Content deleted Content added
→welcome-joke: c. |
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}} |
|||
__FORCETOC__ |
|||
{{Talk header|WT:UTM|WT:UW|wp=yes|noarchives=yes|search=yes|archive_age=30|archive_bot=lowercase sigmabot III}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:Wikiproject user warnings/templates/talk-header}} |
|||
{{Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings/templates/talk-header}} |
|||
{{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 |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 250K |
|||
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|||
|counter = 8 |
|||
| |
|counter = 20 |
||
|minthreadsleft = 5 |
|||
|archive = Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
|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__ |
|||
{{shortcut|[[WT:UTM]]}} |
|||
{{clear}} |
|||
{{archives|auto=long|index=/ArchiveIndex}}{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn|target=Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace/ArchiveIndex|mask=Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace/Archive <#>|leading_zeros=0|indexhere=no}} |
|||
== [[Template:uw-spamublock]] == |
|||
If you have a query, please see The User Warnings Wikiproject [[WP:UW/FAQ|Frequently Asked Questions]] to see if it is answered there. |
|||
{{edit template-protected|template:uw-spamublock|answered=yes}} |
|||
== Subst paramter == |
|||
your account has been used for advertising or promotion -> it has been used for advertising or promotion |
|||
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) |
|||
Can this be added to the icon template call? ''[[User:Rich Farmbrough|Rich]] [[User talk:Rich Farmbrough|Farmbrough]]'', 12:27 [[15 October]] [[2007]] (GMT). |
|||
: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) |
|||
== Link to dispute resolution == |
|||
::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 == |
|||
{{Resolved|1=looks like it's been added. --[[User:Slakr|<span style="color:teal;font-weight:bold;">slakr</span>]]<small><sup>\ [[User talk:Slakr|talk]] /</sup></small> 16:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)}} |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Template:Uw-mislead3|answered=yes}} |
|||
[[Template:uw-3rr]] might benefit from a link to [[Wikipedia:Dispute resolution]]. The template advises users to discuss their dispute, which is a start. The advantage of linking to the dispute resolution page is that this page helps explain what to do if simple talk page discussion doesn't work (I find often users keep reverting because they find discussion isn't productive). The one con I can think of is that this warning is already rather long and adding a link would lengthen it. [[User:Heimstern|Heimstern Läufer]] [[User talk:Heimstern|(talk)]] 05:49, 1 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
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 == |
|||
== [[Template:Uw-copyright]] == |
|||
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. |
|||
This doesn't mention fair use. A little misleading, I think. [[User:Rocket000|Rocket000]] ([[User talk:Rocket000|talk]]) 18:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Here's what the templates might look like:<br> |
|||
== Change to {{tl|uw-vandalism1}} == |
|||
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? == |
|||
[[User:Angel David]] recently made [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AUw-vandalism1&diff=183090867&oldid=183046911 a change] to this template. The difference is that this version would explicitely identify the target's conduct as vandalism. I personally don't like this change as I think it is sufficient for the level one [[WP:AGF]] template to describe the conduct as unconstructive. If there is clear or blatant vandalism, you can always skip to the level two warning or go straight to {{tl|Uw-vandalism4im}} or {{tl|uw-bv}}. I like having a softer version available, and the change also deprecates the level 2 warning. Any other opinions on this?--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 02:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
: I agree, that edit is not assuming good faith. Revert it. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 03:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I would also agree it should not say vandalism. Though I have wondered why need both test1 and vandalism1 when their usages are about the same. <font face="Broadway">[[User:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056366">Mr.</font>]]''[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056625">'''Z-'''</font><font color="#054F66">man</font>]]</font>'' 03:15, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I use test1 if it's an inoffensive edit ("Josh is the coolest") and vandalism1 if it's more offensive ("Australians are a bunch of dumbass fuckheads"), but can still possibly be described as someone experimenting with whether they really can edit this thing.