MediaWiki talk:Anoneditwarning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This message appears at the top of every page of users not logged in when editing. I've added links to IP address, the history, and to the log-in screen. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 23:01, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expand

— Omegatron 00:01, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with that. The simpler we keep the message, the better. If necessary, a new page could be created explaining all this, but I don't think it's necessary. Keep in mind that this message appears at the top of every edit screen. Also, some people might not agree with the last statement. While it is true in terms of technical IP addresses, other people think that an account feels like a name, making it less anonymous. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

The typical anonymous editor doesn't understand what that means. I don't think another sentence is too long.

True, we should keep the message simpler. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 03:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

"You are not logged in. You are free to edit pages; be aware that your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history, which is accessible by anyone and can be used to reveal your true identity. Registering an account allows you to post under a pseudonym instead." — Omegatron 01:15, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

This sentence structure looks sound and to the point. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 03:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warn anons creating articles in talk namespace?

In the past week I've had to move no less than 7 articles created by anon users to the article namespace. Should we include a namespace check that points them to articles for creation? Kimchi.sg 10:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Anons can no longer create articles if I remember correctly. ~ Flameviper 13:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Place IP address at top of page?

I was thinking that it chould display the anon IP address along with a link to the anon's talk page. Something like "Your IP address, which can be found [[Special:Mytalk|here]], which will be recorded in this page's edit history". As it currently stands, it is exceedingly hard to find your own IP address and as thus, many anons (especially shared IPs) are unaware of their vandalism notices (usually thinking that their vandalism is acceptable). ~ Flameviper 13:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It's already at the top of the page by default... next to login/logout... right? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it isn't. On Uncyclopedia it is, likely because they use an older version of MediaWiki. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:37, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Don't see any harm in changing text from "your own IP address" to eg "your own IP Address ([[Special:Mytalk|184.23.43.1]])" - PocklingtonDan 19:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Impossible, I think, because the IP address isn't passed in to the message. --ais523 09:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

No it's not. 68.39.174.238 13:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

68.29.173.238 is right; although it appeared in previous MediaWiki versions, it doesn't seem to do so at the moment. --ais523 13:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd be happy to do it for yall, but I can't seem the magic word for it. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Once the exact text of the addition has been decided, consensus has been reached, and it is technically possible, re-add {{editprotected}}. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 04:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this can be done without a change to the software. --ais523 12:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The link to your talk page is already functional. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] = New text =

Per above discussion, I have taken the liberty of writing a new text for the contents of this page.

You are not currently logged in. While you are free to edit without logging in, your IP address (viewable here) will be recorded in this page's edit history. Creating an account will conceal your IP address and provide you with many other benefits.

The raw code:

You are not currently [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]]. While you are free to edit without logging in, your [[IP address]] (viewable [[Special:Mytalk|here]]) will be recorded in this page's <span class="plainlinks"> [{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=history}} edit history]</span>.  Creating an account will conceal your IP address and provide you with many other [[Wikipedia:Why create an account?|benefits]].

Cheers!

~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

What about ...'your IP address (view your IP address and messages sent to people with that IP address) will be recorded'..., to make it clearer to people who don't understand IPs what's going on? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ais523 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC).

That seems too long. And it's cumbersome... KISS. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 20:14, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Done. Agree that the second proposal is too wordy, although the first one might do with a little more elaboration. Perhaps add the IP address note on the seperate line? But anyway, the proposed wording seems to be a step up from what we have, now, so I've put it in. Luna Santin 23:32, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Luna. I believe that link may stop a considerable amount of vandalism from anonymous editors (particularly shared IPs, who tend to not receive vandalism warnings). I believe it may be possible to further distill the fact that vandalism is bad into these IPs, but until that can be done, this will work superbly. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 01:34, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reducing "uninentional vandalism"

{{editprotected}}

(Topic moved from Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Reducing "unintentional vandalism" on advice.)

