Recent Discussions
I don't want 100 different SharePoint sites. How to create private teams w/o a new site?
Guys. WTF. I've inherited a problem where a company of 50 people has 100 sharepoint sites - because users created different Teams for different projects, and Microsoft makes it incredibly opaque what this actually means. Now we have 100 SharePoint sites, many of which are unused, but all of which appear in the list of sites in 365AC. The structure we WANT is 1 Sharepoint site for our 1 org, but multiple locations within that site, and multiple groups for multiple projects. I THOUGHT what could work was converting the excess Teams into Private Channels. But I have now learned that private channels ALSO create SharePoint sites, because _______. Most confusingly, all of these sharepoint 'sites' DO exist within our main SharePoint website - they're just pages (but not 'pages') pretending to be a fresh sharepoint website. This confuses the **** out of people, the way they've redefined what a 'site' is, what a 'team' is, etc. This is genuinely hot garbage, and it's suddenly clear to me why people always push back on using SharePoint over OneDrive. Recommendations for... not having this disaster? Making a structure that is intuitive and doesn't redefine what a site and page are, and allows you to have private locations for management or projects, but DOESN'T create a 'site' within the main 'site', with it's OWN 'documents', and it's own 'Notebook' (which isn't a document) and it's own 'Conversations' (which are NOT conversations), and it's own 'pages'? I don't work with dumb people - these are very technical people. But even our main SharePoint guy is mystified by these interactions. Does it make more sense in another language? If anyone at Microsoft is reading - the english term 'site', comes from the word 'website', which generally refers to a distinct web service with a distinct domain name. These contained different webPAGES.. When websites started existing off a shared domain name, like company1.sharepoint.com and company2.sharepoint.com - this confused people, but they put up with it, because it was relatively easy to explain the tech behind this - having websites under a single site, that wasn't too hard to understand. But what SharePoint seems to do, is extend this practice into absolute hysteria, where a particular webPAGE of a webSITE is ALSO a site, but also is a TEAM, or COULD be a CHANNEL. OR it could be a PAGE - WHO knows? If it's a TEAM, that TEAM could have CONVERSATIONS, which aren't actually Team Conversations - they're EMAILS. But this is fine, because all CONVERSATIONS of a TEAM done in TEAMS are actually stored as EMAILS so really those, CONVERSATIONS should be CONVERSATIONS... So why aren't these conversations in Teams between a Team that are stored as Emails not showing in the Conversations which show emails within that Team? aefggaddadsfasd
Webpart "See All" ASPX link Not displaying List of News for Read-Only Users
We have an extremely simple Sharepoint site in M365 Sharepoint that we created a very simple News webpart, list form, 1 item, from news posted to this site only. The idea being people come and see the most recent news post, they click "See All" to view more if they desire. Visitors can see this link and go and view the article, along with any other news article posted to this site if they have the direct link, but only people with Edit or higher access are able to click the "See All" link and get a list of more news articles. People with regular Visitor/Read access see the title of the list but the page is otherwise empty like it's failing to return query results. We've chopped up the URL since it's aspx and have at least figured out the point of failure is in the : &serverRelativeUrl part of the link. If they chop off link before that variable, they can get an (albeit unformatted) list of the news articles. I am absolutely not a Sharepoint guru. We've inspected the permissions on the Site Library, we've reindexed the site, we've even experimented with different usergroups, nothing seems to change this behavior. Can anyone explain what's happening here and how to fix it or is this just busted behavior in Sharepoint Webpart command link?