--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 03:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I reverted it. Damn, I already placed this template a few times with that language and I was not intending to label a newbie as a "vandal". This template is supposed to AGF, so it should have polite language. If you want to label a user as a "vandal", then use level 2 or 3. That is the point of "levels". Regards.--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 03:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Should such a high use template be fully protected? A change for a few minutes could affect many uses. There really isn't much of a need for it (or similar templates) to be edited. <font face="Broadway">[[User:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056366">Mr.</font>]]''[[User talk:Mr.Z-man|<font color="#056625">'''Z-'''</font><font color="#054F66">man</font>]]</font>'' 03:28, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think we need both vandalism1 and test1, if nothing else, for consistency. Say a new user goes to the help desk or uses {{tl|helpme}} and asks how do I deal with some edit and is referred to the chart and escalating warnings are explained (or simply makes it here themselves and figures it out). If they are addressing a series of vandalism edits, they should be presented with the commensurate escalating, consistently named series, each starting with vandalism, and not have to figure out that test1 is illogically followed by vandalism2. Course the chart could remain unchanged with a simple redirect from one to the other, but it still would leave an incongruity.--[[User:Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]] ([[User talk:Fuhghettaboutit|talk]]) 03:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Seeing that there are even tools that automatically post these templates on user talk pages, they should all be fully and indefinitely protected to ensure that they are not changed without discussion. - [[User:I do not exist|<span style="color:teal">∅</span>]] ([[User talk:I do not exist|<span style="color: gold; font-weight: bold;">∅</span>]]), 11:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::I tend to agree. There are enough admins that keep an eye on these pages to sort any problems that arise, though I'm not entirely sure that ring fencing the warnings in their entirety will sit well with the community. <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 13:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::It seems to me that since these "uw-" templates were all (or most) created by a collaboration and all heavily scrutinized before they were implemented, any changes should be discussed first so that other templates can be updated accordingly to maintain strict consistency. Therefore, they (at least the ones using the "levels" structure) should be fully protected - thereby guaranteeing discussion. Regards.--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 15:27, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Leave it here for a couple more days, then village pump the issue. <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 15:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Though in saying leave it here, it would be good if alot of other editors who have had a long involvement in these templates give their thoughts (even if it is just support) as well, as a starting point before going to VP <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 11:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Regardless of the decision on the actual templates, I believe the shortcuts ({{t1|uw-v1}}, etc.) for all of these should be fully protected. Thoughts on the redirects?--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 21:33, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Agreed. I can't think of any good reason not to protect the redirects. Incidentally, I also agree with fully protecting the most used templates. At a minimum, there should be a notice suggesting discussion before making any substantive changes.--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 22:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::{{done}} I've fully protected the common uw redirects. In some sense, these were probably at greater risk, as I doubt very many of us had them on our watchlists.--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 05:04, 11 January 2008 (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) |
|||
== Other templates section == |
|||
== Vector legacy == |
|||
In the "Other" section, the link that says "Click here to show messages" is redirecting to the same page as for the single level templates section, which makes me wonder what that link is for. Isn't there a page anywhere showing all the templates from the "Other" section that it could link to? • [[User:Anakin101|Anakin]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/Anakin101|contribs]] • [[User_talk:Anakin101|complaints]])</sup> 20:52, 9 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I noticed that, too. The history tab shows it was redirected in November - I do not know any of the back history on that. Anyway, I think all of those pages are in dire need of being reorganized pretty soon. I have been cleaning up the main page here and there and put these subpages on my to-do list, but I might not get to it for months.--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 00:00, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
