Content deleted Content added
→Advertising warnings: link to WP:SPAM? |
Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive 20) (bot |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Skiptotoctalk}} |
|||
{{shortcut|[[WT:UTM]]}} |
|||
{{Talk header|WT:UTM|WT:UW|wp=yes|noarchives=yes|search=yes|archive_age=30|archive_bot=lowercase sigmabot III}} |
|||
{{archives}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings/templates/talk-header}} |
|||
If you have a query, please see The User Warnings Wikiproject [[WP:UW/FAQ|Frequently Asked Questions]] to see if it is answered there. Thank you! |
|||
{{Central|text=all [[Special:PrefixIndex/Template:uw-|uw-* template]] talk pages and [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings|WikiProject User warnings]] project talk pages redirect here. If you are here to discuss one of the uw-* templates, be sure to identify which one.}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|||
|counter = 20 |
|||
|minthreadsleft = 5 |
|||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
|algo = old(30d) |
|||
|archive = Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
}}{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive index|mask=Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=no}} |
|||
{{Archives|collapsed=yes|image=none| |
|||
#[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User warnings/Archives/2005/01|WP:UW Archives 1]] |
|||
#[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User warnings/Archives/2006/01|WP:UW Archives 2]] |
|||
#[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User warnings/Archives/2007/01|WP:UW Archives 3]] |
|||
#[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User warnings/Archive 1|WP:UW Archives 4]] |
|||
#[[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User warnings/Archive 2|WP:UW Archives 5]] |
|||
*WP:UW merged into [[WP:UTM]] |
|||
:WP:UTM archives |
|||
#[[/Archive 1|April 2005–April 2006]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 2|April 2006–October 2006]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 3|October 2006–January 2007]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 4|January 2007–February 2007]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 5|February 2007]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 6|February 2007–March 2007]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 7|March 2007–September 2007]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 8|September 2007–May 2008]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 9|April 2008–June 2009]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 10|June 2009–May 2010]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 11|May 2010–February 2011]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 12|February 2011–September 2013]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 13|October 2013–July 2015]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 14|July 2015–December 2016]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 15|December 2016–August 2018]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 16|August 2018–February 2020]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 17|February 2020–November 2020]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 18|December 2020–November 2021]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 19|November 2021–March 2023]] |
|||
#[[/Archive 20|March 2023–present]] |
|||
}} |
|||
__TOC__ |
__TOC__ |
||
{{clear}} |
|||
== [[Template:uw-spamublock]] == |
|||
== {{tl|uw-copyright1}} --> {{tl|Cv}} ? == |
|||
{{edit template-protected|template:uw-spamublock|answered=yes}} |
|||
I just saw that the uw-copyright series was deleted and redirected to {{tl|cv}}. Did I miss something? I have mixed feelings about having a single issue template here. It is a bit harsh for newcommers in my opinion, they don't know they are doing something wrong. (Sorry if I bring a point that has already been discussed, I couldn't find it in the archives :)) -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 13:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
your account has been used for advertising or promotion -> it has been used for advertising or promotion |
|||
:There are two templates, {{tl|Nothanks}} (or {{tl|Nothanks-sd}}) and {{tl|Cv}}, which were listed here before. More than that however, is inappropriate. If someone continues to upload copyrighted material after two warnings (really after one), they cannot be allowed to continue to do so and it cannot be built into the official sort of system created here that they be given five opportunities, with a warning after each one, to commit illegal actions on Wikipedia. I have now redirected {{tl|uw-copyright1}} to {{tl|Nothanks}} instead; it also happens to be much more explanatory and helpful than the new {{tl|uw-copyright1}} which was apparently invented without any reference to already existing templates. —[[User:Centrx|Centrx]]→[[User talk:Centrx|''talk'']] • 21:43, 19 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::I thought a bit about it, I will try to make a 2 levels templates, level 1 being AGF (a mix between the previous lv1 and nothanks) and level 4 being basically {{tl|Cv}}. What do you think? -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 09:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::I ripped of the 2 old templates. Here's the [[User:Lucasbfr/uw|result]]. I propose to use the first one for level 1 and the second one will be level 4. levels 2 and 3 would redirect to level 4. What do you think? -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 17:27, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::: I changed my mind (I hated the idea of having a 2 lv template) and went bold, recreating a single issue {{tl|uw-copyright}} that I hope will please everyone. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 07:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Minor nitpick to reduce repetition. <i><span style="font-family:Segoe print">[[User:Mori Calliope fan|<span style="background-color:black;color:#ffb8f3">Mori Calliope fan</span>]] [[User talk:Mori Calliope fan|<span style="background-color:#870900;color:#ffb8f3">talk</span>]]</span></i> 21:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Would it be possible to squeeze mention of "not linking to copyright violations either" into one of these templates, or to create a new singlelevel one for such purpose? Thanks :) --[[User:Quiddity|Quiddity]] 19:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Personally, I would type a personal message to the user in question, or use the spam templates if the linking is clearly inappropriate, but some people might find such a template useful? -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 07:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:This seems to be a side effect of the changes made by {{u|Jpgordon}} in [[Special:Diff/1162488493]]. --[[User:Ahecht|Ahecht]] ([[User talk:Ahecht|<span style="color:#FFF;background:#04A;display:inline-block;padding:1px;vertical-align:-.3em;font:bold 50%/1 sans-serif;text-align:center">TALK<br />PAGE</span>]]) 23:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Template signature error == |
|||
::Good nitpick, fixed. [[User:Jpgordon|--jpgordon]]<sup><small>[[User talk:Jpgordon|𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇]]</small></sup> 00:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2024 == |
|||
Whenever I use any of {{tl|uw-block1}} , {{tl|uw-block2}} or {{tl|uw-block3}} it messes up my signature. It clips everything but the "Email" link. Have a look in my [[User:James086/sandbox|sandbox]] to see what I mean. What I do is sign after the template, but it is a bit of a problem. Does this happen for anyone else, if not does anyone know what in my sig triggers it so that I can change it? The code for my sig is: |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Template:Uw-mislead3|answered=yes}} |
|||
<code><nowiki><font face="comic sans ms" color="#454545">[[User:James086|]]</font><sup>[[User talk:James086|<font color="#006400">Talk</font>]]|[[Special:Emailuser/James086|<font color="#700000">Email</font>]]</sup></nowiki></code> |
|||
Please fix [[Template:Uw-mislead3]], it expands with a <code><nowiki><!-- Template:uw-move3 --></nowiki></code> comment instead of <code><nowiki><!-- Template:uw-mislead3 --></nowiki></code>.<br> |
|||
I just had this shocking moment where I warned someone with a level 4 move disruption warning because I copied it and thought 'oh no, I warned them for move disruption in the third warning too, how did I not see it' - but no, turns out it's just the comment that's been wrong since the template was made. – [[Special:Contributions/2804:F14:80C8:4701:9C49:A8E6:A25E:3091|2804:F14:80C8:4701:9C49:A8E6:A25E:3091]] ([[User talk:2804:F14:80C8:4701:9C49:A8E6:A25E:3091|talk]]) 03:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Done}} -- [[User:John of Reading|John of Reading]] ([[User talk:John of Reading|talk]]) 10:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Suggestion: Merge templates for removing XFD notices == |
|||