Ability to schedule email of SharePoint post
We've started using SharePoint to create and send mass emails in our organization, but its a huge pain that I can't schedule them ahead of time to send at a specific time/date. Could you work on creating a way to schedule not just the publishing of a SharePoint news post, but when it is shared via email? That would be amazing.Sending Approvals
We're currently using the built-in approval workflow tool to send invoices off for approval and request coding in the comments box, but is there any way I can do this through the central purchase ledger email rather than having it go via individuals? I know it runs in a roundabout way through Teams so I suspect not, but have been asked to find out.Bulk cleanup of content / documents in SharePoint
Hi, We currently have a few SharePoint sites that have old content / documents in document libraries. These are outdated and some are more than 5 years old. To delete these, we currently need to go to each document library / page (and its subfolders), sort by the date created / modified and then manually delete, which would take some time. Is there a way to bulk delete older content/ documents based on date, either within SharePoint admin or a third party program? (e.g. maybe run a query on a site to list any older content and then check off which page / document to delete). Jason
pnp-modern-search does not work in the local SharePoint workbench
Version used 4.9.0 (SPFx 1.15.0) Describe the bug The solution works correctly when deployed using the .sppkg package in SharePoint Online, but it does not work in the local SharePoint workbench. There are two related issues: When running gulp serve, the build/runtime reports an error related to microsoft/sp-webpart-workbench/lib/api/, suggesting a failure in loading or resolving the local workbench API module. When adding the web part to the local workbench page, the web part fails to render with the following error: Error: Cannot find module './15.js' The second error appears to be related to a missing or incorrectly resolved chunk/module during bundle loading. The issue only occurs in the local workbench. The deployed .sppkg solution in SharePoint Online works correctly. Node.js version: 16.8.0 (compatible with SPFx 1.15.0). Dependencies installed via npm install without errors. To Reproduce Clone the repository Run npm install Run gulp serve Open the local SharePoint workbench Add the web part to the page Observe: Error during gulp serve related to microsoft/sp-webpart-workbench/lib/api/ Web part fails to load with Cannot find module './15.js' Expected behavior The web part should load and render correctly in the local workbench without module resolution errors. Desktop : Browser: Chrome Node.js: 16.8.0 SPFx: 1.15.0
SharePoint News Email “Content too large” issue – size limit clarification
Hi, We are currently trying to send a SharePoint News post via email and encountering the following error: “The contents of this page are too big to send in email.” We performed testing to understand the limitation and observed the following: Full newsletter (~5.29 MB) → ❌ Error Pages 1–12 (~3.11 MB) → ❌ Error Pages 1–11 (~2.80 MB) → ✅ Works Slight increase (~2.90 MB) → ❌ Error again ✅ Based on testing: Practical threshold seems around ~2.7–2.8 MB Above this, email rendering fails ❓ Questions: Is there a documented maximum size limit for SharePoint News email content? Is the limit based on: Total content size after rendering? Image count/size? Can this limit be configured or increased? What are the recommended best practices for image-heavy newsletters? ✅ Current understanding: It appears that the limitation is due to HTML email rendering size rather than just file size Any clarification or official guidance would be appreciated. Thanks.
Clarification on SharePoint Macro Consent Flow and Permissions
Hi Team, We have a customer using SharePoint in a secure environment. While configuring the Prolaborate SharePoint Macro on their site, a consent popup is displayed during the approval process. Previously, our macro implementation used the Admin Consent flow. Based on the customer’s security and approval requirements, we have modified the consent to use the User Consent flow instead. The customer has requested additional clarification regarding the consent process. Specifically, they would like to understand: The exact API calls triggered for these two consents View your basic profile Maintain access to data you have given it access to The permissions being requested from Microsoft Graph or SharePoint Whether the application requests any tenant-wide or high-privilege permissions Whether minimal permissions such as Sites.Selected can be used instead of broader scopes Current concern: The customer feels the current permission request is too broad for approval within their secure environment (Banking customer). Reason: Their internal approval process requires clear visibility into the exact API and permission scopes being requested, as different permissions are reviewed and approved by different internal teams (for example, User.Read is managed by the Identity team). From our implementation side, we are using only custom APIs and are not directly calling Microsoft Graph APIs. This information will help us provide a clear response to the customer and support their internal approval process.
Unable to add clickable link to Post Message in chat or channel
I'm trying to post to a channel when a Sharepoint list item is created. In the past, I had to manually enter the link in the html view and as long as I did not click back to the regular view the link would save and work correctly. Now, no matter what I do, as soon as I save the flow the dynamic link placeholder is converted to ']} Before saving after saving This is with the new designer, but I have also tried the classic designer.
SharePoint Video Playback Quality Defaults to 480p – Horrendous
I manage multimedia training for over 600 locations and two distribution centers, supporting nearly 10,000 team members. We have made a significant investment in producing high-quality training content through professional equipment, structured scripting, and dedicated production and editing time. However, once videos are uploaded to SharePoint, the default playback quality often degrades the experience to what appears to be approximately 480p. As a result, professionally produced content can look noticeably poor on initial playback. Many of our store-level team members are not in a position to manually adjust playback settings, so the default experience matters. The source files are high resolution, but the default playback does not reflect that quality. This also creates issues when leadership reviews training content, because the playback quality can reflect poorly on the production even though the original video is clear. We moved away from third-party hosting due to ad exposure during onboarding and the need for a controlled internal platform. We are intentionally using SharePoint and Stream as part of our existing Microsoft 365 ecosystem for scalability, governance, and centralized access. Introducing additional paid hosting platforms or external streaming solutions is not a direction we are pursuing. From an enterprise training standpoint, defaulting to low-resolution playback undermines engagement and credibility. Are there plans to allow administrators to define a default playback resolution for SharePoint or Stream videos? Are there recommended encoding settings that influence the initial playback quality more reliably? Are there roadmap updates around improving adaptive streaming behavior or default resolution selection? Any guidance or insight would be appreciated.News Web Part Not Returning Items When Using Managed Property Filter Across Multiple Sites
We are experiencing an issue with SharePoint Online News web parts that are configured to filter items using a managed property, specifically mapped to a RefinableString (RefinableString01) linked to our custom metadata column “Conteúdo Informativo”. Despite the proper mapping and reindexing of the relevant sites, the web part fails to return any items when the number of source sites exceeds 14. Details: The web part is configured to pull news items from a specific set of sites. When configured with up to 14 sites, the web part works correctly, displaying all news items that match the filter (RefinableString01:"Notícia:Regional:Aprovada"). When a 15th site is added to the web part source, the web part stops displaying any items, although the underlying search query returns results correctly when tested via KQL in the search API (_api/search/postquery). All sites involved have been reindexed, and the managed property (owstaxIdConteúdox0020Informativo) has been mapped to RefinableString01 as recommended. Using the web part configured with the option “All sites in this hub” works correctly and returns all items, but this is not a viable solution because it includes items from sites that should not be part of the filter scope. Impact: Numerous web parts across multiple sites are affected, preventing proper display of news items filtered by metadata. The issue appears to be related to the number of sites configured as sources in the web part. What can be done to solve this issue? Thank you very much!