I would like to suggest that an augmented version of the text "For testing, please use the sandbox instead.", which currently appears in the edit window in a place where no-one would ever see it (least of all casual experimenters), is promoted up the page to go immediately beneath the edit buttons, so that this section reads:

Do not copy text from other websites without permission. It will be deleted.
Do not save editing experiments. For testing, please use the sandbox instead.

The aim is to discourage non-malicious users from unintentionally corrupting pages by entering random characters etc. and then saving the page to "see what happens". I'm hoping that this area of the screen will -- just about -- bear one more line of text. Any thoughts?

Matt 22:20, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this is a good idea, but suggest slightly different wording:

To test how Wikipedia works, edit the sandbox, not other pages.

-- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:03, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added {{editprotected}}. The suggested edit seems good to me, I'll just wait to see if any objections come up. --ais523 08:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

As for the wording... what about If you want to make test edits, you can do so safely in the Sandbox.? --ais523 14:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.. I kind of prefer a definite statement to the effect that you shouldn't save test edits, which is then followed by a clause mentioning the sandbox. Just having an "if you want to experiment then..."-type wording seems a little weaker to me. Also, I think the inclusion of the word "save" is important. You can do editing experiments to your heart's content on "live" articles provided that you only preview, and indeed this is a very useful facility. Matt 01:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

Do not save test edits. If you want to experiment, please use the Sandbox. I wonder if this could be turned off in the Sandbox itself using ParserFunctions? (It would depend on how this particular message is cached; it appears to accept wikimarkup, but I'm wondering how often it's parsed.) --ais523 12:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yep, that wording seems fine to me. I think it would have to be turned off (or reworded) in the sandbox itself, otherwise it would be extremely confusing. Actually, on a slightly different note, I find the sandbox itself confusing. Is there only one sandbox article for everyone? How does that work if there are twenty people all trying to edit it at the same time? Matt 17:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

There's one main sandbox, and test edits overwrite or follow each other, generally speaking. User:Sandbot does its best to try to maintain some sort of order there, and on occasion I reset it manually myself. Registered users can also create their own sandboxes, typically which only they edit, for longer-lasting tests (e.g. when you want to show something to someone or don't want your test to be overwritten immediately). --ais523 17:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I've checked; it is possible to turn this off in the sandbox. If there are no objections soon, I'll make the change. --ais523 17:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

(Undo indent) Excellent. I just had another thought actually. If you want to test out how something will appear in an article, then in practice it is so much easier to use the Preview button than mess around with the sandbox. If you can't get it to work, or you don't like the results, then you just navigate away without saving. I wonder if it might be worth trying to explicitly mention this in the message? Otherwise people might get into the habit of thinking they have to use the sandbox, when really they don't. Downside is that the message will get longer and more complicated, and I can't think of a really neat and concise way of expressing it right now. Matt 17:36, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

There are occasions on which previewing is insufficient for saving for technical reasons; additionaly, one of the main reasons for test edits is that people want to edit Wikipedia just to see if they can, and previewing isn't very useful for that. I'd suggest using the shorter message that doesn't mention 'Preview' (which is quite obvious anyway, as it's right next to 'Save'). --ais523 17:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think you are probably right. It's probably over-complicating matters. Unless anyone objects, let's go with the wording you proposed. Matt 18:42, 27 April 2007 (UTC).

"Do not save test edits." seems a bit rude to be displaying to every single anon. To borrow a line from WP:WARN, how about just "If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox."? —dgies^t_c 23:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

As per my earlier comment, I think it's better to include a direct statement telling people not to save tests. Just saying "If you want to experiment, then..." seems rather weak to me. However, if you feel the proposed wording is too abrupt then it could be easily softened as Please do not save test edits. If you want to experiment then please use the Sandbox. Matt 00:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC).

