch helped more than the feeling of an actual support desk. I stepped on some rakes. As one does. My big ask of the mentor was to let me know when I should course correct. Saving people the embarrassment of things they can't/shouldn't do feels like an important part of new user retention. The person I was assigned directed me elsewhere when they didn't know an answer. Wanted to say you're rocking yours in the meantime and keep it up @Audiodude. Cedarshadow (talk) 20:29, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

It was the opposite for me. Teahouse is more of a forum style, with lots of other "silly newbie questions" and numerous hosts who go there just to help and can pick and choose what they feel like answering. It doesn't feel as naggy as dropping a direct TP comment to a specific editor any time I have a basic question. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 02:07, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

I suppose it didn't point out the biggest two issues with what feels like mentees' most common approach. That, first, it gets tiring replying 'no you can't do that' and 'I can't explain every nuance of policy X, here's a link' so often. Second, that they ask all this generic stuff before doing any editing. Like at that stage the do's and don'ts are very much just the rules, I can't really offer any help besides suggesting you make sure you follow them, you'll learn by instinct what works as you start editing. If you've started editing and got pushback and don't know why, sure. If you're in a contentious area and don't want it, I'll suggest you start with technical edits and use the talkpage. But when there's no frame of reference it's like *shrug* generic reply to generic question. Kingsif (talk) 12:12, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

I think that, given the current approach where newly registered editors get a mentor whether they want one or not, it will be counter-productive for them as mentees to have yet another list of ways to use Wikipedia "properly" - i.e. ask questions of type A in a WikiProject, ask questions of type B at the Teahouse, ask questions of type C to your mentor. I suspect that for the vast majority of new editors, that would be yet another set of overlapping rules that will overwhelm them. I favour @Audiodude's approach of just trying to answer them directly. What I think would be worth considering is for questions that are likely to be more involved, if they are asked at the Teahouse, then Teahouse hosts should be encouraged to say, "Actually that's a more complicated question, why don't you ask Bob, your mentor?" and maybe move the question, pinging the mentor too, to the mentee's talkpage. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 14:57, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

My personal feeling is that mentors are best at providing direct, one-on-one, personalized support as a first point of contact. Thus for better or worse, that will including explaining to people what they shouldn't be doing, and helping them understand guidance. If that doesn't match your interests, that's OK; there are lots of other venues where you could help out that would avoid burning out on repetitive answers. isaacl (talk) 16:41, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

I think we're talking across purposes. What you describe as what mentors are best doing is the Teahouse purpose. They give non-robotic explanations to technical FAQs. And what you suggest I look for elsewhere (e.g. giving personalised feedback on article improvements and maybe conflict resolution) is what I assumed being a mentor was. Hence I asked the question. If being a mentor really was designed with duplicating the Teahouse but putting it all on one person, sure, but I doubt it. Who would sign up for that. Kingsif (talk) 16:59, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

I think we have different ideas regrding the purposes of the Teahouse and the newcomer mentorship initiative. I see the Teahouse as being a chill place to ask questions, and not so much a personalized, one-to-one, ongoing relationship between two users. I see some overlap but not duplication. isaacl (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Your mentees have clearly been getting back to you after receiving an answer more, I suppose. I've been saying reality isn't matching intention and what overwhelming majority of my mentees want is Teahouse. Kingsif (talk) 23:09, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Shameless plug: Mentor survey

Did you just arrive here, curious about what's going on? Then please head up to the § Survey section above, and click the big blue button. We want to hear from you!

Or, have you already contributed, but haven't taken the survey yet? Then please do !

For those in any other category, please head to /Mentor reflections#Survey questions and click the button there. Mathglot (talk) 21:22, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

What should mentorship be?

I'm curious about what others think mentorship is and should be. It's been mentioned here by various editors that mentorship is currently an extension of the Teahouse: mentors are only expected to passively wait for questions from mentees; any proactivity is at the mentor's discretion, and the mentor dashboard does little to assist this. Interestingly, there is no prominent link to the Teahouse on the Newcomer Dashboard. There's also overlap with WP:ADOPT.

For thought: if the "ask mentor" button were replaced with "ask Teahouse", what would be lost? Naturally, the interaction would potentially be less personalized, and asking a mentor is maybe less overwhelming than the Teahouse.

I don't think requiring mentors to be much more proactive would be popular(?), and I'm not proposing such. Mathglot has mentioned a concern about the current workload potentially interfering with a mentor's time to do their own editing.