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: |
|||
== Template for misuse of procedures == |
|||
* "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)." |
|||
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. |
|||
Is there a warning template for users who are misusing Wikipedia procedures? In the example I'm looking at, a user has nominated an obviously valid article for deletion. --[[User:Arctic.gnome|Arctic Gnome]] <small>([[User talk:Arctic.gnome|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Arctic.gnome|contribs]])</small> 04:02, 10 January 2008 (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) |
|||
:These templates are only for common garden problems that we see almost every day, and are no substitute for a good ol' personal message. In your case it depends on the reasoning for the AFD, but common problems would be [[WP:POINT]] or [[WP:CENSOR]]. Ask an admin for a speedy keep at [[WP:ANI]], and if the editor persists without good reasoning then blocks would be issued for disruptive editing. <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 10:58, 10 January 2008 (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]]== |
|||
== {{tl|uw-vandalism4im}} == |
|||
[[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? == |
|||
Is there any real need for such a warning? That "only" word is way too strong: IMO, it implies you'll never get another; and it certainly can't (this is still IMO) be used if there already are some warnings on the page! Even "If you see a vandal with a long history" (as said [[User talk:Sandycx|here]], and i assumed it meant a long history of unwarned vandal ''edits''), i'd go for vandal3 instead... Or if that long history was already warned (as seen [[User talk:70.109.217.17|here]]), vandal4 would be just fine. Perhaps a modified v4im, that said "your ''newest'' disruptive edits" or "your ''recent'' disruptive edits"... Other thoughts? -- [[User:Jokes Free4Me|Jokes Free4Me]] ([[User talk:Jokes Free4Me|talk]]) 10:34, 10 January 2008 (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) |
|||
:Yes there is, as it is the only warning the editor will receive. This warning should not be used on first time vandals or editors with a mixed history of vandalism and good edits, but usually on persistent IP's, with a number of blocks to their names, where the editing trend suggests there is a <u>very</u> high chance the next edit will be vandalism. This is the set of warnings were AGF can only go so far, and we have to face facts that if a school IP only has vandalism edits to it's name, once a block has expired, we tell them again of the consequences and go for a longer block next time if the warning is ignored. Cheers <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 10:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:@[[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) |
|||
::I agree with Khukri. I have seldom used that warning, but I have used it when an account has had a long string of vandalism that was clearly intentional, but no recent warnings. If they were blocked 3 months ago and have vandalized regularly for the last 2 months without getting a warning, there's no purpose in starting them off with a level 2 warning... --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 22:18, 10 January 2008 (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) |
|||
:::Same here. I use it in cases where {{t1|uw-bv}} doesn't apply, I don't want to block them immediately (e.g., their last block expired a few months back, but they still have an extensive history of vandalism and blocks), or they've done a ''lot'' of vandalism yet haven't been warned yet. My only problem with people using {{t1|uw-vandalism4im}} is that they use it instead of {{t1|uw-vandalism1}} or {{t1|uw-vandalism2}} thinking that when they report to [[WP:AIV]] we'll treat it as a final warning, which is likely not going to be the case except in cases of sockpuppetry or something extraordinary. --[[User:Slakr|<span style="color:teal;font-weight:bold;">slakr</span>]]<small><sup>\ [[User talk:Slakr|talk]] /</sup></small> 16:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Uhh, a question: when should warning4 be used and when should warning4im be used? ~[[User:Ambrosia-|<font color="black" face="Fixedsys"><u>Ambrosia-</u></font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Ambrosia-|talk]]</sup> 05:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::warning4 is used after warning3 has been issued. warning4im is the only warning they receive, which is used for chronic vandals after a block expires. <font style="color:Blue;">'' '''[[User:Compwhizii|Compwhiz II]]'''<sup>([[User_Talk:Compwhizii|Talk]])</sup><sub>([[Special:Contributions/Compwhizii|Contribs]])</sub> ''</font> 22:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Incorporating layout into template coding == |
|||
