As the number of edits get higher, is it possible to shrink the text in the icon box somehow? Otherwise, theoretically, we could end up with this:

JPG-GR 00:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I think that would need quite a bit of logic (adding commas for every power of 1000) Are there any other templates that have this problem? How do they deal with it. Adam McCormick 00:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No clue whatsoever, and I figured as much. One of those puzzles that I love, but I am waaaaaaaaay too unfamiliar with wiki-code at this point to solve this one. JPG-GR 04:51, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the solution is to put them in yourself, So:

100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+

This user has made more than 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 contributions to Wikipedia.

or for commas and returns:

100, 000,000, 000,000, 000,000, 000,000+

This user has made more than 100, 000,000, 000,000, 000,000, 000,000 contributions to Wikipedia.

You can put just about anything in the text box so <small></small> tags should work too:

100,000,000, 000,000,000, 000,000,000+

This user has made more than 100,000,000, 000,000,000, 000,000,000 contributions to Wikipedia.

Adam McCormick 16:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erm... can we safely say that someone with that many edits NEEDS HELP, NOW? – Gurch 20:39, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say we need to worry too much about this. Assuming the average time taken to make an edit is 10 seconds, making 10²⁶ would take 50 billion times the earth's predicted lifetime. I don't think getting over a couple hundred thou would be possible. - Zeibura S. Kathau ^{(Info | Talk)} 23:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt. It's my debugger lifestyle. Gotta find solutions to those problems that theoretically won't happen. :) JPG-GR 04:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably gonna have to use exponents. So for 100000000000000000000000000, it's 10²⁶, which will produce:

1026+

This user has made more than 1026 contributions to Wikipedia.

V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 15:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This still leaves us with the problem of, what if the exponent too becomes too wide?, e.g. 10^{1000000000000000}. Maybe a change of basis, or double exponentiation: 10¹⁰¹⁵ — Isilanes 15:49, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the exponent is too wide, you ban the user, because any user making that many edits within the forseeable future is clearly a renegade bot causing financial problems for the Foundation through extreme overuse of bandwidth. We don't need to solve this problem for the same reason that computer systems don't always use 5 digits for the year section of a date - it isn't worthwhile for the next 7993 years. Nihiltres^(t.c.s) 19:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I support the above : ) - As a guideline back down to reality, let's make the top number 900 million (900 000 000), so that we sidestep the billion naming convention issue between english speakers. - jc37 19:36, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, I was kidding. 10¹⁰¹⁵ edits is just as as ridiculous as 10²⁶ edits mentioned above (however bigger it is). We can safely assume that anything above 1M or 10M must be faked. Moreover, the solution to the "problem" is that the user can write anything in the subst'ed text (e.g. 200k edits, or 0.2M edits, or 2·10⁵ edits). — Isilanes 16:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A valid explanation for not needing a solution. *rests now* JPG-GR 07:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about just having an optional argument for the template specifying the text size for the number in the left section? --Jordan Elder talk 01:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The {{#ifexpr ParserFunction seems good for an automatic solution. V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 01:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually what I was going for in the first place, but wasn't sure if it was even possible. JPG-GR 04:27, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a table on the documentation page showing the colors that were used for each range in the original templates, in case users want to emulate these. --PhantomS 08:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has significantly changed the way the template works for color and I think it makes it much more difficult to use. I've corrected the default back to the colors it was and unless there's some good reasoning I'm going to revert the change. Adam McCormick 04:59, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: {{subst:User contrib meta|User 100e}} will produce just about the same appearance as {{User 100e}}, but it's programmed to use {{user contrib}}. I'm in favor of using a one time substitution, rather than keeping the 4 huge switch statements. Gracenotes^T § 19:43, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, since users regularly update userboxes on their pages. I know I will. And I also know that I would not like to change the template back to a substed template every time. A bunch of huge switches will not waster server resources; my userpage has two of these templates on them, and one uses the set switch. V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 19:55, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Well, I guess that sounds fine, I should have never gotten into colors to begin with; just standardized it. Well, paint the bikeshed however you wish :) Gracenotes^T § 20:26, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: {{User contrib meta}}, I created an alternate version which takes the raw edit count as input and autoselects the right userbox from the old set by transcluding {{User contrib}}. This simplifies the template setup process. Nihiltres^(t.c.s) 22:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Color Reference is broken, {{Template:User 10e}} does not exist, and the other ones don't exist either.  Tcrow777  talk 20:27, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those links can be deleted, they reference the old userboxes that this one replaced, they worked for the first wee this page was up. I'll go delete them. Adam McCormick 04:38, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before this page goes much further into "mass-effect", I'd like to suggest a more specific rename to Template:User edit count. "contrib" is too vague for the usage, and could mean any number of things. - jc37 17:17, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer contrib because it's easy to remember and shorter to type. Either way I think this page needs to at least be a redirect. There is also some debate as to whether talk page contributions count as "edits" or just contributions Adam McCormick 18:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to that debate? I think that the fact that we click on a tab labelled "edit this page" makes such a debate moot? : ) - jc37 19:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edit this page bit is consistent on most wiki sites. I can't point you to a debate because I've only ever seen it in statements by individuals and personal conversations. I just meant that there is some difference between edits to the Main namespace and edits in general and that some editors (myself included) believe that edits should refer to the Main namespace as that is "Editing" the encyclopedia and that other edits such as discussion are contributing to the encyclopedia but not editing it. Adam McCormick 19:43, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The list currently on the page was generated by Gracenotes (talk · contribs) specifically to be used for the merger of the existing edit count userboxes to the use of this one. Therefor I have move it here, in its entirety rather than transcluding it. Adam McCormick 04:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At some point, these colors should be reorganized to represent more of a progression so that the number of edits can be visually referenced without referencing the guide (at which point the guide would be used only for customization. Adam McCormick 19:21, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