I do think the mentor dashboard could be expanded, at the least. For example, listing "major events" regarding mentees – page creations, AfC submissions and status changes, blocks and AIV/ANI reports, and so on. This would make it easier to keep tabs on mentees and help with proactive mentoring, without requiring such. Recently, a quite active mentee of mine was blocked for socking; I would not have been aware of this if I hadn't been looking through the mentee edit log. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 22:23, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Related to this, Kingsif mentioned above mentors being a sort of support staff for mentees. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 22:29, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Coming back to this, I see some boards (or maybe it was WikiProjects) with what appears to be useful, and I think, automated notices that might include some of the types of things you mentioned. I think there's a bot involved, but if they are doing it, so can we, so we should look into what sort of useful info of that type could be scraped automatically, with maybe full reports on a subpage, and just highlights, or the latest two or three of each type, excerpted here. Worth looking into. Mathglot (talk) 07:11, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

It's common for organizations to pair up newcomers with experienced people to provide them with personalized support and a starting point for their support network. Building relationships is important for collaboration, and I think have a first point of contact offers advantages over a general help venue such as the Teahouse.

Rollout of mentors to all newcomers was gradually phased in due to concerns of workload. Based on the percentage of assigned editors asking questions to their mentors, it was eventually determined that there were enough mentors to warrant making mentorship available to all new editors. However for the health of the initiative, there needs to be an influx of new mentors, both to handle community growth and to replenish the pool as mentors leave. isaacl (talk) 16:53, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

And yet a lot of initial questions, especially those by accounts that never return, are more suited to Teahouse or Help Desk. I think offering the option of where to ask with a brief description of each would be helpful. Something like:

• Questions about how to use Wikipedia? Ask at the Teahouse.
• Searching for general information? Ask at the Help Desk.
• Looking for more personalized help? Ask your mentor (please note that it may take longer to receive an answer through this option).

ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 02:48, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Personally, I think we shouldn't be too prescriptive regarding the types of questions posed to mentors. The assigned users can choose whatever path suits them. I appreciate you feel certain questions are better suited for other venues, but I think it's better to be more flexible. isaacl (talk) 10:36, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

That's why I'm proposing something like the above, where it suggests the most appropriate venues but they can still pick which one they prefer. Most newbies don't understand which options are available and just click whatever button they see first. I'm glad that I somehow managed to stumble across Teahouse or I might not have stuck around. I honestly don't even know how I found it. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 10:50, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

I think we shouldn't be too prescriptive regarding the types of questions posed to mentors. Exactly. Let new editors choose what they are comfortable with, and how and with whom they would like to interact. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Which they can't do if they don't know which options are available. That's all I'm trying to do here - make the options more accessible and clarify the difference between them. Not force one or the other. ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 13:38, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Pretty much every (I would hazard every, but I haven't checked) welcome message, which pretty much every active new editor will get, mentions the Teahouse. Indeed, the {{welcome mentee}} one that I use has it right there. I'd hazard that's where you saw the link to the Teahouse, @ChompyTheGogoat, in the welcome message on your Talk page. It's also just a couple of clicks away in the "Get help with editing" section on Special:Homepage or in "Help" on the left hand sidebar (at least in my skin). So I don't quite see how an extra message or banner will really help new editors. Where would you propose putting such a banner? Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 14:48, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Wherever they currently click to ask mentors for help. I only noticed the Teahouse link buried in that welcome template when I looked at it yesterday - which was dropped on my talk page AFTER I'd already posted to Teahouse asking a question.

In my ideal scenario people would get an introductory walkthrough as soon as they create an account (with the option to opt out), and these various options could maybe be offered at the end along with a link to FAQs, then able to be brought back up at any time. So many first questions are basically copypasta and covering the most common ones through automated tools would make mentoring a lot less tedious and free them up to focus on questions where they can actually be more helpful - especially for the newbies who have more potential to actually become productive contributors. Less "can you help me write an article about myself", more "what are some effective strategies to find reliable sources". ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 04:01, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

FAQ for mentor responses

In their survey response, mentor GoingBatty mentioned that having a "FAQ for mentor responses" might be a good way to make mentorship better. I have thought something similar with respect to the WP:Teahouse and WP:Help desk, possibly augmented by a template that might import or substitute a FAQ answer given some short, but meaningful id token. Maybe something could be devised that would work across all help platforms. It would be interesting to hear from mentors what their five most common mentee questions are. In fact, that would make a good survey question; should we add that? Mathglot (talk) 02:31, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

@Mathglot: The top question I seem to receive is how to start a new article. When they specify, it seems that many times they want to write about themselves or another situation where there's a COI. While I used to post a long paragraph, I now usually just point them to Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 03:33, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

I just became aware of the template {{THYFA}} after reading HouseBlaster's survey response. This seems very similar to what's being discussed here, although it is perhaps broader in scope, as it is basically a template that addresses any new article. I agree that this is one of the most common issues seen in new user questions, and having a FAQ and/or some template solutions might make the job of mentors and other volunteer question helpers easier. To an extent, it seems like pieces of the solution are already out there, and they just need better organization and publicity. Mathglot (talk) 08:37, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

I had a similar experience reading the survey responses and finding out about {{Welcome mentee}}. I always used the Twinkle welcomes, and the list doesn't include this one. -- Reconrabbit (talk) 17:53, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