Yes, you could have read it from the edit box but it would be mixed with everything else then. Thanks, <font face="comic sans ms" color="#454545">[[User:James086|James086]]</font><sup>[[User talk:James086|<font color="#006400">Talk</font>]]|[[Special:Emailuser/James086|<font color="#700000">Email</font>]]</sup> 12:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:The source of the problem is the vertical bar. |
|||
<nowiki><font face="comic sans ms" color="#454545">[[User:James086|]]</font> |
|||
<sup>[[User talk:James086|<font color="#006400">Talk</font>]]</nowiki><span style=background:lightblue>|</span> |
|||
<nowiki>[[Special:Emailuser/James086|<font color="#700000">Email</font>]]</sup></nowiki> |
|||
:It causes an "ifelse" statement to become screwed up. Replacing the "|" with either "&#124;" or "<nowiki>{{!}}</nowiki>" will fix the problem. [[User:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">Grace</font><font color="#000">notes</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">T</font>]]</sup> § 04:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::It works now, thanks a lot. <font face="comic sans ms" color="#454545">[[User:James086|James086]]</font><sup>[[User talk:James086|<font color="#006400">Talk</font>]] | [[Special:Emailuser/James086|<font color="#700000">Email</font>]]</sup> 09:28, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Proposal: Merge AFD, RFD, TFD, CFD, FFD and MFD user warning templates into one. This would let editors use a centralized warnings list for deletion in general instead of having to go and carefully find the one for the appropriate XFD. If needed, we could add a parameter to disambiguate which. |
|||
:::No problem! [[User:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">Grace</font><font color="#000">notes</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">T</font>]]</sup> § 16:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Here's what the templates might look like:<br> |
|||
== Foreign language user warning template == |
|||
Uw-xfd1: <code> Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in deletion debates. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you.</code><br> |
|||
Uw-xfd2: <code> Please do not remove deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in deletion debates. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you.</code><br> |
|||
Uw-xfd3: <code> Please stop. If you continue to remove deletion notices or comments from deletion debates, you may be blocked from editing.</code><br> |
|||
Uw-xfd4: <code> You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove a deletion notice or a comment from a deletion debate.</code><br> |
|||
Uw-xfd4im: <code> This is your only warning; if you remove a deletion notice from a page or delete comments from a deletion debate again, you may be blocked from editing.</code><br> |
|||
Any suggestions welcome! <small>If you reply here, please ping me.</small> <span style="font-family:monospace; font-weight: bold"><span style="color:ForestGreen">[[W:EN:User:TheTechie|<span style="color:Green">thetechie@enwiki</span>]]</span>: [[User talk:TheTechie|<span style="MediumBlue">~/talk/</span>]] <span style="">$</span></span> 23:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Link the plain and simple COI guide? == |
|||
I made a new warning template {{tl|uselanguage}} to tag user talk pages. It has one parameter that is the language code. It will ideally give a warning in the language of the user, but will work with all language codes pointing to the correct WP. It is similar to the family of the contrib-xx1 templates, but can easily be expanded. [[User:AndreasJS|<span style="color:white;background:blue;"> Andreas </span>]] <sup><font size="-2">[[User talk:AndreasJS|(T)]]</font></sup> 00:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Wow. This is great! We should probably add uw- to the beginning and have this take the place of uw-english. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[User:TeckWiz/@|@]] </sub></small> 02:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::When it is substituted, however, it will result in a mess of superfluous code, although appear fine. I suggest that we clean it up by ''requiring'' substitution, or else give an error message. [[User:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">Grace</font><font color="#000">notes</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">T</font>]]</sup> § 04:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::I would suggest to deprecate and bot-replace [[template:UE]] and maybe also those like [[template:contrib-fr1]]. [[User:AndreasJS|<span style="color:white;background:blue;"> Andreas </span>]] <sup><font size="-2">[[User talk:AndreasJS|(T)]]</font></sup> 17:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
A lot of newcomers on Wikipedia might not be familiar with all of our policies and feel lost in the wordings, maybe it would be good to link a more beginner-friendly guide such as [[Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide]] in {{tl|uw-coi}} and {{tl|uw-coi-username}} to gently nudge them towards more responsible editing? [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#8a7500">Chaotıċ <span style="display:inline-flex;rotate:30deg;color:#9e5cb1">Enby</span></span>]] ([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 17:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== New template proposal: Articlesig == |
|||
== Vector legacy == |
|||
Assuming it doesn't already exist in some form, I am going to create this new user message template, {{[[Template:Articlesig|Articlesig]]}}, in about a week if there are no objections. (The design happens to be lifted from {{[[Template:noprotection|noprotection]]}}.) |
|||
The template currently says: "you should be able to move an article yourself using the [[Help:Moving a page|"Move" tab]] at the top of the page (the tab may be [[:File:Vector hidden move button.png|hidden in a dropdown menu]] for you)." This seems to apply to the Vector Legacy skin, but not the current Vector 2022 skin. I think there are now two places "Move" can be: the Tools sidebar, or Tools menu, but I don't know which one appears by default. Depending on this, please can the template be reworded, maybe to something like: |
|||
=== Proper signature use === |
|||
* "you should be able to move an article yourself using the [[Help:Moving a page|"Move" action in the "Tools" menu]] at the top of the page (the "Tools" menu may be in a sidebar to the right of the page for you)." |
|||
Hello, <nowiki>{{PAGENAME}}</nowiki>. I've noticed that you've been adding your [[Wikipedia:Signatures|signature]] to some of your [[Wikipedia:User contributions|article contributions]]. This is a common mistake for beginners, and it has since (most likely) been corrected. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's [[Wikipedia:edit history|edit history]]. Therefore, you should only (and always) use your signature after contributing to [[Wikipedia:Talkpage|talkpages]], the [[Wikipedia:Village Pump|Village Pump]], or other discussion pages. (For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these, see [[Wikipedia:What is an article?|What is an article?]]) Thanks for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! |
|||
or |
|||
* "you should be able to move an article yourself using the [[Help:Moving a page|"Move" action in the "Tools" sidebar]] to the right of the page (the "Tools" sidebar may be hidden as a menu at the top of the page for you)." |
|||
Might also need a sentence there saying something like "if you're using the Vector legacy skin, there should be a [[Help:Moving a page|"Move" tab]] at the top of the page (the tab may be [[:File:Vector hidden move button.png|hidden in a dropdown menu]])." (Is there a way to automatically detect which skin the user is using, and display text appropriate to that? This might be more difficult if this template has to be subst'ed.) |
|||
Updating [[Help:Moving a page]], and a replacement for [[:File:Vector hidden move button.png]] would be nice to have, but probably not worth waiting for to make this change. |
|||
<math>\sim</math> [[User:Lenoxus|Lenoxus]] [[User talk:Lenoxus|" * "]] 08:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Alternatively, is there a way to flag this up to the WMF team who implemented these changes to clean up? --<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.15em 0.15em 0.1em">[[User:Yodin|Yodin]]</span><span style="text-shadow:grey 0.25em 0.25em 0.12em"><sup>[[User talk:Yodin|T]]</sup></span> 19:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