Y Done. I've made the change; the final wording adopted was "Please do not save test edits. If you want to experiment, please use the Sandbox." (which differs from "Matt"'s version only in that I used a comma rather than 'then'). The notice will be disabled in the Sandbox itself. --ais523 08:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Good stuff... thanks for doing that! Matt 00:47, 2 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Compensating for Bug ID 9213

{{editprotected}} Would it be possible to make the link to Special:Mytalk more noticeable, to help make up for the failure of the new messages bar to work consistently or reliably for anons? That way they see an obvious link to their talk page whenever they hit edit?--VectorPotential^Talk 23:57, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Would bolding it be ok? ^demon^{[omg plz]} 00:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Something like that, maybe with a reference to it being a talk page, something like Check your talk page for new messages, if that's not too horrible looking--VectorPotential^Talk 16:57, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

How's that? ^demon^{[omg plz]} 21:12, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

That works--VectorPotential^Talk 21:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Would adding something like {{User:Vector Potential/anon workaround}} be overkill?--VectorPotential^Talk 16:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

This is actually a serious suggestion--VectorPotential^Talk 17:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I think its a good idea. Most editors are not going to read through the entire text at the top so a orange bar will catch their attention. What do others think? --_Hdt83 ^Chat 19:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Having the bar there all the time will lead to it being ignored just as if it was never there. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Emphasize logging

I think we should emphasize that your IP address and the time and date of your edits will be freely visible to anyone, and recorded forever and ever. I think this would discourage at least a small portion of the vandalism (from high school libraries and the like; yes, you can be tracked down from this information, kids). Currently it says:

You are not currently logged in. While you are free to edit without logging in, your IP address (viewable on your talkpage, where you can check messages sent to your IP) will be recorded in this page's edit history. Creating an account will conceal your IP address and provide you with many other benefits.

How about this?

You are not currently logged in. While you are free to edit without logging in, your IP address will be recorded publicly, along with the time and date, in this page's edit history. It is sometimes possible for others to identify you with this information. Creating an account will conceal your IP address and provide you with many other benefits. Messages sent to your IP can be viewed on your talkpage.

Whether it helps chill some vandalism or not, it's still good to spell this out for newcomers. Most people aren't too technically-savvy. — Omegatron 05:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

"can be used by others to identify you"? — Omegatron 18:46, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

A very sensible addition, I think, but for one thing. We should somehow avoid giving an innacurate impression of the likelihood of such a search being carried out. Adrian M. H. 18:54, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes. We need to stress that it's possible and completely out of our control, but without giving the indication that it happens regularly. — Omegatron 20:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I changed it a little bit again. — Omegatron 12:31, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds pretty good. I think that the use of "possible" is sufficient to indicate that it is unlikely to happen in practice. Adrian M. H. 15:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I switched "often" for "sometimes", which is technically slightly less accurate but reads better and avoids any hint that it happens a lot. What do you think? Adrian M. H. 15:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Fine with me. I'll put it up. — Omegatron 15:26, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Is there a page that lists instances of anon identification like this? Benoit, Seigenthaler, politicians editing their own articles, etc. We could create such a page and link to it from "sometimes possible". — Omegatron 15:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Not sure, but I'll keep an eye open for it. Adrian M. H. 15:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest something like "...will conceal your IP address - within reason - and..."--Rambutan (talk) 18:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

It's an improvement. People have the right to know this. A.Z. 00:00, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Though not to avoid being prosecuted for murder... A.Z. 00:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

We don't want to discourage anon editing though, and this may scare people into not contributing. This is also technically true for registered users as well, except the "publicly" part. I would remove the line "It is sometimes possible for others to identify you with this information" and leave the rest. Prodego ^talk 05:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