It was requested, but timed out I guess and got archived. Maybe we could request it again with more 'oomph' if there is additional support for it. I seem to recall at least one other editor who was interested; I'll see if I can find that discussion. Mathglot (talk) 01:51, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Probably because it didn't have a related github issue. Novem Linguae is the only one making changes to the tool responding to edit requests recently from my experience... I've requested it with {{edit interface-protected}}. -- Reconrabbit (talk) 12:09, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Never mind. {{Mentor welcome}} is in the list, I just missed it. -- Reconrabbit (talk) 14:58, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for requesting it again. Yeah, {{Mentor welcome}} is in Twinkle, but it has fewer features and no parameters, and it is older than {{Welcome mentee}}, so it got there first, so maybe that's why. Hopefully your request will go through this time. Found the other discussion about it I was looking for: it was with UtherSRG in his archives. Mathglot (talk) 07:25, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

I rescinded my request, it should have been made on Github anyway. If you know how to make a pull request to ask that it be replaced that might help. -- Reconrabbit (talk) 12:08, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

That's odd; I've seen many requests at WT:Twinkle. Maybe it's a new procedure. If it's mostly just one person updating it, that could explain it—that is a huge burden; no need to make it worse. Thanks for trying. Mathglot (talk) 16:25, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

// The three magic words that can be used in the "syntax" field are:

// - $USERNAME$ - replaced by the welcomer's username, depending on user's preferences

// - $ARTICLE$ - replaced by an article name, if "linkedArticle" is true

// - $HEADER$ - adds a level 2 header (most templates already include this)

// - $EXTRA$ - custom message to be added at the end of the template. not implemented yet.

So, $HEADER$ is irrelevant, $USERNAME$ isn't used in {{subst:welcome mentee}}, and $EXTRA$ just isn't a thing yet. Which means that unless it's expressly {{subst:welcome mentee|$ARTICLE$}} which will let you type a name of an article and put it in there, there is no customization to be had. I will do the PR as is for y'all, but if you end up deciding there is a specific set of parameters that Twinkle should always use I can also set that up. Jerod Lycett (talk) 09:52, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Recruiting and training new mentors

There's a bullet point up there for recruiting and training new mentors, and I think that would be great, as well as lighten the collective load somewhat. Looking for ideas about how to do this. Mathglot (talk) 01:54, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Maybe a related question: I'd be interested to hear from newer editors (under a year?) who have become mentors, especially if you engaged with your mentor when you started out – what inspired you to take up mentoring yourself? —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 05:39, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Claudine, do you mean editors who have newly created an account within the last year and have become a mentor, or editors of any seniority who have become mentors only within the last year? Based on /Survey responses so far, mentors in the second group comprise six mentors (including me). But I'm guessing you meant the first group; that includes at least PeriodicEditor and Dafootballguy, but very possibly others as well who have not yet weighed in.

As for me, I started editing in 2006, but mentorship only seven months ago. I think I joined because I enjoy helping new users, and I started to notice mentee questions on the Talk pages of mentors whose pages I visited for some other reason. As I was already a Teahouse host, I thought that this would be another avenue to help new users, and I was curious to investigate and try it out. Mathglot (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, both interpretations of my question could be helpful! I think I'm similar to you in that I've been around for a while but only started mentoring relatively recently after some Teahouse experience. But I'm also interested in what a mentee -> mentor pipeline might look like, if having a mentor has been rewarding/motivated new editors to take up mentoring themselves. —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 03:20, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

I decided to become a mentor after i was informed about it by another user about 5 months ago. PeriodicEditor (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

I’ve only become an editor in the past year, and I think what drove me to become part of the program was just the idea that I had been a newcomer really not that long ago, and there was this very accessible way I could help out newcomers like the one I was a couple of years ago. All in all it’s been pretty fun (and informative)! Cheers, 𝔰𝔥𝔞𝔡𝔢𝔰𝔱𝔞𝔯 ^{(𝔱𝔞𝔩𝔨)} (any/all) In solidarity. 19:56, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

I started editing regularly in January this year (having edited sporadically since Sep 2025), and, much like Shadestar, wanted to help new users (I usually like helping people outside of Wikipedia too), and felt I had gained enough experience with policies and guidelines to help others with troubles they had. {{GearsDatapacks|talk|contribs|in solidarity}} 21:46, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Mentorship statistics

For fun, I collected some statistics about mentors and mentees. I'm not an expert with Quarry, so take the results with a grain of salt. Also, I don't know if Quarry has a way to query mentees directly, so I approximated by treating "mentee" as being any user who has asked a question using the newcomer interface and is not part of a privileged group (admin, checkuser, WMF, patroller, and so on). If anyone is more experienced with Quarry, I would appreciate tips and suggestions for future reference.

As of 7 July 2026 (UTC):

• There are approximately 40595 mentees: [1]
  • 776 are extended confirmed (1.9%). [2]
  • 22473 registered in or after 2025 (55.4%). [3]
  • 7186 registered in 2026 (17.7%). [4]
  • 3527 have received a block (8.7%). [5]
• There are 308 mentors: WP:MENTORLIST
  • 227 are active (not marked as "away").
  • 218 autoaccept new mentees.
  • 90 manually select mentees.
• This means there are 132 mentees to every mentor. This is an average; some mentors take on many more mentees than others.