That's cool. I've been using test1 and adding a sentence after, which is a bit akward and doesn't link to all the appropriate pages (too much typing). This is just a one-shot, yes? [[User:Natalie Erin|Natalie]] 14:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:What do you mean? <math>\sim</math> [[User:Lenoxus|Lenoxus]] [[User talk:Lenoxus|" * "]] 16:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::A single template, as opposed to an escalating series of templates. [[User:Natalie Erin|Natalie]] 16:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think if they continue to do it the standard vandalism or test templates would suffice.<font color="maroon">[[User:Mr.Z-man|Mr.Z-man]]</font>'''<small>[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|talk]]</small>''<font color="navy" face="cursive">[[Special:Contributions/Mr.Z-man|¢]]</font>'''''<small>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Mr.Z-man|Review!]]</small> 22:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::Yeah, after someone's gotten this warning and continues doing it, that would make sense. In answer to your question: Yes, it is certainly one-shot (at first I thought maybe you meant that I only intended to use it once, which wouldn't make sense). However, something like this should still be used for this specific issue the ''first'' time it is recognized, but if they continue to disregard this rule, a new level has obviously been reached. <math>\sim</math> [[User:Lenoxus|Lenoxus]] [[User talk:Lenoxus|" * "]] 01:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::What about a user who never signs their posts and refuses to? I got into this with [[User:Wrestlinglover420]]. He never signs his posts on talk pages and basically told me he's not gonna if he doesn't want to. [[User:TJ Spyke|TJ Spyke]] 00:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::: To return to <nowiki>{{Articlesig}}</nowiki>: It is really needed! Has something happened to the proposal, or is there somewhere else you need support so you can create it? Is someone fighting over the words to use? [[User:Greswik|Greswik]] 21:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::: Nope! I'd just let it slip my mind... so here goes! Link: {{tl|Articlesig}}. Oh, and in answer to TJ Spyke: that template is {{tl|Tilde}}, and at least one bot, [[User:HagermanBot|HagermanBot]], thankfully does this when it can (not that it's perfect, of course, so go ahead if the template is needed). In fact, seeing such a message on another user's talkpage was what reminded me of this! <math>\sim</math> [[User:Lenoxus|Lenoxus]] [[User talk:Lenoxus|" * "]] 21:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::::: Great! But, what is that <nowiki>{{PAGENAME}}</nowiki> - thing? I had to fix it after using it. Was that just me, could you make a simple example? [[User:Greswik|Greswik]] 15:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==Discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Template:Uw-cyberbully|Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 May 7 § Template:Uw-cyberbully]]== |
|||
== Question == |
|||
[[File:Symbol watching blue lashes high contrast.svg|25px|link=|alt=]] You are invited to join the discussion at [[:Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Template:Uw-cyberbully|Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 May 7 § Template:Uw-cyberbully]].  All the best, <span style="color:#595959">‍—‍</span>[[User:A smart kitten|<span style="color:#595959">a smart kitten</span>]]<sub style="color:#595959">[<nowiki/>[[User talk:A smart kitten|<span style="color:#595959">meow</span>]]]</sub> 11:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)<!-- [[Template:Please see]] --> |
|||
== Templates warning against frivolous XfD/PROD nominations and comments? == |
|||
If you aren't an admin, like most people here, do these threats carry no weight?[[User:W1k13rh3nry|W1k13rh3nry]] 12:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes, after level 4 on another incident, you report them for an admin to look into the matter. This is often done on [[WP:AIV]]. See also [[WP:AN]]. — <span style="text-decoration: none;">[[User:RevRagnarok|<font color="#696969">RevRagnarok</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:RevRagnarok |Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/RevRagnarok|Contrib]]</sup></span> 12:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::Not all the warnings threaten things, or mention admin-only tools. A lot of them are boilerplate reminders of various policies, like copyright infringement, signing posts, and using edit summaries. In that respect, templates save the work of thinking of and typing out a whole message yourself, and include links to relevant pages. With the warning series' that escalate to a final warning, most admins like to see that a user has received a level 3 or 4 warning (from any other user) before blocking, because it ensures that the person is aware of the rules and consequences. [[User:Natalie Erin|Natalie]] 15:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
What is a good way to warn a user who makes a clearly inappropriate or disruptive XfD/PROD nomination, such as one without a valid reason for deletion? What about users who make disruptive comments at XfD that have nothing to do with the deletion policy? [[User:Helpful Raccoon|Helpful Raccoon]] ([[User talk:Helpful Raccoon|talk]]) 02:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== <code><nowiki><includeonly>subst:</includeonly></nowiki></code> instead of <code>subst=subst:</code>? == |
|||
:@[[User:Helpful Raccoon|Helpful Raccoon]], here's my recommendation: start by writing [[User:Xenon54/Don't template the newbies|a manual message]]: explain why their edits are disruptive, ask them to stop. If it's a new editor, try to [[WP:3LA|avoid jargon]]. If disruptive edits continue – revert. Then [[Template:Uw-disruptive1]] becomes appropriate, since it presupposes that the edits were reverted. —[[User:Andrybak|andrybak]] ([[User talk:Andrybak|talk]]) 07:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Currently, most user warnings in this project make use of <code><nowiki>{{{subst|}}}</nowiki></code> with an optional <code><nowiki>|subst=subst:}}</nowiki></code> parameter that simplifies the output of the template when placed on a user talk page. However, this extra parameter is often excluded, and when used, requires some extra typing and doesn't work without an article parameter due to a bug. Perhaps we could use the much easier <code><nowiki><includeonly>subst:</includeonly></nowiki></code> trick to simplify the output? The <code><nowiki>includeonly</nowiki></code> trick uses no additional parameters, is used automatically every time, and also avoids the bug, allowing it to be used even without an article parameter. I think we should switch all the user warnings under this project to use this format, but I'd like to see if people support this first, since it would affect so many templates. [[User:Pyrospirit|<font color="green">Pyrospirit</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Pyrospirit|<font color="red">Flames</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Pyrospirit|<font color="orange">Fire</font>]]</sup> 02:21, 1 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::A manual message seems good. The issue I have with existing templates is that XfD nominations and comments shouldn't be reverted like other edits just for being unconstructive (like saying an article "fails GNG" when it obviously doesn't). XfD nominations can be closed as [[Wikipedia:Speedy keep|speedy keep]] if there's no deletion rationale or they're obviously disruptive, but that's not exactly reversion and doesn't apply to all frivolous nominations. [[User:Helpful Raccoon|Helpful Raccoon]] ([[User talk:Helpful Raccoon|talk]]) 08:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:As much as I'd love to implement this, there is no way that ''everyone'' is going to subst user messages (I know, believe me), and if someone doesn't subst a message in the above format, then it will result is a sticky mess of code that will undoubtedly confuse an vandal, or cause said vandal to laugh at Wikipedia's unintentional bad coding, etc. [[User:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">Grace</font><font color="#000">notes</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Gracenotes|<font color="#960">T</font>]]</sup> § 14:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::Oh, so it won't work if you don't subst, then? In that case, it would remind them to subst the message when they see the messed up code, so it'll serve two purposes! [[User:Pyrospirit|<font color="green">Pyrospirit</font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Pyrospirit|<font color="red">Flames</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Pyrospirit|<font color="orange">Fire</font>]]</sup> 02:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::Well it would mean that people check the output of the template after putting it. And that's probably not going to happen this century :D That kind of warning is useful on db-reason and afd, because a badly formed speedy deletion or AfD is enough to have the request bumped, but on a user warning, it will just confuse the user receiving the warning even more. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 06:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Argument for welcome and anon == |
|||
I have gotten into the habit of adding a parameter for welcome and anon (even though it is ignored) so that I can tell what article caught my eye. Perhaps the argument (if present) could be included in the message. For example, "Thank you for your contributions, such as your edit to <nowiki>{{1}}</nowiki>". |
|||
Any thoughts? [[User:Wrp103|wrp103 (Bill Pringle)]] 00:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==[[Template:uw-spam1]] "nofollow tags" statement== |
|||
[[Template:uw-spam1]] contains the following erroneous statement: ''Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings.'' This sentence always bothered me because it's factually incorrect or misleading: |
