Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortcut:
WT:UTM
edit
Archive
Archives

If you have a query, please see The User Warnings Wikiproject Frequently Asked Questions to see if it is answered there. Thank you!

Contents


[edit] {{uw-copyright1}} --> {{Cv}} ?

I just saw that the uw-copyright series was deleted and redirected to {{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 :)) -- lucasbfr talk 13:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

There are two templates, {{Nothanks}} (or {{Nothanks-sd}}) and {{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 {{uw-copyright1}} to {{Nothanks}} instead; it also happens to be much more explanatory and helpful than the new {{uw-copyright1}} which was apparently invented without any reference to already existing templates. —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 {{Cv}}. What do you think? -- lucasbfr talk 09:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
I ripped of the 2 old templates. Here's the 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? -- lucasbfr talk 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 {{uw-copyright}} that I hope will please everyone. -- lucasbfr talk 07:54, 29 March 2007 (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 :) --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? -- lucasbfr talk 07:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template signature error

Whenever I use any of {{uw-block1}} , {{uw-block2}} or {{uw-block3}} it messes up my signature. It clips everything but the "Email" link. Have a look in my 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:

<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>

Yes, you could have read it from the edit box but it would be mixed with everything else then. Thanks, James086Talk|Email 12:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The source of the problem is the vertical bar.
<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>
It causes an "ifelse" statement to become screwed up. Replacing the "|" with either "&#124;" or "{{!}}" will fix the problem. GracenotesT § 04:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
It works now, thanks a lot. James086Talk | Email 09:28, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
No problem! GracenotesT § 16:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Foreign language user warning template

I made a new warning template {{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.  Andreas  (T) 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. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@ 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. GracenotesT § 04:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I would suggest to deprecate and bot-replace template:UE and maybe also those like template:contrib-fr1.  Andreas  (T) 17:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New template proposal: Articlesig

Assuming it doesn't already exist in some form, I am going to create this new user message template, {{Articlesig}}, in about a week if there are no objections. (The design happens to be lifted from {{noprotection}}.)

[edit] Proper signature use

Hello, {{PAGENAME}}. I've noticed that you've been adding your signature to some of your 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 edit history. Therefore, you should only (and always) use your signature after contributing to talkpages, the Village Pump, or other discussion pages. (For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these, see What is an article?) Thanks for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience!

\sim Lenoxus " * " 08:37, 26 March 2007 (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? Natalie 14:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean? \sim Lenoxus " * " 16:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
A single template, as opposed to an escalating series of templates. Natalie 16:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I think if they continue to do it the standard vandalism or test templates would suffice.Mr.Z-mantalk¢Review! 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. \sim 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. TJ Spyke 00:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
To return to {{Articlesig}}: 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? Greswik 21:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Question

If you aren't an admin, like most people here, do these threats carry no weight?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. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 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. Natalie 15:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] <includeonly>subst:</includeonly> instead of subst=subst:?

Currently, most user warnings in this project make use of {{{subst|}}} with an optional |subst=subst:}} 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 <includeonly>subst:</includeonly> trick to simplify the output? The includeonly 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. Pyrospirit Flames Fire 02:21, 1 April 2007 (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. GracenotesT § 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! Pyrospirit Flames Fire 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. -- lucasbfr talk 06:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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 {{1}}".

Any thoughts? wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 00:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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. -Amatulic 19:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

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 ;). -- lucasbfr talk 10:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 4-im

What does "im" mean? --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 18:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Immediate - last/only warning. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 18:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] uw-advert1

It seems we have a 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. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 23:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Either that or redirect. —METS501 (talk) 23:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Uw-redirect4im

Do we really need a 4im for redirecting? I think that's a bit harsh. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 14:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Singlenotice/inner

I don't have time now, but when someone does, please update Template:Singlenotice/inner. Thanks! --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 16:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 03:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

That seems fine. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 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.--Kubigula (talk) 13:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] 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

Reported to Admin

You have been reported to admin due to your repeated vandalism. An administrator will review your edits and decide whether you should be blocked.   Asics talk Editor review! 17:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


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 {{Subst:User:Asics/Reported|sig=~~~~}} 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, Asics talk Editor review! 17:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Fwarn isn't "uw-certified", but it's available. --TeckWiz ParlateContribs@(Lets go Yankees!) 17:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 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 {{uw-test}}, {{uw-vandalism}} or {{uw-joke}}, I feel that these may be a little too generic. Are there any suggestions? --Sigma 7 02:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../t/e/m/Wikipedia_talk%7ETemplate_messages_User_talk_namespace_f6b1.html"