February 2025 is when enwiki began to autoassign new users to mentors. This explains the large percentage of registered newcomers in 2025; remember, I'm measuring mentees as non-privileged users who used the newcomer interface to ask their mentor a question.

Mentee edit counts: [6]

There is some wackiness with apparent duplicates that can inflate the numbers (which I filter out, line 14). Don't take the exact numbers too seriously ; the overall trend should be accurate. Maybe someone can do a better job here.

Old edit stats – blocked users not excluded

Old table that does not account for blocked users. [7]

Edit count	# of mentees	% of mentees
1+	39821	98%
2+	28744	71%
3+	23708	58%
5+	18355	45%
10+	12508	31%
25+	6639	16%
50+	3626	9%
75+	2465	6%
100+	1845	5%

Updated table (04:26, 8 July 2026 (UTC)) to exclude blocked users: [8]

Edit count	# of mentees	% of mentees
1+	36429	90%
2+	25532	63%
3+	20776	51%
5+	15863	39%
10+	10618	26%
25+	5549	14%
50+	2962	7%
75+	1981	5%
100+	1472	4%

Notice the large drop in users at 3+ edits. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 01:23, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

this is an interesting and informative statistic, it shows the process via which '1 day editors' stay behind and real/potential editors keep going...which is just 5% of those that started, WOW --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 02:00, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

We have an LTA who makes userspace edits to get up to extended-confirmed so they can vandalize extended-protected articles. I expect that LTA accounts for a not-insignificant number of those 5%. If you can run it to filter out locked and blocked accounts, you'll have a much better idea of the actual numbers. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 03:52, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

I knew I was forgetting something! I'll update the table. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 04:17, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the stats gathering, @Kodning, which is very interesting. It's not possible to query mentees directly through Quarry, because the relevant table growthexperiments_mentor_mentee isn't in the database replicas used by Quarry.

However, there are weekly dumps of that table available at https://dumps.wikimedia.org/other/growthmentorship/. I did a bit of rough grepping and counting on the latest dump for enwiki, and it seems that, out of c. 53,627,000 total users, some 5,893,863 have mentors. And of those with mentors, 382,150 are "active" (I don't know how this is determined). Interestingly, the number of unique mentors in the dump is 396, which is rather more than the (218+90)=308 listed at Special:ManageMentors (see below...). Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 09:52, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

T392280 remains open, so consistency in the mentor_mentee data over time would be impacted when a user is blocked. AllyD (talk) 12:07, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the dump link! I'll have to go through it when I get the time. Interesting find about the discrepancy in mentor count. Kodning 🌸 (talk) 20:28, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Kodning, good stuff, thanks for this! A few things occur to me:

• this should not be just some discussion that gets archived so the data gets hard to find; let's at least create a subpage for the statistics; maybe we can keep the discussions about the stats here, and the data on the subpage for now (but see #3)
• it would be great to run this periodically (maybe 1x/month, so it's not too big a burden; maybe eventually a bot)
• once we have maybe three runs, let's plug the data into Commons in .tab files, and then we can use the Chart Extension via Template:Chart to create time-series line graphs, which could reveal trends and other interesting stuff (or legacy charting methods) which would be really useful here.

Having useful and comparable time-series data depends on running exactly the same query every time. There are a couple of SQL/Quarry experts that hang out at WP:Request a query (Certes, and Cryptic; maybe others); as you said you were a bit unsure about it, do you think you could start a discussion over at WP:RAQ, linking your Quarry query/-ies (and this discussion), and asking them to give it/them a once-over to see if they can tidy them up into something robust enough for a monthly run without expecting the query to be fragile and have to change later? Thanks in advance! Mathglot (talk) 04:46, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:VPI § Retention of editors who've been caught using LLMs

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:VPI § Retention of editors who've been caught using LLMs. —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 03:25, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Feedback and ideas needed for mentorship logo

Have a critical or creative eye? Your ideas and opinions would be appreciated at WT:Mentorship noticeboard#Feedback requested – logo. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:41, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Randomly assigned experienced users

Hi, I'm not sure if anyone else has ran into this issue, but I seem to sometimes randomly get assigned experienced editors who do not need, and did not seem to sign up for mentorship. For example, I'm currently a mentor for Rodw (brought up on my talk page; log entry), and I recall at one point being a mentor for Epicgenius (log entry). ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 00:46, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

@ARandomName123, as far as I'm aware, everyone has a mentor. For experienced users who started before mentorship became a thing, the only time they notice is when their mentor leaves mentorship, which causes them to be reassigned to another active mentor. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 04:01, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Actually, it's not automatic for everyone. All users who registered since February 2025 at en-wiki automatically get a mentor, but legacy users who were around before that do not (except a few, during roll-out). More senior users may opt in and then they will be randomly assigned a mentor. Otherwise, they don't have one. To find out if someone has a mentor and who it is, use the #mentor magic word; see this FAQ question. Mathglot (talk) 08:29, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