|||
*The presence of "nofollow" tags in the article's HTML header is irrelevant. Even without nofollow tags, most spiders are smart enough to avoid following links that lead away from the site being crawled. The point of nofollow tags is more to prevent spiders from indexing specific pages stored on the ''same'' web site that it's crawling. |
|||
*It may not matter that external links "do not alter search engine rankings" because an external link in a Wikipedia article ''will'' drive more traffic to that external link! Wikipedia articles come up near the top of many searches, and people who read such an article will see the external links, and some fraction of those will click on those links. |
|||
I don't see the sentence as something that would sound convincing to a linkspammer. -[[User:Amatulic|Amatulic]] 19:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:[http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2005/01/preventing-comment-spam.html Not exactly], Google and most search engines rank websites according to their popularity. Wikipedia being very popular, an outgoing link from there affected search results. The nofollow tag allows us to say that the link should be ignored. For the second statement, that's why we fight spam on WP ;). -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 10:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== 4-im == |
|||
What does "im" mean? --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 18:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Im'''mediate - last/only warning. — <span style="text-decoration: none;">[[User:RevRagnarok|<font color="#696969">RevRagnarok</font>]] <sup>[[User_talk:RevRagnarok |Talk]] [[Special:Contributions/RevRagnarok|Contrib]]</sup></span> 18:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== uw-advert1 == |
|||
It seems we have a [[Template:Uw-advert1|lonely template]]. I think a TFD is in order, since uw-spam basically covers it, and the other levels don't exist. Either that or make into a single use. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 23:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Either that or redirect. —<span style="color: red;">[[User:Mets501|M<small>ETS</small>501]] ([[User talk:Mets501|talk]])</span> 23:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Template:Uw-redirect4im == |
|||
Do we really need a 4im for redirecting? I think that's a bit harsh. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 14:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Template:Singlenotice/inner == |
|||
I don't have time now, but when someone does, please update [[Template:Singlenotice/inner]]. Thanks! --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 16:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== uw-biog redirects == |
|||
Would anyone object to the creation of uw-blp1 - uw-blp4 as redirects to the uw-biog series? At least for me, BLP (as the policy abbrev) is much easier to remember. <font color="maroon">[[User:Mr.Z-man|Mr.Z-man]]</font>'''<small>[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|talk]]</small>''<font color="navy" face="cursive">[[Special:Contributions/Mr.Z-man|¢]]</font>''''' 03:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:That seems fine. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 13:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:I think it's a good idea. I've finally adjusted to "biog", but I had the same urge to type blp as the warning name.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 13:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
{{done}} <font color="maroon">[[User:Mr.Z-man|Mr.Z-man]]</font>'''<small>[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|talk]]</small>''<font color="navy" face="cursive">[[Special:Contributions/Mr.Z-man|¢]]</font>''''' 18:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Template to say a user has been reported == |
|||
I wasn't sure if it was needed, but I created one for myself anyway! It looks something like |
|||
{| class="messagebox standard-talk" |
|||
|[[Image:Stop x nuvola.svg|30px]]<big>'''Reported to Admin'''</big> |
|||
You have been reported to admin due to your repeated [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]. An administrator will review your edits and decide whether you should be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]. {{ #if: '''[[User:Asics|<span style="font-family:impact;"><span style="background:black;color:aqua">Asics </span>]]'''<small>[[User talk:Asics|<span style="background:black;color:aqua">talk </span>]]</small><sup>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Asics|<font color="Black">Editor review!]]</font></sup> 17:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC) | '''[[User:Asics|<span style="font-family:impact;"><span style="background:black;color:aqua">Asics </span>]]'''<small>[[User talk:Asics|<span style="background:black;color:aqua">talk </span>]]</small><sup>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Asics|<font color="Black">Editor review!]]</font></sup> 17:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)}} |
|||
|} |
|||
<br /> Any advice on whether I should leave it in my userspace, or move it to a proper template so others can find and use it more easily? As at the moment you have to type in ''<nowiki>{{Subst:User:Asics/Reported|sig=~~~~}}</nowiki>'' in order to get it to work. Is there another one already made? (Knowing my luck there will be, and I will have wasted 10 minutes making it!) Thanks in advance for any advice, '''[[User:Asics|<span style="font-family:impact;"><span style="background:black;color:aqua">Asics </span>]]'''<small>[[User talk:Asics|<span style="background:black;color:aqua">talk </span>]]</small><sup>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Asics|<font color="Black">Editor review!]]</font></sup> 17:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:[[Template:Fwarn|Fwarn]] isn't "uw-certified", but it's available. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 17:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::[[Template:Non-admin fwarn|Fwarn]] is great, I wish it ''was'' "uw-certified." It's documentation needs help though. Not much, just a little. Okay, I'll do it. --[[User:Yksin|Yksin]] 22:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::Why would you call it by that name? I didn't mean that as a name, I meant that as the template wasn't "approved" with the new template system. It's an old template. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 23:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::I was merely repeating your usage. In any case, whether "approved" within the new template system or not, [[Template:Non-admin fwarn]] is a very useful template, if used appropriately. I've put together a bit of documentation to help in that direction, that (as a fairly recent vandalism-fighter) I had to learn by trial & error. -- [[User:Yksin|Yksin]] 23:32, 10 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I've seen this template used occasionally when on bouts of vandalfighting and I must say that I am not entirely convinced by its usefulness. After all, it basically tells them that they are about to be blocked and there is nothing they can do about it. The [[Template:Fwarn|Fwarn template]] states on it ''You may not receive another warning before being blocked, so be careful and be serious from now on''. However, if someone has submitted them correctly to [[WP:AIV]] and they have vandalised after a final warning, no matter how "careful and serious" they are, they are going to be blocked. In my humble opinion, all this template might do is, in some cases, encourage a last scurry of vandalism in the knowledge they are going to be imminently blocked anyway. I invite people to disagree with me and persuade me that this template ''is'' useful, but from my experience of witnessing its use I don't entirely feel that way. [[User_talk:Wimt|Will]] <small><font color="red">(aka [[User:Wimt|<font color="red">Wimt</font>]])</font></small> 02:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::::The biggest reason I find it useful is because it indicates to the user that s/he has actually been reported. I frequently come across talk pages that have a large collection of "this is your final warning, next time you will be blocked" all in a row, with no indication that they've ever been reported. If I was engaged in vandalism, I'd just think, "they always say they're gonna do something to me but they never do." [[Template:Non-admin fwarn] lets them know: yes, something ''has'' been done. Almost as important, it lets other editors dealing with the same user's vandalism know that a report has been made -- especially if it's the same day with a particularly active vandal -- and adds to the general record of how serious a particular user's vandalism has been. Note that sometimes admins at [[WP:AIV]] do ''not'' block a reported user -- usually because of time passage since the last prior vandalism -- so I've added to the documentation to hopefully better align its usage with [[WP:AIV]] practice. I agree perhaps the language in the template itself could be improved. --[[User:Yksin|Yksin]] 16:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::I'm gonna agree with Will in saying that I'm not entirely convinced of its usefulness. Someone who is an obvious vandal will get blocked without needing ''yet another'' message on their talk page. As for seeing whether they've been reported or not... I also fail to see the use in that. You can see from their block log (viewable by anyone) whether they've been blocked or not, and whether they've been reported doesn't have much bearing on anything (in my opinion, though I'm a lot more heavy-handed towards vandals than some other people are). If they're a vandal IP, block and move on. If they're a vandal account and they've been warned before, indefinitely block them and move on (regardless of time spent between warnings). [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">☯</span>]] //</span> 17:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::So in summary: you & I see the issues differently, & therefore choose differently. I can live with that. --[[User:Yksin|Yksin]] 17:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
