Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive 14: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:12, 12 August 2021

Latest revision as of 18:59, 22 January 2025

(5 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)

Line 92:

== [[Template:uw-notenglish]] ==

The template, [[Template:uw-notenglish|Uw-notenglish]], leaves a few lines of blank space above it when used. See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Charles.mccants&oldid=682610592 here], when it was used as part of a Twinkle edit. I have no idea why it does this, but when used it doesn't look good. I have no idea how to remove the blankspace from the template, but hopefully someone will be able to do this. Thanks. <span style="border=3px double #0075EA">[[User:Seagull123|'''<span style="background:#304747;color:#BED6D6">&nbsp;Seagull123&nbsp;</span>''']][[User talk:Seagull123|'''<span style="color:#304747;background-color:#BED6D;">&nbsp;Φ&nbsp;</span>''']]</span></span> 20:38, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

:The template appears to be okay; it's whatever adds the header that seems to be adding two lines of whitespace above the header. I've seen a bot or two that does this, also. Maybe a small Twinkle bug? ''[[User:Paine Ellsworth|<b style="font-size:85%;color:darkblue;font-family:Segoe Script">Painius</b>]]''&nbsp; 00:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Line 108:

== Redirect vs. Link Target ==

I made [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template%3AUw-userpage&type=revision&diff=684525973&oldid=665395975 this edit] before I noticed that it had been done by someone else and then reverted. I'm going to leave it rather than self-reverting for now, because to me it seems like it makes more sense to use the link target (which is shorter anyway), but if someone disagrees I'm fine with being reverted. Best, [[User:Mww113|<b><fontspan colorstyle='"color:#000000';">M</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle='"color:#330000';">w</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle='"color:#660000';">w</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle='"color:#990000';">1</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle='"color:#CC0000';">1</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle='"color:#FF0000';">3</fontspan></b>]] [[User talk:Mww113|(talk)]] 05:24, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

== COI category maintenance? ==

Both {{tl|Uw-coi}} and {{tl|Uw-coi-username}} contain the comment {{xt|THE FOLLOWING CATEGORY SHOULD BE REMOVED WHEN THE USER IS BLOCKED, OR IT IS DECIDED THAT THIS USER DOES NOT HAVE A COI, OR THIS TEMPLATE HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR A WHILE WITH NO ACTION.}} with that category being [[:Category:User talk pages with conflict of interest notices]]. Currently, it has over 41,500 pages in it, so I think this category has been a bit neglected. Would anyone be opposed to a bot performing automatic removal of this category after a period of time? Say, two weeks, or a month? I think it would help make this category useful again for those that might try to keep an eye on it, if it contained only recent notices. ^{[[User:Avicennasis|<fontsup colorstyle="color:red;">Avic</fontsup>]]}[[User talk:Avicennasis|_{<font colorstyle="color:blue;">ennasis</fontsub>]]} @ 09:47, 4 Tishrei 5776 / 09:47, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

:{{BOTREQ|brfa}} [[Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/AvicBot 12|here]]. ^{[[User:Avicennasis|<fontsup colorstyle="color:red;">Avic</fontsup>]]}[[User talk:Avicennasis|_{<font colorstyle="color:blue;">ennasis</fontsub>]]} @ 09:01, 24 Tishrei 5776 / 09:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

== Question about uw-username ==

Line 410:

Just noting for the record that we already have {{tl|utverylong}}, which is simpler and much less confrontational. Observe:{{tl|utverylong}} [[User:Beeblebrox|Beeblebrox]] ([[User talk:Beeblebrox|talk]]) 00:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

:FYI, the nonstandardized archive template still exists at [[:Template:uw-archive]]. I've included at several pages and templates for reference. Personally, I wouldn't flinch if we went into a discussion about whether this template should be deleted, but I feel that, if it exists, it should have been at least integrated with the other single-notice templates. &mdash;&nbsp;'''''[[User:Andy M. Wang|Andy&nbsp;W.]]''&nbsp;<small>([[User talk:Andy M. Wang|talk]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Andy M. Wang|contrib]])'''</small>''' 19:09, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

:For housekeeping purposes:

:*[[:Template:uw-archive]]

Line 417:

:*[[:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace]] (updated to include it)

:*[[:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace/Single-level templates]] (updated to include it)

:And just to clarify, the fact that the template is nonstandardized, and per [[WP:DTR]], I personally lean toward removing this template. If a user's talk page is seriously getting too long, it's their business. We have some articles at 500K and no notice on the talk about splitting them up. &mdash;&nbsp;'''''[[User:Andy M. Wang|Andy&nbsp;W.]]''&nbsp;<small>([[User talk:Andy M. Wang|talk]]&nbsp;·&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Andy M. Wang|contrib]])'''</small>''' 19:25, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