@Mathglot, are you sure? I don't know that I ever opted in, for example, and WT:GTF and the teahouse have fielded more than a few confused veterans wondering what the heck is going on when their mentor changed. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 11:07, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Asilvering, I thought I was sure, but increasingly there are some issues where what I am seeing and what I am hearing (perhaps, misinterpreting?) from the Growth team are not in sync, and require resolution. There are various examples of this at mw:Talk:Growth. For a fresh example, see phab:T307488#12110334. Mathglot (talk) 18:38, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

I think that everyone (like everyone) was assigned a mentor when the feature was invented. The thing that was or wasn't enabled was the Mentorship module. And for long-standing users, the module was (obviously) not enabled, so they had no idea that they had been assigned a mentor.

Then, when mentors retired, all their mentees, witting or no, were reassigned to active mentors, which spawned a log message and notification. Unwitting mentees were thus confused: see the Rodw / ARandomName123 case above. What I don't know is how existing long-standing users were apportioned to mentors when the feature was invented. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 11:21, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

That said, I am not sure what to make of this list of veterans plus some less veterans at the bottom (the link at the end of each line is to the GrowthExperiments log), where clearly some veterans don't have a mentor! Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 12:00, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Glancing at your list, I see some of us un-mentored old hands have very old accounts (cross-referenced with my list of potential members of the 25-year society), i.e. accounts that have seen a few changes in the wiki software and databases. Having said that, I don't know why Jimbo needs a mentor but I trust LuniZunie is up to the task! —ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · email) 23:56, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

To be honest, I was 100% sure it would not work. It did work; oops!

Side note, I was worried this would allow me to see when Jimbo was online (which seems like a pretty bad oversight), but luckily, it did not. He doesn't even show up in my mentor list on the dashboard. – LuniZunie_(talk) 00:08, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

LuniZunie, it takes a few hours for the dashboard to catch up. Can you check back tomorrow, and if he is still not listed, then I will file a bug. (But this whole test makes me wonder if we have a new kind of possible dispute type to watch out for, as mentors vie for the honor of being Jimbo's mentor: "It's me!" "No, it's not, it's me!" "Shove off, I claimed him first!" I don't have the guideline written for it, but I've got the shortcut and warning template names: WP:CLAIMWAR and {{uw-claimwar}}. What do you think?) Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:58, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

I think it's pretty obvious not to do this, and could be seen as WP:WHEELWARing. Given I've been his mentor for months, he's not going to randomly show up. I'm pretty sure it's meant to be like this, at a certain point of editing (whether its edit count or account age), accounts just don't appear. – LuniZunie_(talk) 02:07, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Don't think an essay is needed per WP:BEANS. It's pretty obviously disruptive and I was actually warned when I claimed Jimbo. – LuniZunie_(talk) 02:08, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

LuniZunie, the red links in my comment were a joke. Sorry I kept too straight of a face. Don't forget, though, when someone tries to take him away from you, they, of course, would be a WP:CLAIMJUMPER. Mathglot (talk) 02:21, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Oops!! Well, people better not take him from me.... – LuniZunie_(talk) 02:45, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Growth Team features/Archive 4 § Missing mentor? has some background on all this. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:24, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Regarding "how existing long-standing users were apportioned to mentors when the feature was invented", I don't think that was the case, or the #mentor magic word would be non-empty for all users (at least, all users who did not opt out), and that appears not to be the case. However, I am increasingly unsure about making statements about how it works or is supposed to work, as things I was previously certain about, I am now less sure of (e.g., T307488). The question about who gets a mentor and when ought to be axiomatic, but it appears it isn't. Mathglot (talk) 18:54, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

It is quite opaque, isn't it? I was basing my statement on this comment, but I agree that the large number of nulls doesn't make sense. I am curious about how veteran users Dreamyshade and The Anome have mentors yet there is nothing in the logs. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 19:01, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

In that thread, Trizek described how everyone was assigned a mentor but not everyone was shown their mentor at that time, as it was being initially rolled out. (This matches an earlier statement from Martin Urbanec.) isaacl (talk) 02:35, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

I suppose my question is, does "everyone" mean "all users who registered after mentorship was enabled on English Wikipedia" or "all users, including those who had registered before mentorship was enabled"? I now think the former, with veteran editors who happen to have mentors explained by their opting in to be a mentee once it was available. @Isaacl, I see that your mentor is MPGuy2824 - did you opt in to being mentored? I see that you're a long-standing editor. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 05:58, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't recall. I'm guessing I did, or else I wouldn't see the mentorship module on my homepage. isaacl (talk) 06:31, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for this blast from the past, @SunloungerFrog. I'm delighted to find that my original mentor, a certain CoconutOctopus, ended up being someone I would nominate for adminship three and a half years later. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 20:22, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

The circle is now complete. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 06:03, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