I've been seeing this {{tl|fwarn}} template on user pages before I block them, and I'm thinking maybe we should delete it. A lot of people who make [[WP:AIV]] reports do so improperly, and we remove the reports instead of blocking. If someone receives one of these messages and then ''doesn't'' get blocked, that's ''worse'' than just getting {{tl|uw-v4im}} and not getting blocked. And this inevitably happens, we don't block on all reports but getting this warning and then no block definitely sends the wrong message: "''go ahead and vandalize with impunity, nobody cares''". <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan |coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps" >l</span>]][[ User talk:Coelacan |acan]]</span> — 23:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:I would dislike deleting a template that people find useful, but I have to agree with the above point. Once someone has been reported to AIV, there are only two outcomes - either they get blocked, in which case there's not much point in telling them to reconsider their behavior (and the same message should presumably come from the blocking admin anyway), or they don't get blocked, in which case they either assume the reviewing admin thinks their vandalism was that bad or they learn to guage how much they can get away with without being blocked.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 02:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::I would dislike deleting it against consensus. Perhaps it's worth taking the question up at [[WP:TFD]]? <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan |coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps" >l</span>]][[ User talk:Coelacan |acan]]</span> — 04:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::The rough consensus above appears to support deletion, so I think consideration by a wider audience at TfD is probably appropriate.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 03:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Why... just... ''why?'' The mind boggles – [[User talk:Gurch|Gurch]] 16:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
===how about a [[WP:AN3]]-specific version?=== |
|||
Tuxide makes a good point in the TFD; 3RR reports are sometimes validly contested. A template that lets a person know they've been reported for 3RR can be a good idea, if it points to [[WP:AN3]]. Without regard for keeping these generic fwarn templates, would a separate {{tl|uw-3rr-reported}} template be a good idea? <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan |coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps" >l</span>]][[ User talk:Coelacan |acan]]</span> — 05:31, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:Non-admin fwarn}} == |
|||
[[Template:{{ucfirst:Non-admin fwarn}}]] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Non-admin fwarn|the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page]]. Thank you.<!--Template:Tfdnotice--> — <span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 03:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Calander additions == |
|||
As you know, the years tend to be common targets for anons who want to add themselves to Wikipedia. While I could use {{tl|uw-test}}, {{tl|uw-vandalism}} or {{tl|uw-joke}}, I feel that these may be a little too generic. Are there any suggestions? --[[User:Sigma 7|Sigma 7]] 02:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:I would say the uw-vandalism series. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 19:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Talking in article == |
|||
Didn't we have a template for talking in articles? I can't seem to find it. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 20:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:The appropriately named {{tl|talkinarticle}}. It's not a uw warning, but I still use it from time to time.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 20:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Personal commentary & analysis == |
|||
I seem to recall a uw template (albeit before the uw standardization) regarding adding personal commentary & original research? Something different from NPOV and cite tags... Am I overlooking it? /[[User:Blaxthos|Blaxthos]] 06:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Birthdays == |
|||
I was wondering whether there is an appropriate warning out there for telling people not to add their own birthdays to date articles. When looking over recent changes, I have noticed that this occurs very regularly. I had been giving them {{tl|uw-test1}} but I feel it doesn't really convey what they are doing and why it is being reverted. I have attempted to make my own template for this purpose at [[User:Wimt/nn-birthday]] but I wondered whether any similar templates already existed and, if not, whether anyone else agrees with me that it would be a useful message to give out. [[User_talk:Wimt|Will]] <small><font color="red">(aka [[User:Wimt|<font color="red">Wimt</font>]])</font></small> 02:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:That seem a little specific. I would suggest using the uw-test templates with the third parameter, which allows you to add specific information. --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 02:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::I've been using test1 for this. If someone does make a specific warning, I would suggest broadening it to adding any nonnotable thing to a date article. People add BS events, deaths, and other crap pretty regularly, as well as adding Jesus to the list of births on December 25. [[User:Natalie Erin|Natalie]] 02:47, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yeah that's very true it could easily be broadened to any non-notable date addition. I do take your point [[User:TeckWiz|TeckWiz]] that it is quite specific and I could use the third parameter of the test templates, but given how often I have been reverting this recently, I personally think that it may justify its own template. Regards. [[User_talk:Wimt|Will]] <small><font color="red">(aka [[User:Wimt|<font color="red">Wimt</font>]])</font></small> 02:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::Like I said, it's a little too specific. Feel free to use yours though. It looks good. You may also want to move it to the template namespace, but I wouldn't classify it as uw- warning. What about Template:Datewarning ? --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 03:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Oh yeah I have no great wish to make it a uw- warning. Template:Datewarning sounds a good idea to me. I'll move it there when I've reworded it a bit to make it suitable for any date addition. Thanks for your help. [[User_talk:Wimt|Will]] <small><font color="red">(aka [[User:Wimt|<font color="red">Wimt</font>]])</font></small> 09:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== When to use "blatant vandal" warning (uw-bv)? == |
|||