 – The insane parameter was added to the template.

APerson (talk!) 14:18, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would anyone support me in re-adding the ", and as a result may be slightly insane" text for contribution numbers over 100,000? This would be the simple addition of two ParserFunctions, one inside the other:

• Wikipedia. would become "Wikipedia{{#ifeq:{{#expr: {{{1}}} > 100000}}|1|, and as a result may be slightly insane|<!--null-->}}.

I think it'd be nice, since this improves the emulation of the old templates, but I don't know what other people think. What's your opinion? Nihiltres^(t.c.s) 22:47, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really think that it adds much to the template. I'd prefer an insane param like "insane=yes" that would activate the text. I'd still prefer to have neither. Adam McCormick 06:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably a good idea to retain the classic bits, just for a sake of history. Plus, it'd be nice to see something like "this user has 2 edits and as a result may be slightly insane" just for sillyness factor. JPG-GR 07:11, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, an insane parameter would be just fine as a means of implementation, and I was thinking just the same as regards history, JPG-GR. The idea of having it apply for users with 2 edits who want it, why not? Nihiltres^(t.c.s) 13:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If as seems likely per Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_5#Numerous_edit-count_userboxes this box will replace all the existing boxes, shouldn't it output categories like the other boxes do? --kingboyk 17:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding categories, there is talk about deleting them alltogether due to past precedent never being overturned at DRV. Disregarding that, we have established on WP:UCFD that edit count categories should only exist in 5k increments at most. So to whoever is thinking about adding this, please do not have this template add people to categories such as "Wikipedians with over 6,000 edits" or other redlinked categories that are likely to encourage someone to create such categories. Thanks. VegaDark (talk) 06:37, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to set this up please don't panic! Adam McCormick 04:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, 5000 categories work, now to deal with non-number text Adam McCormick 04:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When I use the userbox, I get a 200+ edits boxs with the number in white! Take a look to see what I mean: User:PostScript/ImportantBoxes —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PostScript (talk • contribs) 17:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Fixed. V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 20:23, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the font switches need to be changed so that the numbers that are supposed to be colors other than white are listed as the font defaults to white Adam McCormick 21:42, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That should do it, hopefully that works? Adam McCormick 17:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yessir, it works, thank you very much. --PostScript (info/talk/contribs) 00:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I got an 'Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character "?"' with the userbox today. I'm assuming it was because I stuck a ³ in which messes up the script. Is it possible to be able to use the old userbox for now, until the script is finalised.