They absolutely do NOT get reassigned when mentors retire. My mentor retired ages ago, and even posted a thread in the Village Pump back in April asking why they were still getting mentee questions. I still have them listed as my mentor to this day. ExtantRotations (talk) 19:17, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Mentees should get reassigned when mentors resign, and that happens in most cases (as can be seen in the relevant logs). But there have been problems doing the de- and re-registration in some cases, for example if the retiring mentor has a huge number of mentees. Devs are still working on fixing it phab:T330071. Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 19:48, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

At special:managementors, admins can manually remove a mentor who is inactive (away), or who doesn't act as a mentor. And starting this Thursday, an option to retire inactive mentors automatically will be provided. Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 18:42, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF), that's true, but that won't help in this case. ExtantRotations' mentor is not a mentor, so I cannot remove them. Even though they've already been removed, some of their mentees still have them as a mentor. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 22:49, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Apologies but it is not entirely clear to me; will this update work on mentors who have retired but are still active editors? ExtantRotations (talk) 22:48, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF) Just confirming that I am still assigned to a retired mentor. I cannot use the option you linked because I am not an administrator. ExtantRotations (talk) 13:54, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@ExtantRotations, if you go to Special:Homepage, in the Your mentor section do you have the option to Opt out of mentorship anywhere? Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 15:41, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

@SunloungerFrog Tested this and it does work; I was able to opt out and back in which reassigned me to a different person. Thank you! Hopefully this bug doesn’t affect too many other people ExtantRotations (talk) 15:52, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

ARandomName123, Rodw is still your mentee, as can be seen from using the magic word {{#mentor:Rodw}} ⟶ ARandomName123. On the other hand, {{#mentor:Epicgenius}} ⟶ (empty string), so he has no mentor currently. As Rodw is a senior Wikipedian who has been around since well before the 2025 launch of automatic mentor assignment, and you didn't claim him, they must have opted in at some point, and in random fashion, they were assigned to you. (Note: This reply was written right after your OP, then stagnated unsaved in a browser tab; sorry! Some of this may now be out of date or wrong, given subsequent comments made above, but it reflected my thoughts at the time.) Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 21:27, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

@ARandomName123 I noticed at one point that I was the mentor of User:JSutherland (WMF), so I said hello:[9] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:22, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

The disagreement or uncertainty in this thread reflects, imho, a lack of clarity on the part of WMF in explaining how certain aspects of mentorship are supposed to work (or do work, which is sometimes different). This is being discussed in various venues, both at Wikipedia Talk pages (not only here at en-wiki, but also at fr-wiki (here), es-wiki (here), pt-wiki (here), and others), mediawiki Talk pages (notably, mw:Talk:Growth), and various Phab tickets. Regarding the latter, phab:T431233, for example, has devolved almost entirely into one of documentation. In some cases, it seems like special procedures that were carried out during initial rollout, and in other cases, various bugs that were fixed or enhancements made while deploying it to one wiki after another (now fifteen), may have left the actual configuration of mentors and mentees different than planned, or in a kind of transitional state on the way to stasis. This may have left the doc defining something a bit different from reality.

At least, that's my interpretation. This is pretty normal for a major roll-out, so nothing shocking there. But that can leave a lot of special cases which may not align perfectly with a platonic ideal of what Mentorship should look like, had it sprung fully formed from the head of Zeus at the outset. That said, all of these issues need to be carefully documented, as the worst outcome is having an indeterminate situation, where we don't know what it actually does, nor what it is supposed to do. I think that with WMF's help, we can help nail down these open issues, and get them documented. In the case of en-wiki, I see that documentation happening mainly at WP:Mentorship (which should perhaps be renamed, WP:Mentorship FAQ) with an assist, perhaps, from editors here. Currently, there are gaps there (e.g., no explanation of how to opt in), and I suspect that some of the answers are wrong, or at least, need refinement. Mathglot (talk) 20:10, 11 July 2026 (UTC) Full disclosure regarding 'wrong' answers: I wrote most of WP:Mentorship, taking much of the early versions from mw:Growth/FAQ, and then refining and expanding as I was able to glean more information from Q&A at Talk:Growth, phab tickets, or elsewhere. Wrong answers at WP:Mentorship may be my own gaps in knowledge or misunderstanding. Mathglot (talk) 21:54, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

@Trizek (WMF), can you fill us in on any of this confusion? In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 21:00, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

My read is that the core of the confusion is that Mentorship is available at all Wikipedias but needs to be activated so that newcomers can benefit from it. Availability and activation are two very different things. The deployment page, outside of the table, says: The following features are deployed on all Wikipedias. (...) Mentorship (Mentor dashboard) – Community activated where a list of mentors has been created.

Thanks to Mathglot's feedback, we improve our documentation's blindspots progressively. We also discovered some things that aren't working as they should at English Wikipedia, such as the impossibility to opt-in for some users.

I already reviewed and sometimes edited WP:Mentorship and I can do it again if you need, with pleasure. However, I can't do this before mid-August, when Wikimania and my vacation time are both over. Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 18:32, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Is there a way to override the newcomer task limits?

