Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive 8: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12) |
||
Line 718:
:I think the whole idea of this preemptive warning is contrary to [[WP:BITE]], [[WP:AGF]], and [[WP:CIVIL]]. More in line with policy, IMO, would be to give the warning to editors who are beginning to engage in behaviors that would result in these sanctions. Yes, this means they might get away with slightly more disruption, but the alternative is worse. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]][[User talk:Anomie|⚔]] 02:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
:It's definitely not suited for UTM. And personally I think templating is a very bad idea here. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
== uw-notcensored3 ==
Line 739:
== {{tl|Uw-tblock}} ==
I am considering bringing this template to TfD to be honest. I don't think it is a good idea to template people to tell them that it is bad to make death threats. What do you think? -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
:I didn't think death and legal (until it's withdrawn) threats were temporary blocks, but yea I'd go along with that Lucas <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 14:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
::I was so stunned by the by the big bold '''making death threats''' that I didn't see that! :D. Note that the legal threats one makes more sense, since [[WP:NLT]] is policy. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
:Note there is also {{tl|Deaththreatblock}} for indef-blocks. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 14:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
::Should I bring one to tfd I'll bring the other then. Note that this one is only transcluded on 3 pages. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
:::I've been meaning to get round to TfDing it since I saw [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Deaththreatblock&oldid=127091197 this version]. The obvious solution with the uw-tblock template is to reword it so that it refers to ''inappropriate'' threats, or similar. There are many types of threat which will earn a block, some of them are temporary, and vandalism does not always seem to be an apt description. -- [[user:zzuuzz|zzuuzz]] <sup>[[user_talk:zzuuzz|(talk)]]</sup> 16:13, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
::::I think the templates would suffice if they simply said "making threats" rather than "making death threats". Same with the legal threat {{t1|Uw-lblock}} template. If we say "death" and "legal" threats, that is a) too much information; and b) putting specific ideas in other unscrupulous user's heads.--'''[[User:12 Noon|<font color="8b0000">12 N</font><font color="a9a9a9">oo</font><font color="8b0000">n</font>]][[User talk:12 Noon| <sup>2¢</sup>]]''' 16:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
:::::Very good idea. <sup>[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]</sup> 17:24, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
::::::How does "Threatening to take real world actions" sound, if you want a template? I dunno to be honest, [[WP:DENY]] pops in my mind when I imagine a situation where I would use such a template (Personally I think the NLT one should be kept though, for it is a convenient way to let the user know exactly why they are blocked). -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
== user page ==
Line 955:
Uhh, a question: when should warning4 be used and when should warning4im be used? ~[[User:Ambrosia-|<font color="black" face="Fixedsys"><u>Ambrosia-</u></font>]] <sup>[[User talk:Ambrosia-|talk]]</sup> 05:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
::warning4 is used after warning3 has been issued. warning4im is the only warning they receive, which is used for chronic vandals after a block expires. <
== uw-afd1 - minor wording change ==
Line 1,536:
Please revert the boldface on 'blocked indefinitely' per [[WP:BITE]], as it may scare newcomers off. Thanks. '''[[User:M!|<span style="color:#999999">Cheers,</span>]] [[User_talk:M!|<span style="color:#555555">Mystytopia</span>]]''' 00:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
:I don't think that's biting, but just bolding the main information of the template, which can be useful to locate it on a sometimes non-empty talkpage. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
:I agree with Lucasbfr - the bold makes it easy to get the point quickly while scanning the page. — Carl <small>([[User:CBM|CBM]] · [[User talk:CBM|talk]])</small> 05:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Line 1,549:
== semi protected ==
This template is no longer fully protected, since all the other UW templates are semi protected. I am not sure whether or not many people watch this page, but if you want information about the [[WP:UW]] templates, '''please leave a note at [[WT:UW]]'''. Thanks! -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
== Category ==
Line 1,555:
When used on a user talk page (surely the most common form of usage) this page puts the page into {{cl|Temporary Wikipedian userpages}} which in turn suggests that the page be deleted. This seems like a poor idea to me, part of the reason for such a msg is to form a lasting record of the blockage and its reason. Why is this category used, and would anyone object to removing it from this template? [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 17:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
:I repeat my request for objections before removing the category from the template. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
::Hell no, keep that one! Apparently these pages are deleted after a month, keep in mind that the block message is still viewable when the user tries to edit. That's an easy way to delete the (unused) talk pages of blocked users when they left. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
== Color ==
Line 1,561:
I really don't like the new color/layout of the template. This one isn't a "get lost" template ... it should be more informational, not have a scare color. This template is for someone who made a disallowed username in good faith - we don't want a big yellow get lost message on the page. Would anyone have any severe heartburn with changing it back? It really does look hideous. --[[User:B|<font color="maroon">B</font>]] 22:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
:Note that it is also routinely used for people who created an improper username in apparent bad-faith. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 21:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
:If I'm correct, without the color the templates appears with a pink background in the "You're blocked" interface, not the best either. The orange is just the same color than the other uw-block templates, and the div class can be used if you tweak your monobook. -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
== Proposed changes ==
Line 1,677:
A change was made to this template on 17 Dec, without discussion. I only discovered this after using the template for blocking of a vandalism-only account. When it rendered after subst, it did not say provide the words that I expected, nor completely give the editor the reason for the block. "Vandalism only" is a slightly different reason than "persistent vandalism"; and in fact, in the blocking page, "vandalism" and "vandalism-only" are separate choices in the drop down reason. For that reason, I'm restoring it to the previous version. Please discuss any changes here as this change potential affects many admins. — [[User:{{{User|ERcheck}}}|{{{User|ERcheck}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{User|ERcheck}}}|talk]]) 13:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
:Ow, to be honest I didn't think the wording would be an issue. [[WP:BRD|I don't think it is such a good idea]] to have so many templates, but I don't feel strongly about it :). -- [[User:Lucasbfr|lucasbfr]]
</div>
== Level 4 warnings ==
| |||