There is a suggested manner on the main page in which to apply these warnings to user talk pages: |
|||
===March 2007=== |
|||
# warning |
|||
# warning |
|||
* block |
|||
# warning |
|||
So, if this is the recommended usage, should it be incorporated into the templates themselves? This would include adding a "#" at the beginning of each template and a header function (which would need coding to handle different situations - can be discussed later). Are there any drawbacks to this? Thoughts?--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 17:28, 10 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I would oppose this. Trying to correctly use code to insert headers in certain cases would be more trouble than just typing "===January 2008===" when needed. As for the "#", last I heard that was put on the page because someone thought it might attract more use there, since few were using it before. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 00:58, 11 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes; numbering breaks if someone (or an automated script) skips a line: |
|||
::# one |
|||
::# two |
|||
::# three. |
|||
::Plus, some of the antivandal bots that autowarn might need to be notified of the change. In all reality, we should probably just update the page to remove the whole numbering idea, because most admins (from what I would guess) and other editors don't pay attention to the sheer number of warnings but more to the the time they were left, the time between them, and what they're for. Morever, because the warnings all have icons on them, they are easy to count visually (without worrying about spacing/parsing/etc). --[[User:Slakr|<span style="color:teal;font-weight:bold;">slakr</span>]]<small><sup>\ [[User talk:Slakr|talk]] /</sup></small> 16:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::I agree with the icon visual. If the layout suggestion is removed from the page (which then it probably should be), the heading suggestion should definitely be left intact. With that being said, since some users remove warnings from their page (as they are free to do so), I would recommend some type of standardized edit summary be suggested on the page so warning can easily be seen in the history. Maybe "WARN #1" or something, in caps. I don't know.... Thoughts?--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 19:40, 12 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::I agree with the above in that rearranging the warnings and actually typing in the code for the warnings takes up more time. Also, tools and anti-vandal bots would have to be reprogrammed to follow this format. I say that we should get rid of this layout since the icons should be sufficient enough to tell what level warning the vandal is on. --[[User:Hdt83|<font color="336611" ><b><i>Hdt<font color="blue" >83</font></i></b></font>]] [[User talk:Hdt83|<sup><font color="brown" face="Arial"><b>Chat</b></font></sup>]] 00:51, 14 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I thought we already got rid of the "layout" when the #'s were removed from the templates themselves. :-p - [[User:I do not exist|<span style="color:teal">∅</span>]] ([[User talk:I do not exist|<span style="color: gold; font-weight: bold;">∅</span>]]), 00:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
(undent)Since the layout was added to this page, I have seen a definite increase in its usage by now-[[WP:UW]] members. As I noted in our previous discussion on this topic (was it in 2006?), while I ''prefer'' to keep the existing layout, I am not firmly attached. Though I feel lukewarm about them, I do not find either of the options discussed at [[WP:UW]] to be particularly objectionable: |
|||
# drop the numbering layout, keep the icons in the warnings |
|||
# keep the numbering layout, drop the icons in the warnings |
|||
Like I said, while I prefer the existing system and layout, I do not have any great objections to either of these options. --[[User:Kralizec!|Kralizec!]] ([[User talk:Kralizec!|talk]]) 15:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== How to conteract warnings being removed == |
|||
Increasingly I am seeing instances of vandals removing warnings from talk pages. One way of reducing the effect of this, which I am doing, is to paste the warning template code into the Edit Summary as well. This makes it easy for an admin looking at the history to see the type and nature of the warnings, even if no warnings appear on the current version of the page. Should such a request be added to the project page and promoted ? Cheers -- John <span class="plainlinks" style="font-family: Verdana; font-variant: small-caps; font-size: 11px; text-align: center;">([[User:Daytona2|Daytona2]]<span style="font-weight:bold;"> ·</span> [[User talk:Daytona2|Talk]]<span style="font-weight:bold;"> ·</span> [[Special:Contributions/Daytona2|Contribs]])</span> 17:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:The [[WP:UTM]] page does suggest you, "give the level of the template you have used (and preferably the name: for example, "error3", "v2", "d1") in your edit summary". I think most admins are in the habit of checking the talk page history for warnings, though it definitely makes life easier if descriptive summaries are used.