Title. See this question from one of my mentees, who wants to do more "add a link" suggested edits. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 19:24, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. But one can turn on "suggestion mode", which is like "add a link" but better. It's in beta features: [10]. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 20:26, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

The user can't change this. Some changes can be made into the Community Configuration, like the maximum number of "Add a link" suggested tasks a newcomer can complete daily, but it will impact all users. Also, a config exists to stop suggesting Add a link after after a certain number of edits, which is currently set to the maximum, 150 total edits; this can be changed to "not" making this task available to all edit counts. Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 18:37, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Adding an archive on my talkpage for mentee questions

I archive my talkpage messages by time period (monthly). I've been thinking about segregating mentee questions/my answers in a talkpage archive specifically for mentee questions/my answers. Is anybody else doing this? -- Rosiestep (talk) 14:44, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Sounds like work. I just let the bot handle mine. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 15:23, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

its not a bad idea 'segregating mentee questions/my answers' as they take up SPACE on the page--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:36, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Rosiestep, that has occurred to me as well. However, I would much prefer having my mentee questions appear on *their* Talk page (with a ping to me), which completely obviates the archiving question, and would unclutter my Talk page as well. If you like that idea (or just have comments about it) please add your thoughts to § Where would you prefer to view and answer your mentee questions? above. Add @Asilvering and Ozzie10aaaa:. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 18:05, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

appear on *their* Talk page (with a ping to me), even better idea...IMO--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:37, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

A possible drawback is that then newcomers will want to talk to someone else, they will post at their talk page as usual. If they fail to ping, no one will answer. Trizek_(WMF) (talk) 18:39, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

These are good observations, which I'll port over to that discussion, if there is no objection. Mathglot (talk) 19:01, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Rate my answer

I was thinking of adding a line at the end of my mentor reply asking the mentee to "rate my answer" in order to get feedback on how I'm doing. Does anyone do this already? Or have you considered doing it? Pros? Cons? What kind of scale might be good to use?

Alternatively, someone could create a script/tool/whatever so that this would happen automatically (give the mentee an option to rate the answer that the mentor gave them)? -- Rosiestep (talk) 09:03, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Genuine question: do you not get feedback from your mentees in the form of responses to you answers? I do pretty much all the time, for the mentees who are actually here trying to accomplish something wikipedia-related and have gotten stuck. At least to my recollection, I don't tend to get much of a response from conversations like "Hi mentor! thanks for being here!" "No prob, ask me questions if you run into trouble!", but I don't think feedback would be useful to give or receive in that case. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 18:57, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

I like it. (It could be the kernel of something much bigger—a PageRank-like calculation of editor quality based on human assessments of edit quality, weighted by the current global edit-quality rating of each editor—but I digress). Probably some sort of simple Likert scale would do, but before we get to that, are you envisioning a single-question poll, or something broader, with several questions?

Also, I think mentees are capable of rating a lot of things, but not everything related to your answer. A mentee can assess clarity, friendliness, timeliness, effort, etc., but I don't think a mentee could confidently assess accuracy, completeness, or linkage to appropriate policy and guideline pages, or they wouldn't need a mentor in the first place. However, other mentors could assess the latter (so could any experienced editor), so maybe addressing different survey questions to different groups and combining them would give a fuller picture of mentor answer quality.

I also worry a bit about asking a mentee too vague a question, such as "How well did you like your mentor's answer?". If you get a bunch of questions from mentees wanting to publish their uncited hagiography promoting their garage band along with where to purchase tickets to their next gig and you respond completely and accurately, they are not going to like your answer. Mathglot (talk) 01:26, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

What about just a simple "Did this response solve your question", with links to other spaces like Teahouse if they say no? ChompyTheGogoat (talk) 02:12, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

Topic-matching

Glad to see this noticeboard pop up! I served as a mentor for a while, but I got discouraged and opted out after too many instances where I answered questions from people who then turned out to be sockpuppets, undisclosed paid editors, or otherwise trying to game the system... But now I'm attempting to revive a WikiProject, and I'm interested in figuring out systematic ways to find new editors who are interested in my WikiProject topic area, so that I and other members of the WikiProject can reach out to them. I'd be up for being a mentor again if I could be matched with mentees based on a mutual interest.

For example, if the topic filter in the newcomer tasks experience could offer the option to type in a topic of choice, that could be automatically matched with categories, WikiProjects, etc., and mentors could assign themselves to categories and WikiProjects. I'm excited about topic-matching because I tried adding a query option to the task-matching tool at https://projo.toolforge.org/, and it was easier than I expected to automatically match most queries to reasonably relevant categories, which then allows that user to get a list of potentially interesting articles that need work. Dreamyshade (talk) 01:57, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

This is a very interesting idea! I'll cross-post it to WT:GTF. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 02:08, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

As far as matching up a user's interests in communicating with them, so far my only experience with that via a tool is with template {{welcome mentee}}, which I try to supply with the |project= parameter, based on their edits. As far as what Projo does, I wonder how similar that is to SuggestBot. Mathglot (talk) 09:46, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for this suggestion, @Dreamyshade (and for cross-posting, @Asilvering)! I'll pass it on to the team. Cheers, Sdkb‑WMF ^talk 22:45, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

@Dreamyshade Thanks for sharing this idea! And thank you for your time as a mentor. I'm sorry your experience ended that way; answering questions in good faith only to find out the person was a sockpuppet or undisclosed paid editor is discouraging, and it's understandable that you opted out. Unfortunately I think this is a fairly common circumstance, and it makes Mentorship feel frustrating.

