Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive 3: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 15:11, 30 September 2020

Latest revision as of 20:23, 28 February 2023

Line 25:

==Template use==

A user has repeatedly "informed" me that templates are only to be used on "newbies" and that my using them on him/her is highly offensive (and she/he subsequently left an — by his/her own admission — retributive template on my talk page). Though I have backed my position and the user has not, I thought I would ask directly; I can think of many reasons that I feel this does not make sense, but rather than stating my own opinion, I want to know the Wikipedia policy. [[User:Shannernanner|<span style="font-family: Palatino"><fontspan colorstyle="color:indigo;">Shannernanner</fontspan></span>]] 15:01, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

:Template warnings can be used on anyone where its appropriate. Hey, I mean even if an admin did something I would still use a template on them. --[[User:WikiSlasher|WikiSlasher]] 09:51, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Line 33:

IMO Welcome, newcomers sounds friendlier than Introduction. Just my 2¢. --[[User:WikiSlasher|WikiSlasher]] 07:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

:I agree. You don't greet people by saying "Introduction", do you? --[[User:Tachikoma|<fontspan facestyle="font-family:zapfino;">Kyok</fontspan>]][[User:Tachikoma/Esperanza|<fontspan colorstyle="color:green"; face="font-family:zapfino;">o</fontspan>]] 15:26, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

== {{tl|test5article}} ==

Line 115:

: Beautiful! Thanks -- you're genius. (And now I see what was happening & what I was doing wrong.) --[[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 18:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

::I like it also, save for one thing. Needs a shorter name. [[Template:Misleading]] or [[Template:Misleadedit]] or something like that. I could see this being placed in the [[Template:TestTemplates]] grid as well, probably in the "Caution" column. --[[User:*Spark*/s|<fontspan colorstyle="color:green;">*Spark*</fontspan>]] 18:57, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

::: How about "wrongsummary2"? The "2" expresses that it "Could be seen as vandalism". &mdash; [[User:SebastianHelm|Sebastian]] 19:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC), changed 19:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

::::Even better, since it [[WP:AGF]]. Perhaps one stating "wrong summary" at the caution level and another higher up stating "misleading" would be more effective. --[[User:*Spark*/s|<fontspan colorstyle="color:green;">*Spark*</fontspan>]] 19:18, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

::::: OK, on rereading the list on the project page I realized that level 3 would be wrong, so I'm correcting my above statement. Please feel free to change your reply, as well.

Line 127:

:I think that's fine for wrongsummary3. I don't believe using the term "misleading" is [[WP:AGF]] for a lower level warning (wrongsummary2). The user might not understand the purpose of edit summary, might not think their summary was misleading, so to outright accuse them of misleading is not a good idea. For wrongsummary2 I propose:

:''<nowiki>Please use an accurate [[Help:Edit summary|edit summary]] for your contributions. A summary which is intentionally misleading in an attempt to disguise spam, personal attacks, or other inappropriate changes to the content of an article could be seen as vandalism or disruption, and you may be blocked.</nowiki>''

:Well....needs work, but I think that's more appropriate for a lower level. --[[User:*Spark*/s|<fontspan colorstyle="color:green;">*Spark*</fontspan>]] 01:18, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

:: I like Fuhghettaboutit's wrongsummary3, and your wrongsummary2 for the case without a parameter. How would you word it if it contained a link to the affected page?

Line 144:

: I'm not actually blind -- but those notices seemed aimed at "no edit summaries" (and one for "abusive"). I encountered a situation where a person who was engaged in a minor revert war had attempted to disguise with a (deliberately) misleading edit. That was what I was getting at. I agree, that any such templates should be included in the edit summaries row, and not create a whole new row. Or, edit the original templates ... But there are at least three different issues that need to be addressed, whether in a single message at each level of severity, or in separate messages at appropriate levels of severity: (a) no edit summaries; (b) edit summaries that are inaccurate or sloppy or inappropriate in some way; and (c) edit summaries (that appear to be) intended to mislead. --[[User:Lquilter|LQ]] 22:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

: Is it necessary to box your comment? We know about this row, I mentioned the grid already. These new templates cover a particular issue better than what's already there. --[[User:*Spark*/s|<fontspan colorstyle="color:green;">*Spark*</fontspan>]] 22:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

:: Apparently it was only necessary for me. I guess I should go see (sic!) an ophthalmologist. :-] <small>Please feel free to remove this line, and to reword your replies, since I changed "we" to "I".</small> &mdash; [[User:SebastianHelm|Sebastian]] 23:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

:::I changed {{tl|wrongsummary3}} per above discussion (and in an incredible bit of irony, on a second change to the language of the template, ''messed up the edit summary'' with a cut and paste artifact). Since no one had yet created it, I also made {{tl|wrongsummary2}}. Does it strike the correct balance between 1 and 3?--[[User:Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]] 23:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Line 161:

Is there a template warning or informing users about changing spellings? [[User:John Reaves|John Reaves]] 02:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

:Yes, it starts with [[:Template:Uw-engvar]] and works up from there. There's also [[:Template:Spellcheck]] for general spelling issues. See [[:Template:TestTemplates]] for the complete list. --[[User:*Spark*/s|<fontspan colorstyle="color:green;">*Spark*</fontspan>]] 02:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

== CSD deletion templates ==

Line 189:

== Upcoming changes ==

Please note, this page will be undergoing overhaul in the next month or so, due to work being carried out at the [[WP:UW|WikiProject for user warnings]]. An idea of the new structure maybe found [[Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings/overview|here]], any problems please don't hesitate to give me a shout. Regards [[User:Khukri|'''Khukri''']] ^{([[User_talk:Khukri|'''<fontspan facestyle="font-family:verdana;">talk</fontspan>''']] . [[Special:Contributions/Khukri|'''<fontspan facestyle="font-family:verdana;">contribs</fontspan>''']])} 12:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

:It's been a while since I saw this page, and I'm impressed with the work and improvement: tip o' the hat to all who were involved! [[User:Akradecki|Akradecki]] 20:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Line 199:

:: Of course - but who are we to scold them for that? Most people want to show themselves in a better light, and I've seen even admins delete questions on their talk page for no apparent reason other than that they didn't like them. Good idea about the new account, though. &mdash; [[User:SebastianHelm|Sebastian]] 16:38, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

:::If you create a new account to dodge a final warning, that new account can be blocked, along with your original account. A bit more on-topic, I do agree that certain (not all) warning templates should state not to remove warnings, such as the level 4 warnings and the block templates, just as long as it doesn't try to enforce that policy, as no policy on that exists. <small>You may want to look [[Wikipedia:Centralized_discussion/Removing_warnings|here]].</small> --[[User talk:Iced Kola|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#858585"; face="font-family:jester"; font-size="3:medium;">Iced Kola</fontspan>]] 17:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

::A user should ''not'' create another account to put themself in "a better light". The vandalous edits are still in their history and the warnings can serve as an aid to analysizing/blocking Admins. The only valid reason to remove warning templates is sensible archival. Simply deleting them won't do. No exceptions, no way out. In fact, I just created [[Template:TYWLAM]]. I think it gets the message across. [[User:Ace Class Shadow|Ace Class Shadow]]; [[User talk:Ace Class Shadow|My talk]]. 19:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Line 210:

: I think it's okay to leave it as is. They may not have known; but that's what this message does -- it tells them why the messages are there. I don't think the message currently assumes bad faith, either; it offers suggestions for legitimate reasons the person might have been blanking and gives them links to help with that. --[[User:Lquilter|lquilter]] 15:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

::Can we add {{tl|TYWLAM}} to the [[WP:WARN]] page then? I don't see it there. And where do we report people who keep removing warnings after a {{tl|TYWLAM}}? [[WP:AIV]], if it's considered to be vandalism, or [[WP:ANI]]? [[User:Insanephantom|<b><fontspan colorstyle="color:#006040;">Insane</fontspan></b>]][[User_talk:Insanephantom|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#906C5A;">phantom</fontspan>]]<small><small>[[Wikipedia:Editor review/Insanephantom| (my Editor Review)]]</small></small> 11:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

==Civilx, AFGx, & NPAx==

Line 221:

Hi,

This is just a reminder that the multi-level warnings on this project page will be changing on the 22nd January. The new templates are currently up for review [[Wikipedia:WikiProject user warnings/Overview|here]]. Please examine the new templates, read the [[WP:UW|project]] / [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject user warnings|talk]] pages and we'd be very interested in your suggestions and opinions. Regards [[User:Khukri|'''Khukri''']] ^{([[User_talk:Khukri|'''<fontspan facestyle="font-family:verdana;">talk</fontspan>''']] . [[Special:Contributions/Khukri|'''<fontspan facestyle="font-family:verdana;">contribs</fontspan>''']])} 08:58, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

== Comment Deletion template ==

Line 231:

== User page vandalism = tpv? ==

anyone know why the userpage vandalism tags are '''t'''pv rather than, say, '''u'''pv? This has come up on the user warnings unification project thingie too. I'm just curious. [[User:Rawling|<fontspan facestyle="font-family:monospace;"><b>Rawling</b></fontspan>]] 13:42, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

:I'm guessing it stands for talk page vandalism &mdash; check [[Template:Tpv2|tpv2]]. The levels of this warning seem to differ on whether they're for talk page abuse or user page vandalism. [[User:Feezo|Feezo]] <FONTspan SIZEstyle="font-2size:x-small;">[[User_talk:Feezo|(Talk)]]</FONTspan> 18:26, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

== Image vandalism ==