If u want, you may check the Underline links option. If this option has value = 'never' then blocked users will not have 'line-through' style, in standard way. ru:Special:Diff/83641579. Iniquity (talk) 12:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC) Just use selectors: ru:Special:Diff/83643224. Iniquity (talk) 13:12, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no idea what you are talking about. Can you be more specific? Code in a sandbox? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:46, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: Wow, sorry, my fault. You are having selectors' rule. Iniquity (talk) 16:42, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can we fix the support for external links? I've proven in principle that it can be done. (The only minor problem I see on testing this is that the tooltip, e.g. on Fruit of the land, starts with "undefined". I'm sure that can be fixed in due course.)

Fixing this might resolve the dispute at WT:Notifications#Checkuser and admin questions. Burninthruthesky (talk) 10:46, 12 April 2017 (UTC) Burninthruthesky (talk) 11:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Burninthruthesky: I've made the requested change. The only downside is that it will make the script slightly slower, but hopefully not enough that it is noticeable. Kaldari (talk) 17:55, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your prompt response. Burninthruthesky (talk) 20:50, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have incorporated some somewhat-overlapping functionality, to fix redlinked user pages even when using {{noping}}. As Vanjagenije suggests at WT:Notifications#Checkuser and admin questions, can we add this to the gadget please? Burninthruthesky (talk) 19:33, 26 April 2017 (UTC); diff updated 08:05, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Kaldari: would you mind looking over this? — xaosflux ^Talk 17:24, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm a little worried about adding another API request into the script. This will probably double the execution time. Kaldari (talk) 23:04, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How about enabling it only if a user preference is set? Burninthruthesky (talk) 07:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request disabled as stale. Please reactivate if you get consensus for this change — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:17, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have placed the markthrough script to the bottom of my common .js page in an attempt to customize the actual strike colors.

mw.util.addCSS('\
	a.user-blocked-temp {'   + ( window.mbTempStyle || 'opacity: 0.7; text-decoration: line-through' ) + '}\
	a.user-blocked-indef {'  + ( window.mbIndefStyle || 'opacity: 0.4; font-style: italic; text-decoration: line-through' ) + '}\
	.user-blocked-tipbox {' + ( window.mbTipBoxStyle || 'font-size:smaller; background:#FFFFF0; border:1px solid #FEA; padding:0 0.3em; color:#FF0000' ) + '}\
	');

I've been adjusting the color values here, but nothing changes, what am I doing wrong ? Thanks for any help. - FlightTime (open channel) 22:38, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

user = user[2];

change to

user = user[2];
if( /[a-f0-9]{1,4}(:[a-f0-9]{1,4}){7}/.test(user) ) user = user.toUpperCase();

A query for the blocks on 2001:8003:407c:ba00:de0:bcb6:8f7a:120d returns the IPv6 in the form of 2001:8003:407C:BA00:DE0:BCB6:8F7A:120D meaning that blk.user later down in the script does not have the same value as the one stored in userLinks. This causes the script to fail when there is a link to an IPv6 with the letter characters lowercase. (An example would be the current version of ANI) (An example would be Special:Contributions/2602:306:cc2b:7000:41d3:b92d:731c:959d). -- The Voidwalker ^Whispers 19:32, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done @The Voidwalker: please confirm I have done that correctly — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:14, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The example works correctly; everything appears to be in order. Thanks! -- The Voidwalker ^Whispers 16:42, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be that range blocks (such as this for 168.99.198.48 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and this for 2001:8003:54C9:8100:982B:CE3D:8B5A:9A64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)) don't get marked as blocked? More examples can be found here. It would be nice to see them marked as such. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 07:04, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support.   — Jeff G. ツ 15:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I don't see any problem. The first one is correctry shown as blocked. The second IP is not blocked. And the third link is to the history of ANI. In any case, an edit cannot be made unless the exact change is specified. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Can this script be made to show globally locked and blocked users, as well as locally blocked users?   — Jeff G. ツ 15:09, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 06:39, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MSGJ this gadget strikes through the names of locally blocked users, but does nothing if the user is globally locked but not locally blocked.

MediaWiki:Gadget-popups.js detects both and hovering over a name like User:Chyah will show BLOCKED, LOCKED

The ability to strike through the named of locked users (since in practice the effect of blocking and locking is equivalent) should be provided. The javascript required is out of my league I'm afraid. Cabayi (talk) 15:58, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Good luck finding someone to help. Feel free to reactivate the request when the code is ready to deploy. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:51, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Per mw:Extension:CentralAuth/API there unfortunately doesn't appear to be an way to query which of a list of users are locked - only whether an individual user is locked (and doing one query for every user on a page would make the script extremely slow). Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the research Galobtter. -- Cabayi (talk) 09:38, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We may also be able to write a Toolforge tool that does the relevant query directly, although I dunno how possible that is. I'll definitely look into it, though. Enterprisey (talk!) 16:39, 29 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Crosspost to my thread about a proposed change to this gadget: Wikipedia_talk:Gadget#Proposed_change_to_Mediawiki:Gadget-markblocked.js. Thanks! Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:03, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the gadget changes the opacity of the text based on the user's block length. Would it be possible to get a secondary checkbox in the gadget list to disable that function, so that the usernames are only struck out? The opacity changes can make the names hard to read on some screens. Sario528 (talk) 20:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Sario528. That would be kind of a big footprint for a small feature IMO, but you can fix this yourself if you like (sorry if you already know this!) Just add the line .user-blocked-indef {opacity:1.0 !important;} to your common.css page, and that should overwrite the opacity styling for indefblocked users. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:57, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding. While I'm already running a custom version of the gadget myself, I made the request for any user that may be having issues with the opacity changes, and is not comfortable working with code. I understand if it's more work then it's worth making the change as requested, but I figured there was no harm in asking. Thanks again for looking into this. Sario528 (talk) 18:52, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Current – Line 59: if ( !url || url.charAt(0) != '/' ) {
• Requested – Line 59: if ( !url ) {
• Reason – This change allows the script to work correctly with {{noping}}. See for example sockpuppet investigation pages where currently only the talk page link is struck through.

– Thjarkur (talk) 18:22, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I implemented this into my own .js page, and the proposed change seems to work as intended and without any issues. I made comparisons on contribution lists, noticeboards, diffs, and page edit histories, and didn't run into any problems. I'm going to go ahead and implement it... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Þjarkur -  Done. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 09:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's weird to see partially-blocked users, who may be blocked from a single page, show up the same as indefinitely site-blocked. Not sure what this should do to show things differently — maybe mark PBs the same as non-indefinite? — but I do feel something should distinguish them. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:26, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:27, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If we throw restrictions into bkprop, we can at least check if there are any partial block restrictions in-play. Looks like it returns an object if there are any restrictions as the result of a partial block, and an empty array if it's a regular block (or if it's one of those dumb empty blocks vis-a-vis phab:T208645). Not familiar with this code but it shouldn't be too hard to just check that then apply a separate appearance? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:50, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can we just show partially-blocked users normally? There's no advantage to show them struck out - essentially they just have a technical topic ban. – bradv🍁 17:01, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone and done this, for now anyway. I've made it so the tooltips still show up, though. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the tooltip says "Partially blocked." Not the best but concise enough? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:10, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Amorymeltzer: I think we should have some sort of indication for partial blocking (indefinite or definite), probably a dotted underline or a small bold P next to the username. @Barkeep49 and Bradv: Thoughts? --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:11, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]