I agree Mentorship would be a lot more meaningful if we could connect editors with similar interests. The Growth team isn't immediately focusing on Mentorship improvements, but I hope we'll have space for some major improvements to Mentorship in 2027. In the meantime, I'll keep this idea in mind as we work on changes to the Homepage (related project: Home), because it's all interrelated: once we have a clearer understanding of a newcomer's interests, rather than just overly broad topic categories, I think we could provide better matching based on mutual interests, like you suggest. - KStoller-WMF (talk) 17:34, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

What's the point?

I've had a few basic questions come in, but honestly it feels like WP:TEA could answer these questions just as easily. I am wondering then, what's the point of mentorship on en.wiki if we could just as easily redirect the questions there. I am wondering what we could do beyond answering basic questions. One thing that came across is basically fold in WP:RCP for our mentees. I'm wondering what other things we could do. Jerod Lycett (talk) 03:04, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Different approaches work for different editors. I think some editors feel more comfortable asking questions to a designated first point of contact, versus posting on a general help venue. isaacl (talk) 03:16, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

concur, a one on one approach is very different from the mentee POV(they feel more guided , more welcomed)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:16, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Afaict, occasional satisfaction. I get that at the Teahouse and Helpdesk too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:10, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

I've wondered about this myself. I'm concerned that the mentorship program is not actually beneficial, on the whole, to mentees or to mentors. Mentees can get help faster at the Teahouse, and if someone answers incorrectly it is relatively likely to be corrected. Not so on a mentor's talk page. In solidarity, asilvering (talk) 23:50, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi. I'm an editor who is new enough to be kind of in the focus of the mentor program, I found this noticeboard by clicking through random blue links while I was bored, and I agree with this. What I have found is that it is almost always better to just ask someone who is experienced in the thing I am editing about rather than go to my mentor. That person would have more context, and be able to give me a better answer. My mentor is a software developer, but I edit about geopolitics and random towns with 3 people in Kentucky. If I had a question like "why is the city class the first thing said in the lead of every town in this state" I would go ask other Kentuckian editors, not my mentor. And for general questions like "how do I make an article" the teahouse seems to be just fine for giving answers. I hope this helps. Map Enjoyer (talk) 01:22, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

I've brought this to idea labs: Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab)#What should Mentorship be? Jerod Lycett (talk) 06:12, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Have you seen any hoax drafts about fictional U.S. presidential elections?

By coincidence (perhaps), two of my mentees have created hoax articles in their respective sandboxes about fictional presidential elections won by real U.S. politicians in the last couple of days. One mentee added a hoax about Ted Cruz, winner of the 2016 and 2020 elections, and the other was about J.D. Vance, winner in 2028. [sic] (Not directly linked here, because the first was speedily deleted under WP:G3, and the other will be deleted very shortly; but you can find details at this sockpuppet investigation.)

It seemed rather too much of a coincidence to have two such hoaxes in just a few days, and I wondered if something is going on, like some spam campaign or something. Anyway, please be vigilant and keep your eyes peeled for hoax articles in your mentees' sandboxes. If you notice anything similar, please mention it here and if it looks like the pattern mentioned at the SPI, please mention it there as well. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:51, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I found a third one here. Haven't tagged this one for deletion, so you can see what it looks like. According to a commment at SPI, this is very likely not a socking issue, but the influence of Reddit, which even comes with instructions on how to use a Wikipedia sandbox to write these 'alternative histories'. The sandboxes we are finding appear likely to be redditors ignoring the rules and saving their sandbox instead of abandoning it after taking a screenshot. Note that by their own rules, their efforts are supposed to be rather elaborate and look like a real article. I have found other efforts like this one that are just stubs, so either a user who maybe read their rules and are too lazy to follow them, or maybe even someone who independently just decided to make themselves president in their sandbox.

The SPI will no doubt be closed, but I'm wondering if we should try to track these, or just continue to tag/delete on sight. (I'm trying to refine a Cirrus search to find more of these. This one returns almost all false positives, but it did identify a couple of them. It's probably not easy to find them, because they can be about any historical event, not just elections, although that is apparently a commmon case.) Adding Tamzin, who is familiar with this situation. Mathglot (talk) 17:01, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

If we do follow this up, maybe at WP:VPM? It turns out that it was likely just coincidence that two such cases turned up among my mentees almost at the same time, so it's probably not really a mentorship issue (although it may well be mentors that notice it more than average). Mathglot (talk) 17:07, 27 July 2026 (UTC)