This really looks like something that will backfire. We probably want vandals to edit anonymously so that it's easier for us to track them down. I don't quite see the positive in a move that will encourage the creation of vandalism-only accounts. Once a clueless vandal realizes that it takes 10 seconds to register a new account the time we lose with that vandal increases dramatically. Plus the warning message has an odd Orwellian tone to it that is likely to discourage positive contributions. I say let the clueless remain clueless. Good editors will eventually register an account. Vandals, hopefully, will continue to edit anonymously, unknowingly allowing us to be much more efficient in blocking them. Pascal.Tesson 20:28, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I do disagree that it will backfire. Before Wikipedia's creation, allowing everyone to edit would seem to a lot of people as something that would backfire, that would turn this website into chaos, that would never work. Now that Wikipedia has been created, allowing everyone to know everything, and allowing full transparency is something that looks like it will backfire. The fact is that this encyclopedia is supposed to bring information to the entire world. We should therefore not hide information about the project itself. For some reason, people participating believe that free information for all is good. If we believe that we should hide information from people because they will use information badly, we are denying the premise of this project. A.Z. 20:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, ok we disagree. Nevertheless, the fact remains that the proposed message is both misleading and likely to scare away anonymous contributors. It's misleading because the IP can be checked even for registered users and most definitely would be in Seigenthaler-like affairs. It's also misleading because IPs don't help to identify an actual person unless you put quite a bit of effort into it. As for "ensuring transparency", well that's all fine and noble but what's the actual benefit besides our good conscience? If we lose a single editor because he misunderstands that warning then the net effect on the project is negative. Pascal.Tesson 13:00, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The above editor may have a good point with regard to vandals creating accounts, although I am not sure how that would increase workload as I am not particularly familiar with the blocking process. Is it actually easier to prevent IPs from editing (even allowing for dynamic IP assignment)? I remain unconvinced by the suggestion that it may scare away editors, however. Adrian M. H. 16:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CSS id attribute

{{editprotected}}

Please reinstate the recent edit by Misza13 which was reverted. While anonymous users do not have a stylesheet page on Wikipedia, it is perfectly possible to create and use a stylesheet locally, for any website, Wikipedia included; without this attribute, there is no way to refer to this message using CSS -- 86.142.251.242 10:22, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Already done by MZMcBride. Nihiltres^(t.l) 20:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] test edits

This didn’t show up when I wasn’t logged in: “Please do not save test edits. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox.” The following edit should be done, since the main sandbox sometimes has lost it’s links to the other sandboxes:

{{editprotected}}

To experiment, use a sandbox: Main Sandbox | Tutorial Sandbox 1 | Tutorial Sandbox 2 | Tutorial Sandbox 3 | Tutorial Sandbox 4 | Tutorial Sandbox 5
For a sandbox of your own, create a user subpage. Thank you.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Chuck Marean (talk • contribs)

N Not done please establish consensus for this change. Happy‑melon 15:21, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

国际机票 国内机票 搬家公司 北京搬家公司 搬家搬家公司 北京搬家 北京搬家公司 婚纱 礼服 婚纱摄影 胶带 圣诞树 小本创业 条码打印机 证卡打印机 证卡机 标签打印机 吊牌打印机投影机 投影仪 月嫂 育儿嫂月嫂 育儿嫂 月嫂 育儿嫂 婴儿用品 宝石 眩晕 [1]咖啡机 逆变器 [2]北京油烟净化器 营养师考试 橡胶模 电子产品设计 公共营养师 自动麻将桌 空调保养 北京婚庆 北京婚庆 机床厂 麻将机 打印机维修 肩周炎 镇流器 空调安装 塑钢门窗 强直性脊柱炎 空调移机 空调移机 北京空调移机 门禁系统 蛋糕 北京空调维修 治疗近视 eq2 gold 营养师资格考试 门禁 电话交换机 集团电话 前列腺 前列腺炎 前列腺炎症 前列腺增生 慢性前列腺炎 急性前列腺炎 前列腺癌 前列腺肥大 前列腺症状 前列腺治疗 前列腺痛 细菌性前列腺炎 前列腺发炎 前列腺炎检查 前列腺疾病 早泄 阳痿 泌尿 血尿 尿路感染打扰了!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.220.81.199 (talk) 09:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)