--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 17:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Whenever I block, I always look at the talk page history ''first'' to make sure all of the warnings were properly issued. You pretty much have to since [[WP:USER]] was updated to state that editors may remove at will any messages on their own talk page. That said, as a blocking admin, I certainly appreciate it whenever an editor also includes the warning in their edit summary (personally I put the generic warning in the summary, such as {{tl|uw-error3}} or {{tl|uw-tpv4}}). --[[User:Kralizec!|Kralizec!]] ([[User talk:Kralizec!|talk]]) 17:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== uw-hblock == |
|||
I took the liberty of creating {{t1|uw-hblock}}, partially because I'm too lazy to keep pasting my block reason into {{t1|uw-block1}} (et al). Plus, I figure it's useful shorthand for other admins as well. Anyway, cheers =) --[[User:Slakr|<span style="color:teal;font-weight:bold;">slakr</span>]]<small><sup>\ [[User talk:Slakr|talk]] /</sup></small> 16:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:There probably is some discussion of which I am unaware, but why does the reason need to be stated on the template? The reason is usually listed in the blocklog anyway. I would point to [[WP:BEANS]] and [[WP:NOSPADE]] as reasons. I am not an admin so I do not add those templates, but I ''see'' them. If I am a vandal and I see a cohort with a block for doing such-and-such, then maybe I would do that because it is a sure way to get blocked. See a related [[Wikipedia_talk:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace/Archive_8#.7B.7BUw-tblock.7D.7D|archived thread]] regarding death threats. I guess I am just playing devil's advocate, but it seems to be a legitimate pondering. Regards.--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 19:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Honestly I've never made a death threat block, so I definitely agree with you on that, but I've made multiple harassment blocks (usually to socks and obvious trolls), so it's less of a block message for the people using socks and trolling, as it is more for the people who might be accidentally affected by the block and for other visitors coming to the talk page to warn the user (despite him/her already being blocked). --[[User:Slakr|<span style="color:teal;font-weight:bold;">slakr</span>]]<small><sup>\ [[User talk:Slakr|talk]] /</sup></small> 16:35, 13 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Just semantics, but how does one attempt to harass another user, either they are or they aren't? <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 07:42, 14 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Bad practice? == |
|||
To me the wording the wording "bad practice" in "deleting or editing legitimate comments ... is considered [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable|bad practice]]", used in [[:Template:uw-tpv1]], comes across as almost a joke. Any reasons to not replace that by "... is considered [[Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable|unacceptable]]"? --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 16:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:That's a level 1 warning, so the wording seems appropriately gentle. (Just my 2 cents...) --[[User:Orlady|Orlady]] ([[User talk:Orlady|talk]]) 20:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Copyright Violations == |
|||
Would it be possible to include template warnings against copyright violations? --[[User:StephenBuxton|StephenBuxton]] ([[User talk:StephenBuxton|talk]]) 12:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:{{tltts|uw-copyright}} is already in place. --[[User talk:QYV|Kife]] 12:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Also {{tltts|nothanks}}.--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 14:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== uw-afd1 - minor wording change == |
|||
May I suggest a slight change to the wording of uw-afd1? "It would be appreciated if you would not remove Articles for deletion notices" may not be strictly incorrect from a grammatical point of view, but isn't particularly "natural" English. I would suggest "if you did not remove" or "you refrained from removing" instead. [[User:Tevildo|Tevildo]] ([[User talk:Tevildo|talk]]) 11:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree the current wording is a bit awkward. I would go with an even simpler, "Please do not remove...".--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 22:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
{{done}}--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 23:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Proposed prohibition on removing templated warnings within one month == |
|||