Not only did it mess up my userbox, for some bizarre reason it messed up the __NOTOC__ magic word! Centy 13:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We're gonna have to revert the changes until after somebody successfully tests this in a sandbox. V60 ^{干什么？ · 喝掉的酒 · ER 4} 19:07, 21 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it should work now but the solution is less-than-ideal There doesn't seem to be any function to identify strings. I'll add code to show commas with {{formatnum}} Adam McCormick 00:49, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway way to allow users the option to turn of commas? 1,337 looks far worse than 1337 edits. Centy 21:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it could be messy. I'll give it a shot Adam McCormick 23:02, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Messy was the word, I hate {{#ifeq:}}. It wouldn't take {{{1}}}. Anyhow, adding "format=no" should now kill the text formating. Let me know if there's another problem Adam McCormick 02:40, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A minor issue: there's an extra line at the bottom of the template that is transcluding onto user pages. This is generally not an issue except when the userbox is placed in a table or next to other userboxes. See, for example, the transclusions here and here. Could someone please fix it? Thanks, Black Falcon ^(Talk) 18:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Alanbly for fixing it. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 17:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, couldn't see the extra line in the preview Adam McCormick 21:17, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The categories corresponding to this template are all up for deletion, please weight in at the discussion if you care. Adam McCormick 04:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the sentence "This user has made over 100,000 contributions to Wikipedia, and, as a result, may be slightly insane," the comma after "Wikipedia" shouldn't be there. It's a list with two items, and a comma only needed with three or more (and even then, it's optional). I tried to fix it myself, but in removing the comma, it wound up displaying as "...to Wikipediaand, as..." --Brandon Dilbeck 07:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Adam McCormick 18:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose a new box/colour for 150,000 contribs, as some users have attained/are close to attaining this number of contribs. I propose that this box be really really outstanding, with loyd colours etc. What does everyone think? -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can do it if you want, but please keep in mind that colours don't matter that much. (→zelzany - fish) 17:49, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this change is made (And I'll make it if there's consensus), then we need an even more outrageous color for 200k edits, as it is currently set the same as 100k. What color combination do you propose? Adam McCormick 22:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red and black always serves to stun. Anonymous Dissident^Talk 15:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anyway I can change where the link goes to? I'd like it to go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rockfang instead of where it currently goes. Rockfang (talk) 12:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to make this same thing work for a Wikia project? or is there already one on wikia? if you could respond on my talk page that would be great. Thanks! Sirkad_talk 03:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recently there was an edit concerning which edit counter this template should use. I have always been of the opinion that the counter by wantanabe_kate is the best (and easiest to read) out there. The new edit pointed here I think there needs to be more discussion before this is made the default. If the new link is decided to be "better" I'll add a parameter to allow the original as I find it much more legible. Adam McCormick (talk) 06:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I talked to the user who made the change after the first time he changed it. Apparently the one that we changed it back to, wannabe-kate, is "... extremely slow when you get into tens of thousands of edits, and was only implemented to combat the (now mostly non-existemt) replication lag." ^([1]) I agree, it is slower (a lot slower), but I prefer it anyways, because it is just better . I think it would be a good idea to add a parameter that way people can chose whichever one they like. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:25, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you could make a couple different options, like the one requested on the thread 2 above this one. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK I've made a first attempt at adding a "link" parameter. it works like this:

{{User contrib|100}} makes:

{{User contrib|100|link=http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/count_edits?user={{urlencode:{{BASEPAGENAME}}}}&dbname=enwiki_p}} makes:

{{User contrib|100|link=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Alanbly}} makes:

Noticed that since the last change, any boxes with a comma in them break. Compare

with

Lugnuts (talk) 21:20, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep - I, too, just noticed the comma-problem and came over here to see what was up. Is this edit (diff) that permitted "indiscrete values" the one that did it? --Lquilter (talk) 23:04, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That edit did cause the problem and as such I've reverted it (just as it was reverted by the original editor). I am going to make this clear, unless such an edit does take commas into account it should not be made. I personally would prefer removing all preprogrammed colors but the templates which this one replaced used them so they were kept. Adam McCormick (talk) 02:05, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No you didn't, I did. The problem is fixed now. The colors won't work if you use commas though, but it didn't before either so i doesn't matter. --MrStalker ^(talk) 17:38, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I did, Wikipedia is just smart enough not to post both changes. Thank you for fixing your edit. Adam McCormick (talk) 17:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, just noticed that your edit doesn't work for any value under 1000. Adam McCormick (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damn it... I've reverted again. I'll see if I can come up with a solution for this. --MrStalker ^(talk) 18:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've got one, Tell me what you think Adam McCormick (talk) 18:42, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I was on the same track, never thought of using #iferror though. It should be working now. --MrStalker ^(talk) 18:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting everyone know that I added a new parameter to the template that when a user adds unique=X to the variables it adds the text "X of which are unique". E.g. "This user has made over 826 contributions to Wikipedia , 448 of which are unique." or "This user has made over 826 contributions to Wikipedia , 448 of which are unique and X of which are deleted" . It has all been fixed so that it doesn't interfere with the deleted= variable. I added this when I noticed that wannabe_kate lists the number of unique edits per page and I think that would be a useful thing for a user to display as well as their total edit count. Happy Editing!  Atyndall93 | talk  11:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to my long absence starting back around October 2006, I had the thought to merge these templates and to give them a new color scheme as well. If anyone is interested, click here. Also, there is another template that is floating around which seems to be a duplicate of this one User mainspace edits. If there are differences between the two, it is suggested they be merged and one deleted. - LA @ 07:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible to create a second Babel with all contributions of a single user to all projects of Wikimedia? Marcus Cyron (talk) 00:58, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just use the link parameter, so for you it would be:

{{User contrib|the top|link=http://tools.wikimedia.de/~purodha/sample/dbswithuser.php?usr={{urlencode:Marcus Cyron}}&go=Go%21&uselang=en}}

Which shows up as:

the top+

This user has made more than the top contributions to Wikipedia.