SharePoint Online modern pages – spacing/gaps lost between web parts in flexible sections 2026
We're experiencing an issue across all our SharePoint Online modern pages. All existing pages with flexible sections have lost the spacing/gaps between image web parts — tiles are now butted right up against each other with no padding or margins. Key details from our troubleshooting: Affects all existing modern pages across multiple SharePoint sites (8+ sites, many pages) New pages created after the issue started render correctly with proper spacing Affects multiple users in our tenant Tested across multiple devices and browsers (Chrome, Edge, mobile) — same result We are on Standard release, no targeted release enabled No changes made to our tenant settings This is causing our intranet pages to look unprofessional and difficult to navigate. Please can Microsoft investigate and roll back whatever CSS/rendering change caused this. Tenant region: UKSharePoint Permissions Management
Over the last 3 years of managing permissions across a suite of sites, I have uncovered more new issues with the way SharePoint permissioning is designed at every turn. A few examples, before the question: If I "Share" a file or folder somewhere on the site (breaking permissions inheritance), it is very inconvenient to find it again. If I "copy link" in this one particular way, permissions inheritance is broken. When looking at site-level permissions, I see site-level permissions groups, but there could be hundreds of other users who have been added to my site(s) without my knowing. If I want to reset permissions in an area (set of folders or library), I have to do it file-by-file or folder-by folder. If I want to get an excel snapshot of - anything really - IT has to pull it and it takes a couple days. Not to mention the permissions interface is incredibly clunky. All-in-all, there seem to be a million ways to break permissions inheritance, creating an access tracking and security nightmare. AND there's no easy way to truly see and understand who has access to what or what is broken, without spending hours with IT to pull a bunch of narrow-visibility reports. So my question is: what is the best way to navigate full permissions visibility? Am I doing something wrong? Is anyone else experiencing these issues? We have resorted to having a very strict "no outsides besides a few exceptions" policy and only managing permissions at the site-level, which really hampers on the collaboration benefits that SharePoint is trying to enable. It is also very administratively intensive. One of the benefits to SharePoint is that users don't really need to understand how it works to use it, but that's becoming less and less true with the increasing lack of security we feel in the platform.SharePoint Creates a New Document Version After Printing
Hello All, We're experiencing an issue with version control in SharePoint. Here is the scenario: Our users are in SharePoint Online major/minor version controlled document libraries. They are opening Office 365 documents (Word, Excel, etc.) in the web app in view-only mode. They are making no changes to the files — just selecting File > Print. The action of printing is creating a new version of the file (ex: 3.0 to 3.1). This is causing issues with the document statues. After a new version is created, the file status is updated from Approved to Draft. But there was no change to the file to warrant a new version. Lastly, the new version is only created if the user is printing from the web app (Word, Excel, etc.). If they open the file in their desktop app, the document is not marked as modifed. After reaching out to Microsoft, we were informed this is a new "expected behavior". Quote from Microsoft: "From SharePoint’s perspective, printing = modifying, so this is not considered a bug but expected product behavior. When a document is printed from Office for the web (Word/Excel/PowerPoint Online), SharePoint treats this action as a file modification." Is anyone else experiencing this issue? Have you discovered a way to prevent this from happening?Quick steps disappear from SharePoint list
I have 4 quick steps set up for my sharepoint list. Each one executes a flow. Twice now they have disappeared. I don't see them when I go to Automate or when I go to manage quick steps. Refreshing the page didn't help. The only way I could get them back was to add a new quick step, save it. Refresh the page and go back into manage quick steps and they were all there again.
Recent Blogs
- We’re excited to share a new episode in our partner showcase series focused on SharePoint in Microsoft 365. In this episode, we spotlight Involv Intranet and how it brings a modern intranet expe...May 13, 2026
- AI is raising the bar for document management. It’s no longer enough to store and share files— content needs to be governed, structured, and connected to the way teams actually work so AI can reason ...Apr 30, 2026