There is an ongoing [[Wikipedia_talk:Don%27t_restore_removed_comments|discussion]] on making a prohibition on removing templated warnings within one calendar month of being placed on a user's talk page by a logged on registered user as an exception to the general practice of [[WP:DRC]]. [[User:Alice/About_Me|<b><font color="#0000DD">A</font><font color="#0066FF">l</font><font color="#0099FF">i</font><font color="#00CCFF">c</font><font color="#00EEFF">e</font></b>]][[Special:Emailuser/Alice|<font color="#FF3333"><sup>✉</sup></font>]] 02:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Considering this is directly contradicted by both the official [[WP:VAN|vandalism]] policy and the guideline on [[WP:USER|user pages]], I doubt this is going to get off the ground. --[[User:Kralizec!|Kralizec!]] ([[User talk:Kralizec!|talk]]) 04:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:#I've just read through our current [[WP:VAN]] policy pages and I must be rather dense this afternoon because it wasn't obvious to me why a proposal that users be prohibited from removing templated warnings (including those related to vandalism) from their own user talk page within one month is contradicted there (the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ACentralized_discussion%2FRemoving_warnings&diff=107417261&oldid=89912806 edit summary] by C B Dunkerson one year after discussion closed did not mention where the "community consensus" to reject the proposal was logged). |
|||
:#Guidelines [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Episodes_and_characters#Editorial_process:_consensus_can_change change as circumstances demand], that's why the discussion is ongoing. (The relevant guideline was added [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AUser_page&diff=107094096&oldid=106367747 relatively recently]. At the time it was added, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Vandalism&oldid=106704008 this] was the relevant text on that policy page: |
|||
::"'''''Talk page vandalism''''' |
|||
::''Removing the comments of other users from talk pages other than your own, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc. is generally considered vandalism. Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there. The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page, where this policy does not itself prohibit the removal and archival of comments at the user's discretion. Please note, though, that removing warnings from one's own talk page is often frowned upon.''" |
|||
::Now that text is no longer present on that policy page, it is arguable whether the guideline should be revised as well...) |
|||
::In any event, "As a tradition, Wikipedia offers wide latitude to users to manage their user space as they see fit. However, pages in user space still do belong to the community..." and if you visit the discussion, you will see why these changes are being proposed. [[User:Alice/About_Me|<b><font color="#0000DD">A</font><font color="#0066FF">l</font><font color="#0099FF">i</font><font color="#00CCFF">c</font><font color="#00EEFF">e</font></b>]][[Special:Emailuser/Alice|<font color="#FF3333"><sup>✉</sup></font>]] 06:04, 21 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== {{tl|uw-balkans}} == |
|||
Hello, I just wanted to let people know that as discussed above, the template uw-balkans has been nominated for deletion at tfd. Please see [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:uw-balkans]] to discuss. Thanks. --[[User:Hdt83|<font color="336611" ><b><i>Hdt<font color="blue" >83</font></i></b></font>]] [[User talk:Hdt83|<sup><font color="brown" face="Arial"><b>Chat</b></font></sup>]] 10:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Proposal for minor change to {{tltts|uw-spam1}} == |
|||
Just an idea to make the wording flow better: |
|||
This: |
|||
:Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not... |
|||
to this: (modified areas in '''bold''') |
|||
:Welcome to Wikipedia. '''Although everyone''' is welcome to contribute constructively to the '''encyclopedia, one '''or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not... |
|||
I thought I should ask before making any kind of modification to any of the user warnings. <font color="#3300ff">[[User:Thingg|Thingg]]</font><sup><font color="#33ff00">[[User talk:Thingg|⊕]]</font></sup><sup><font color="#ff0033">[[Special:Contributions/Thingg|⊗]]</font></sup> 21:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
*[[Template:Uw-vandalism1]] already uses that language. I would think ''all'' of the level 1 templates should be checked and updated with this language. [[WP:BE BOLD|Go for it]]. --'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 22:02, 21 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== {{tl|Uw-tblock}} nominated for deletion == |
|||
I crossed this template [[Wikipedia_talk:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace/Archive_8#.7B.7BUw-tblock.7D.7D|again]] this afternoon and this time I decided to nominate it for deletion. You are invited to voice your opinion at [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2008_January_22#Template:Uw-tblock]]. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:#002BB8;">lucasbfr</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:#001F7F;">talk</span>]]</sup> 17:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== review of {{tl|Uw-lblock}} == |