I can't figure out how the "blatant vandal" warning is supposed to be used. Based on the "assume good faith" policy, you're not supposed to accuse someone of vandalism unless it's, well, blatant. So, when should the templates uw-vandalism1, 2, etc. be used, and when should uw-bv be used? [[User:CalebNoble|CalebNoble]] 05:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Also, whats the difference between uw-bv and uw-vandalism4im ? --[[User:TeckWiz|'''TeckWiz''']] <sup>[[User_talk:TeckWiz|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/TeckWiz|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/TeckWiz|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 21:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::I use bv when it's not quite so extreme as to justify an immediate "This is your '''only''' warning", but still extreme enough that first and second-level warnings aren't enough. Essentially, I think of it as an immediate third-level warning (remember, level 3 likewise assumes bad faith) that gives a bit more context than just starting immediately with "Please stop". [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] 21:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yeah I agree - although I don't really use uw-bv myself, I tend to consider it to be at the same level as uw-vandalism3 when giving further warnings. It is generally used as the first warning given to someone in cases of rather serious and/or fast vandalism. Uw-vandalism4im on the other hand I tend to use on editors who have got a last warning within the previous 24 hours or so to let them know they are still on their absolute last warning. It can also be used as a first and only warning in cases of extremely serious vandalism. [[User_talk:Wimt|Will]] <small><font color="red">(aka [[User:Wimt|<font color="red">Wimt</font>]])</font></small> 21:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::I've assumed that a garden variety ''vandal'' makes an article worse, but it's not completely clear they know the effect of what they're doing. A blatant vandal is one who knows they're making it worse. The former adds cutesy sayings, uncited libelous facts, or changes numbers to plausible values, etc. The latter inserts profanity, character assassinations, non-plausible numbers, etc. —[[user:EncMstr|EncMstr]] 22:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:[edit conflict] The complexity of the vandalism should be taken into account as well. Someone who adds a picture of a penis to a Pokémon page or is modifying templates, for example, is of a totally different type than someone just adding "omg hi" to the day's FA. [[User:EVula|EVula]] <span style="color: #999;">// [[User talk:EVula|talk]] // [[User:EVula/admin|<span style="color: #366;">☯</span>]] //</span> 22:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Att no longer policy == |
|||
I don't know templates currently cite ATT instead of Verifiability, but they need to be changed back to Verifiability as ATT is not currently policy, but proposed policy. '''[[User:Miss Mondegreen|Miss Mondegreen]] | [[User talk:Miss Mondegreen|Talk]] 08:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)''' |
|||
:Are there any? If I am correct, they are all citing [[WP:V]]. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 09:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::I just changed a set last night--I think the big thing is all of the non talk page templates which haven't all been changed back. I'm working on requesting those now. But I have no idea about the rest of these. I did the citing sources set last night but the others? '''[[User:Miss Mondegreen|Miss Mondegreen]] | [[User talk:Miss Mondegreen|Talk]] 03:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)''' |
|||
== using article space as a forum == |
|||
Unless I couldn't find it, we need a UWT assuming good faith to tell people to use the talk page rather than the article space for talk. To warn [[User talk:168.169.110.137]] I had to modify another template. --[[User:Arctic.gnome|Arctic Gnome]] <small>([[User talk:Arctic.gnome|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arctic.gnome|contribs]])</small> 17:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:{{tl|talkinarticle}} is good for this situation. We should probably go ahead and add it to the project.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 17:40, 19 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::What about {{tl|Uw-chat1}}? -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 11:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::Chat1 is currently geared to the situation where someone posts off-topic or inappropriate comments to an article talk page. Talkinarticle is designed for warning those who put talk comments in the actual article space. We could tweak Chat1 to cover the talk in article situation, but (although I generally think we are starting to get too many UWs) I think this is worth a specific one-off warning. I see this situation come up a fair bit, and Artic.gnome's question is at least the third time someone has asked about this template.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 14:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::Oh, my bad, I misread :). -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 14:05, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== {{t1|uw-vandalism-lgbt}} == |
|||
We apparently have a new template for people vandalising pages with things like "[person] is gay". --<small>TeckWiz is now</small> [[User:R|'''R''']] <sup>[[User_talk:R|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/R|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/R|@]]</sub>(Lets go Yankees!)</small> 11:17, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:I have no opinion on this template existence (even if personally I wouldn't use it, vandalism is vandalism. But we have {{tl|uw-racism}}, so...), but this template is a copy paste of {{tl|uw-v3}}. It could be replaced by |
|||
{{cquote2|<nowiki>{{uw-vandalism3|{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{{1|}}}}}|2=Also note that using [[LGBT]] terms to vandalize promotes hatred and is offensive to many people. Please stop promoting intolerance. }}</nowiki>}} |
|||
to keep it consistent with the uw-v3 formatting. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 14:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::(edit conflict - I have pretty much the same reaction as Lucas) I know there are folks who do LGBT RC patrol, and I personally don't begrudge them a specific warning template. However, I don't think we should add this to the main UTM page. We already have {{tl|uw-racism}} and I think you could make an argument for a specific template for every way in which a comment can be offensive - race, sexual preference, religion, national origin etc. Personally, I think the vandalism warnings are adequate for addressing these situations. However, if people want something more specific, I suggest we create one warning, perhaps {{tl|uw-offensive}}, that warns people not to make offensive comments regarding race, sexual preference or religion.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 14:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
For anyone interested (and who may not have both pages on their watch list), there's a new proposal on this topic at [[WT:UW#Proposal for new Incivility Template]]--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 17:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
*This particular template was discussed further at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject LGBT studies#A concern]], where the template was created, and consensus favored deletion. I have done so. <span style="white-space: nowrap">— [[User:Coelacan |coe<span style="font-variant: small-caps" >l</span>]][[ User talk:Coelacan |acan]]</span> — 06:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
**Indeed; now we can always use [[User:Gzkn/Friendwarning]] <code>:p</code> (''that'' one's [[m:GAY|a joke]], though) [[User:Gracenotes|<span style="color:#960;">Grace</span><span style="color:#000;">notes</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Gracenotes|<span style="color:#960;">T</span>]]</sup> § 17:19, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== anon vandal == |
|||
Is there a new-style template to replace the old <nowiki>{{anon vandal}}</nowiki> ([[Template:Anon vandal]] - 2 words, not [[Template:anonvandal]] 1 word... I see the problem, so is there a new name for the first one? <strong>[[User:Tvoz|Tvoz]] </strong>|<small>[[User talk:Tvoz|talk]]</small> 18:40, 20 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Image sizing == |
|||
I tend to enumerate warnings for organisational purposes on userpages, as with this: |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px|left]] }}}Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. One or more of your recent edits{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, such as the one you made to [[:{{{1}}}]],}} have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]] or removed. Please use [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|the sandbox]] for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|welcome page]] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism1 --> |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px|left]] }}}Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}. Your edits appear to be [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. {{{2|Thank you.}}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px|left]] }}}Please stop. If you continue to [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalize]] Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}, you will be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing. {{{2|}}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism3 --> |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left]] }}}This is your '''last warning'''. The next time you [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalize]] Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}, you will be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing. {{{2|}}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism4 --> |
|||