==Consensus for adding A7 to [[template:Uw-hasty|Uw-hasty]]==

Line 454:

Support as proposer [[User:Zppix|Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ]] ([[User talk:Zppix|talk]]) 17:59, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

* '''Tentative''': if I understand correctly that the idea is to create a version of {{T|Uw-editsummary}} that shows where edit summaries go in the Visual Editor interface instead of the standard edit window, presumably to be used when the recipient’s edits are tagged VE, that sounds like a good idea. I don’t use VE myself, but I can imagine someone who does being confused by the illustration of an unfamiliar or irrelevant-seeming form. {{ping|Zppix|p=,}} please expand on the above proposal, providing some rationale, so people don’t have to guess what this is actually about.—[[User:Odysseus1479|Odysseus]][[User talk:Odysseus1479|'''<fontspan colorstyle="color:slateblue;">1</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle="color:darkviolet;">4</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle="color:purple;">7</fontspan>''']][[Special:Contributions/Odysseus1479|'''<fontspan colorstyle="color:maroon;">9</fontspan>''']] 04:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

*'''Support''', if I understand the proposal correctly. Sounds like a good idea. The visual editor ''does'' indeed handle adding edit summaries in a different way than the wikitext editor does. [[User:APerson|APerson]]&nbsp;([[User talk:APerson|talk!]]) 05:06, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

*'''Somewhat support''': If the proposal is indeed what {{u|Odysseus}} is saying, this does seem like a good idea. Might be worth it to add as a parameter to the existing template though. —&nbsp;[[User:Crh23|<span style="font-size: 110%;background-color:#E90800; color:#000005;font-family:Garamond;">&nbsp;'''crh'''&nbsp;<span style="color:White;">₂₃&nbsp;</span></span>]]<small>&thinsp;([[User Talk:Crh23|Talk]])</small> 19:01, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Line 473:

I suggest tweaking ''"You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary..."'' to ''"You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary..."'' and expanding ''"on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing"'' to ''"on Wikipedia this is known as [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit warring]] and is usually seen as obstructing"''. Any thoughts? --[[User:McGeddon|McGeddon]] ([[User talk:McGeddon|talk]]) 10:33, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

:Good idea, I wholeheartedly agree with the suggested change. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] &#124; [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 10:35, 16 May 2016 (UTC).

::I agree; another reason to explain ''edit warring'' as a ‘term of art’ here is that there appears to be a common public misconception that it includes what’s elsewhere called ''[[flaming (Internet)|flaming]]'' or similar hostile talk-page interactions that belong instead under the rubrics of [[WP:NPA]] or [[WP:BATTLE]].—[[User:Odysseus1479|Odysseus]][[User talk:Odysseus1479|'''<fontspan colorstyle="color:slateblue;">1</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle="color:darkviolet;">4</fontspan><fontspan colorstyle="color:purple;">7</fontspan>''']][[Special:Contributions/Odysseus1479|'''<fontspan colorstyle="color:maroon;">9</fontspan>''']] 21:02, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

:::Hi. "Elsewhere" is little too generic. At least in IMDb, edit warring is defined as any form of tug-of-war reverting, be it hostile or friendly. (In Wikipedia, hostility is needed. Friendly remedial editing is actually encouraged.) I've seen "edit warring" used in Wikia too, but because bullying the newcomer is the norm there, I couldn't work out a definition. (They revert newcomers just because!)

Line 488:

== Uw-disruptive3 wording ==

I think the wording in [[Template:Uw-disruptive3]], if an article is linked, is confusing - "Please stop your disruptive editing, as you did at (insert article here)." This wording makes it seem like the user has stopped editing disruptively at that article but is editing disruptively at other articles, but often, disruptive editors could possibly continue to edit at the same article. Any suggestions on alternate wording? [[User:Electricburst1996|<fontspan colorstyle="000FFcolor:#000FF0;">Electric</fontspan>]][[User:Electricburst1996|<fontspan colorstyle="color:#00FFFF;">Burst</fontspan>]]^{([[User talk:Electricburst1996|Electron firings]])}_{([[Special:Contributions/Electricburst1996|Zaps]])} 15:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

:"Please stop editing disruptively, as you did at..." [[User:Doniago|DonIago]] ([[User talk:Doniago|talk]]) 17:17, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

::I like this one. --[[User:Marksomnian|Sincerely, Marksomnian.]] ([[User talk:Marksomnian|talk]]) 11:13, 15 June 2016 (UTC)