Isn't that easier than creating a new version? Adam McCormick (talk) 05:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am a member of the wiki Lostpedia. I copied this template and edited it onto there at [2].But it will not display correctly [3]. I copied my version to my page on Wikipedia and it works [4][5]. Does anyone know why this is?--Connor401 (talk) 20:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably a problem with the setup of parser functions over there, maybe they don't allow parser functions in user space. You should try moving it to template space and see if it displays correctly. Adam McCormick (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Still No. Template:[6] Inclusion:[7]--Connor401 (talk) 14:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it still an issue if you remove "Template:" from the page you're transcluding to? Adam McCormick (talk) 20:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to change the link from showing Kate's Tool to SQL's Tool, which shows deleted contributions? Ctjf83Talk 18:58, 9 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a "link=" parameter should do it. -- Avi (talk) 07:05, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It worked! Thanks Ctjf83Talk 00:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The query.php link is dead so this needs to be updated. Snappy56 (talk) 08:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} I've copied this template and created {{User contrib SUL}}. Is it an idea to specify in this template that this is a count for the English language wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org)? Nsaa (talk) 22:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done but in future please don't subst the {{editprotected}} template. Stifle (talk) 11:50, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why? I must delete my box now. Why not for all projects? If here is a specification, there also should be a version for all Wikimedia-Projects. Marcus Cyron (talk) 20:45, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm reposting the tag because this suggestion wasn't discussed. I'm with Marcus, if you really want to specify English Wikipedia it should be a flag you can set, not the default. Please change it back or make it a parameter. Adam McCormick (talk) 00:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've partially reverted the change. I added a {{{lang}}} parameter, so that people who want to specify "English" can do so. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}}

Currently this userbox expands vertically if the text if forced onto three lines. This can be fixed by reducing the line height slightly. Change the line beginning:

| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.25em; color:

to read

| style="font-size: 8pt; padding: 4pt; line-height: 1.1em; color:

Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:58, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. — Huntster (t • @ • c) 09:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reading all of the above (if I haven't overlooked something), the user boxes seem limited to the contributions in one Wikipedia only. What can a user do who has >5000 contributions in the English Wikipedia and >3000 in the German? One user box with 5000 or 8000? Or two user boxes??--Ratzer (talk) 08:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can do whatever you want, You could use {{User contrib|8000}} which gives:

Or to be specific you could use {{User contrib|8000|lang=English and German}} which gives:

Or to be explicit you could use {{User contrib|5000|lang=English}}{{-}}{{User contrib|3000|lang=German}} which gives:

It's all up to you. I would suggest using one of the first two. Adam McCormick (talk) 15:49, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It says it has a 69 hour high database server tag, but when I use the wannabe kate tool, it counts fine.--Truco 23:45, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree the counter should be put back to Kate's tool. Adam McCormick (talk) 06:06, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could we make the 30,000+ edits golden-ish instead of purple? Considering that once you pass 30,000, the colors never change, I'd rather look at a lighter color than purple. Gary King (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} Could this template be changed so that it uses the {{Userbox}} template. I've done a version in the sandbox which does that. So can it be copied over. Thanks. -- WOSlinker (talk) 18:20, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Let me know if there are any problems. Plastikspork (talk) 20:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"There are various edit counters here."

The "here" link is broken, just thought I should let somebody know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iankap99 (talk • contribs) 22:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest the addition of bot=(yes|no), script=(yes|no), script_wrote=(yes|no), broke=(yes|no) and busted=(yes|no) parameters which may encourage bot and script users to be more honest in their edit counts. As in: "I've made 20,000 edits to Wikipedia, 19,783 of which were by a script, but I wrote it myself, and it only broke 17 articles, and I never got busted for it!" --Lexein (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC) [reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This implies that the pages that were deleted may be slightly insane. I'm not sure where else to put the phrase generated by insane=yes; maybe the words "This user" could be added in front of "may be slightly insane" if deleted=# is used? APerson (talk!) 22:05, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]