Note, however, that the size of the third-level warning's image (25 px) causes it to run into the 4th warning -- causing indentation. Reducing the warning to 15 pixels solves the issue. My only issue is with images in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd level warnings classes paired with single lines of text (note how in this case, 1st and 2nd level do not overrun). For 4th level, I do not see issue: my formatting provides two lines of whitespace between the final warning and the admin notification and/or administrative act; so it clears it up. Any other concurrence with reducing image sizes for 1st, 2nd, or 3rd lvl warnings paired with single lines of text (see below)? |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px|left]] }}}Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. One or more of your recent edits{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, such as the one you made to [[:{{{1}}}]],}} have been considered unhelpful or unconstructive and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]] or removed. Please use [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|the sandbox]] for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|welcome page]] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism1 --> |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px|left]] }}}Please do not add unhelpful and unconstructive content to Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}. Your edits appear to be [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] and have been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. {{{2|Thank you.}}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism2 --> |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|15px|left]] }}}Please stop. If you continue to [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalize]] Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}, you will be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing. {{{2|}}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism3 --> |
|||
#{{{icon|[[Image:Stop hand nuvola.svg|30px|left]] }}}This is your '''last warning'''. The next time you [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalize]] Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{1|}}}|, as you did to [[:{{{1}}}]]}}, you will be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing. {{{2|}}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism4 --> |
|||
Sláinte! --[[User:Thisisbossi|Bossi]] (<small>[[User talk:Thisisbossi|talk]] ;; [[Special:Contributions/Thisisbossi|contribs]]</small>) 05:55, 22 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Block images and icons changes in general. == |
|||
[[User:Magnus animum]], changed the block images from [[:Image:Stop x nuvola.svg]] to [[:Image:Modern clock chris kemps 01 with Octagon-warning.svg]] see [[Wikipedia:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace/Multi_level_details#Blocks|here]]. There was no mention of it here, and not all the warnings were done (I've done the missing one). |
|||
I'd prefer that most changes came through here like the ones done by [[User:98E]] to the lvl4 images (which I reverted) but the block images changes do not seem out of line with some of the blocks that were in place before. Anyone think otherwise? Ta <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 14:16, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Was it your intention for the image links above to go to the [[IM]] dab page? --[[User:Kralizec!|Kralizec!]] ([[User talk:Kralizec!|talk]]) 14:50, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::The only problem with that icon is that it isn't protected and it is on Commons. That means that if someone on commons replaces the icon with something else everything here would also be affected. The other thing I don't like which is more minor but still an annoyance is that the icon doesn't seem to match the nuvola or modern look now being used in the uw-template series. -- [[User:Hdt83|<sub><font color="336611" ><b>Hdt83</b></font></sub>]] [[User talk:Hdt83|<sup><font color="blue" face="Arial"><b>Chat</b></font></sup>]] 23:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:I fixed your wikilinks, Khukri. I agree that there is a look'n feel problem with the new image. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 15:51, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==Changing V1 and V2== |
|||
I have to say that I'm not quite happy with {{tl|uw-v1}} (and it's partly my own fault). The template tries to address situations where someone has vandalized repeatedly or just once, and the resulting language doesn't flow very well. I mean the "one or more of your edits, such as the one you made to..." part. My thought is to steal the language from V2 and change V1 to the following (options included): |
|||
:Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute to our encyclopedia, but please do not make unhelpful and unconstructive edits, as you did to ''Article''. Take a look at the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|welcome page]] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia and feel free to use [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|the sandbox]] for any test edits you would like to make. Thank you. |
|||
Of course, this means that V2 would also need to be changed so that the two warnings are not redundantly similar. My proposed language for V2 is as follows: |
|||
:Adding unhelpful and non-constructive content to Wikipedia, as you did to ''Article'', is considered [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]] and is [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you would like to experiment, please use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]]. {{{2|Thank you.}}} |
|||
This would be a pretty big change, so I ask for comments, objections or suggestions. For all I know, it could just be me that doesn't particularly like the current V1.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 02:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::As level 1 warnings assume good faith, we should emphasize "''considered'' unhelpful and unconstructive" in V1. If we are assuming good faith, we must assume they had good intentions but are unaware of policy. <font color="maroon">[[User:Mr.Z-man|Mr.Z-man]]</font>'''<small>[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|talk]]</small>''<font color="navy" face="cursive">[[Special:Contributions/Mr.Z-man|¢]]</font>''''' 03:07, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::Good point. How about, "..., but please do not make edits that are considered unhelpful or unconstructive, as you did to ''Article''."? --<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 03:43, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==How does one propose a new template?== |
|||
Per discussion [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Wnjr here], there seems to be a mismatch between the tone of the {{tl|Uw-longterm}} tag and the purpose WP:WARN holds it out for (viz., reprimanding a user for a "Long term pattern of abuse"). A user had racked up a clear record of abusing the minor edit tag, but this abuse didn't amount to vandalism. Because we have a tag for such a "Long term pattern of abuse" I used this, and received complaints that this was needlessly inflammatory, because the template's language seems aimed at vandals, not serial abusers. In my view, "long term pattern of abuse" and "long term pattern of vandalism" are plainly distinct, and merit different templates. I propose there should either be separate tags for a long-term pattern of abuse (which is what we have here) and a long-term pattern of vandalism, or in the alternative, the language of the {{tl|Uw-longterm}} template should be changed to be more appropriate to the behavior WP:WARN holds it out as a sanction for.[[User:Simon Dodd|Simon Dodd]] 15:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:Your problem is in the semantics of the word "abuse". It doesn't mean what you think it means. This template is fine for the purpose it's meant for, warning users who behave ''abusively''. The guy you were using it on wasn't "abusing" anything. He was maybe ''mis''using it (arguably, in some instances, not even in most). "Abusive" behaviour is harmful behaviour that is committed in a reckless or intentional way. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 20:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::Notwithstanding Fut.Perf's comment, given discussion at [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=125792881#The_understanding_of_.22abuse.22_and_admin_misbehavior WP:AN], I have made changes to WP:WARN and surrounding materials to fix the problems that led to this situation. To begin with, because abuse and vandalism are clearly separate concepts and because {{tl|Uw-longterm}} clearly addresses the latter, I have relabeled it here at WP:WARN to reflect its actual purpose. I have also created a new template, {{tl|Uw-longtermabuse}}, to fill the gap left by relabelling {{tl|Uw-longterm}}. Lastly, I have proposed a new policy, [[Wikipedia:Abuse]] that I hope will be used to arrive at a community consensus of what "abuse" means as WP:WARN and other policies comprehend that term.[[User:Simon Dodd|Simon Dodd]] 13:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:::The template was listed for deletion at [[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2007 April 25]]. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<font color="darkblue">talk</font>]]</sup> 15:13, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::::And in further demonstration of Fut.Perf's bad faith in so doing, he made no note of that here or on my talk page. A true class act.[[User:Simon Dodd|Simon Dodd]] 15:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