|||
I tweaked this template to make it more informative (the previous version was very blunt, in my opinion). What do you think? -- [[User:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:#002BB8;">lucasbfr</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:#001F7F;">talk</span>]]</sup> 17:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Typo in template == |
|||
{{Resolved|1=Spelling corrected. --[[User:Kralizec!|Kralizec!]] ([[User talk:Kralizec!|talk]]) 02:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)}} |
|||
There's an "e" missing from "everyone". I don't have access to fix this. --[[User talk:Mr Ralph|Mr R]] 01:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:All of the warning templates redirect back to this central talk page, please specify which particular template has the error. Regards. --'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 01:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Ach, hadn't spotted the redirect. 'Tis {{TL|uw-npa1}} --[[User talk:Mr Ralph|Mr R]] 01:39, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== The sandbox clause == |
|||
I propose removing the sandbox clause (''"If you would like to experiment..."'') from {{tl|uw-npov2}}. When people are pushing POV, they usually aren't just experimenting, they mean what they say. It's actually a matter of courtesy that we take them seriously. Implying that they may have been just fooling around with no purpose comes across as condescending. [[User:Future Perfect at Sunrise|Fut.Perf.]] [[User talk:Future Perfect at Sunrise|☼]] 09:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree with you, removed :). -- [[User:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:#002BB8;">lucasbfr</span>]] <sup>[[User talk:Lucasbfr|<span style="color:#001F7F;">talk</span>]]</sup> 10:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== [[Template:Uw-spam1|Uw-spam1]] links to [[WP:EL]] twice == |
|||
It links to [[Wikipedia:External_links]] twice in the first sentence. Slightly confusing for the layperson I think. I reckon it would read better if the first instance was unlinked. • [[User:Anakin101|<font color="#5a3696">Anakin</font>]] <sup>([[Special:Contributions/Anakin101|contribs]] • [[User_talk:Anakin101|complaints]])</sup> 18:59, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:Agreed and {{done}}--<span style="font-family: Palatino Linotype">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 23:02, 23 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
==Proposed change to Uw-coi== |
|||
Would it be better if [[Template:Uw-coi]] was changed so that "avoid breaching relevant policies" was not numbered as part of the previous list, which has a different context? Maybe instead of "<code><nowiki>#:and you must always:</nowiki></code> / <code><nowiki># '''avoid breaching'''</nowiki></code>...", "<code><nowiki>And you must always '''avoid breaching'''</nowiki></code>..."? --[[User:Jmchuff|Jason McHuff]] ([[User talk:Jmchuff|talk]]) 08:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== welcome-joke == |
|||
There are times when a new user gets off on the wrong foot, and rather than get a welcome message the new user gets bombarded with warnings. In the interest of assuming good faith, it might be helpful to give the user a welcome message combined with a notice of what they've done wrong. |
|||
For new editors that have made joke edits, I created [[Template:welcome-joke]]. May I add this to [[Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]]? [[User:Kingturtle|Kingturtle]] ([[User talk:Kingturtle|talk]]) 19:42, 27 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:I appreciate your contributions, but it seems like the purpose of that template kind of overlaps with the purpose of {{tl|uw-joke1}}. Perhaps a rewording of {{tl|uw-joke1}} is in order? - [[User:Chardish|Chardish]] ([[User talk:Chardish|talk]]) 20:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Sending the {{tl|uw-joke1}} message misses out on also providing the new user with a wide array of helpful links. [[User:Kingturtle|Kingturtle]] ([[User talk:Kingturtle|talk]]) 20:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Do new users really want a wide array of helpful links, or do they want a few links, carefully selected? Providing links to nearly every useful page (there are 64 links on that template) is overwhelming. - [[User:Chardish|Chardish]] ([[User talk:Chardish|talk]]) 21:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::(ec)If I feel a user falls into the category Kingturtle is talking about, I always give the user ''both'' {{t1|uw-joke1}} '''and''' {{t1|welcome}}. That seems to do the trick in my mind. I believe that all of these "combo" messages are ineffective and I have never used them; whereas 2 separate messages make the appropriate points. Regards. --'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 21:16, 27 January 2008 (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)