Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive 7: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot II (talk | contribs)
MiszaBot II (talk | contribs)
Line 946:
:::I saw that earlier; looking at the context, it appears to me as vaguely relevant nonsense rather than blatantly defamatory information. [[User:Anomie|Anomie]] 13:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
:::: Ahhh, that has to be it. I can see the reason someone might cite me on that. I was just providing "evidence" that the "cunting cunt" was in wikipedia, at least at some point. [[User:24.205.34.217|24.205.34.217]] 21:46, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
== misleading edit summaries ==
 
I mentioned this a while ago and would like to request it now: I think a template for misleading edit summaries would be a good idea. I'm talking about when it says something like "cleanup" or "typo" or some other misleading thing but really means "changed the meaning" - similar to marking something as "m" when it isn't. A template for that would be useful - it can be a little different from just straight-up vandalism, as it is designed to sneak vandalism in and get people not to look at the change. Anyway, I'd find it useful. <strong>[[User:Tvoz|Tvoz]] </strong>|<small>[[User talk:Tvoz|talk]]</small> 17:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
:I would say a single use template ("uw-missummary"?), and then just use the regular vandalism templates. --<small>([[Wikipedia:Editor review/R|Review Me]])</small> [[User:R|'''R''']] <sup>[[User_talk:R|Parlate]]</sup><small>[[Special:Contributions/R|Contribs]]<sub>[[Special:Emailuser/R|@]]</sub> (Let's Go Yankees!)</small> 17:31, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
::We actually have {{tl|Wrongsummary1}}, {{tl|Wrongsummary2}}, {{tl|Wrongsummary3}} as well as {{tl|minor}}, though none of these are part of the uw scheme. I think we could probably make one single use template out of the lot.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 18:54, 14 July 2007 (UTC)