==Advertising warnings== |
|||
A new section of [[WP:BLOCK]], added in [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Blocking_policy&diff=prev&oldid=125330311 this edit], permits blocks afterr warnings of accouts that "exist for the '''sole or primary purpose''' of promoting a person, company, product, or service". It seems to me that a proper set of warning tempaltes should be crezted for this, and included in [[Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]. Does anyone object or have any suggestions? [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 15:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:<s>Uh..{{t1|uw-advert1}} and the rest of the series exist.</s>. Never mind. Yes, they should be created. Also, since it's no in the blocking policy, we should make uw-adblock (ablock already exists). --<small>TeckWiz is now</small> [[User:R|'''R''']] <sup>[[User_talk:R|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/R|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/R|@]]</sub>(Let's go Yankees!)</small> 20:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:I created the series. Please review it if you have the time! [[User:Gracenotes|<span style="color:#960;">Grace</span><span style="color:#000;">notes</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Gracenotes|<span style="color:#960;">T</span>]]</sup> § 15:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::I like these, but could some or all of the also link to [[WP:SPAM]] since that is the basic guideline on what is improper advertising. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 07:12, 29 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Usage of the word "abuse" == |
|||
This word is misused here. It is very difficult to actually abuse a person over the internet. See [[Wikipedia talk:Abuse#I_object_to_the_word_.22abuse.22_used_in_this_fashion|here]] |
|||
Instead of "long-term pattern of abuse", which might be offensive to people who have suffered actual abuse, we should say "long-term pattern of severe disruption", or some other different wording. |
|||
Thanks,<br /> |
|||
[[User talk:Armedblowfish |Armed Blowfish]] ([[Special:Emailuser/Armedblowfish |mail]]) 18:56, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
:I can certainly agree with that, although it looks like it's going to be a moot point - someone's nominated the template for deletion.[[User:Simon Dodd|Simon Dodd]] 19:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::Disruption would be better wording if such a template were actually helpful. However, Armedblowfish, despite sharing your concern for the victims of abuse, reading a dictionary entry for "abuse" suggests that your restriction of the use of a word which has long had a wide range of meanings to the social context of the extremely serious things you refer to is itself an abuse of the English language. The things you describe are terrible, but that does not mean they should take over a perfectly good English word. [[User:JPD|JPD]] ([[User talk:JPD|talk]]) 11:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 17:39, 18 May 2024
|
Archives
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
your account has been used for advertising or promotion -> it has been used for advertising or promotion
Minor nitpick to reduce repetition. Mori Calliope fan talk 21:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- This seems to be a side effect of the changes made by Jpgordon in Special:Diff/1162488493. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)- Good nitpick, fixed. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 00:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2024
Please fix Template:Uw-mislead3, it expands with a <!-- Template:uw-move3 --> comment instead of <!-- Template:uw-mislead3 -->.
I just had this shocking moment where I warned someone with a level 4 move disruption warning because I copied it and thought 'oh no, I warned them for move disruption in the third warning too, how did I not see it' - but no, turns out it's just the comment that's been wrong since the template was made. – 2804:F14:80C8:4701:9C49:A8E6:A25E:3091 (talk) 03:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Done -- John of Reading (talk) 10:11, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Suggestion: Merge templates for removing XFD notices
Proposal: Merge AFD, RFD, TFD, CFD, FFD and MFD user warning templates into one. This would let editors use a centralized warnings list for deletion in general instead of having to go and carefully find the one for the appropriate XFD. If needed, we could add a parameter to disambiguate which.
Here's what the templates might look like:
Uw-xfd1: Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in deletion debates. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you.
Uw-xfd2: Please do not remove deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in deletion debates. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you.
Uw-xfd3: Please stop. If you continue to remove deletion notices or comments from deletion debates, you may be blocked from editing.
Uw-xfd4: You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove a deletion notice or a comment from a deletion debate.
Uw-xfd4im: This is your only warning; if you remove a deletion notice from a page or delete comments from a deletion debate again, you may be blocked from editing.
Any suggestions welcome! If you reply here, please ping me. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 23:48, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Link the plain and simple COI guide?
A lot of newcomers on Wikipedia might not be familiar with all of our policies and feel lost in the wordings, maybe it would be good to link a more beginner-friendly guide such as Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide in {{uw-coi}} and {{uw-coi-username}} to gently nudge them towards more responsible editing? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 17:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Vector legacy
The template currently says: "you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu for you)." This seems to apply to the Vector Legacy skin, but not the current Vector 2022 skin. I think there are now two places "Move" can be: the Tools sidebar, or Tools menu, but I don't know which one appears by default. Depending on this, please can the template be reworded, maybe to something like:
- "you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" action in the "Tools" menu at the top of the page (the "Tools" menu may be in a sidebar to the right of the page for you)."
or
- "you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" action in the "Tools" sidebar to the right of the page (the "Tools" sidebar may be hidden as a menu at the top of the page for you)."
Might also need a sentence there saying something like "if you're using the Vector legacy skin, there should be a "Move" tab at the top of the page (the tab may be hidden in a dropdown menu)." (Is there a way to automatically detect which skin the user is using, and display text appropriate to that? This might be more difficult if this template has to be subst'ed.)
Updating Help:Moving a page, and a replacement for File:Vector hidden move button.png would be nice to have, but probably not worth waiting for to make this change.
Alternatively, is there a way to flag this up to the WMF team who implemented these changes to clean up? --YodinT 19:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 May 7 § Template:Uw-cyberbully. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 11:33, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Templates warning against frivolous XfD/PROD nominations and comments?
What is a good way to warn a user who makes a clearly inappropriate or disruptive XfD/PROD nomination, such as one without a valid reason for deletion? What about users who make disruptive comments at XfD that have nothing to do with the deletion policy? Helpful Raccoon (talk) 02:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Helpful Raccoon, here's my recommendation: start by writing a manual message: explain why their edits are disruptive, ask them to stop. If it's a new editor, try to avoid jargon. If disruptive edits continue – revert. Then Template:Uw-disruptive1 becomes appropriate, since it presupposes that the edits were reverted. —andrybak (talk) 07:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- A manual message seems good. The issue I have with existing templates is that XfD nominations and comments shouldn't be reverted like other edits just for being unconstructive (like saying an article "fails GNG" when it obviously doesn't). XfD nominations can be closed as speedy keep if there's no deletion rationale or they're obviously disruptive, but that's not exactly reversion and doesn't apply to all frivolous nominations. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 08:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)