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

Revision as of 06:48, 11 August 2007

Revision as of 06:45, 21 August 2007

Line 970:

:::There used to be a link to BJAODN, but a point was raised that this probably just served to feed and/or encourage joke vandalism. I've come to agree with this point - don't feed the vandals.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 17:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

:::I think telling users not to make jokes, and telling them we have a special page for jokes and joke edits, in the same sentence, is a bit contradictory, as Kubigula says, it can only encourage vandalism. [[User:Jrphayes|John Hayes]]^{[[User_talk:Jrphayes|talk]]} 18:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

== How about this ==

Would somehthing like this be worth while. I thought of this today but others may think its a waist of time of effort.

Any have a look if you like put it to use possibly.

*<nowiki>{{subst:uw-vandalism4||}} {{·}} '''{{user5|}}--~~~~''' </nowiki>

*'''''This comes out of it'''''.<br />

{{{icon|[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] }}}Please stop. If you continue to [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalize]] Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Sydney Coach Terminal|, as you did to [[:Sydney Coach Terminal]]}}, you ''will'' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:||}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism3 --> {{·}} '''{{user5|58.166.113.166}}--[[User:Adam.J.W.C.|Ad@m.J.W.C.]] 13:09, 24 July 2007 (UTC)'''

=====Or this=====

*Same thing different warning.

{{{icon|[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|25px]] }}}Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia{{{{{subst|}}}#if:|, as you did to [[:]]}}. It is considered [[Wikipedia:Spam|spamming]] and [[WP:NOT|Wikipedia is not]] a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses [[nofollow]] tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue [[Wikipedia:Spam|spamming]], you '''will''' be [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]] from editing Wikipedia. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:||}}<!-- Template:uw-spam3 --> {{·}} '''''{{user5|81.157.22.178}}'''''--[[User:Adam.J.W.C.|Ad@m.J.W.C.]] 07:19, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

:Well, this may confuse some users in to thinking that the IP info at the end may the signature of the IP who left that message which would not be good. If you look at [[WP:UW]], we already have a similar template ([[:Template:S/wnote]] displaying the IP addresses information and contribs. --[[User:Hdt83|_{<font color="336611" ><b>Hdt83</b></font>}]] [[User talk:Hdt83|^{<font color="blue" face="Arial"><b>Chat</b></font>}]] 22:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

== Templating the regulars ==

I've been pointed to [[Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars]]. I disagree with it and rather agree with [[Wikipedia:Template the regulars]], but have also noticed some problems with the use of templates on regulars which might require the creation of alternate first level warnings for regulars.

Now, in the case I used the 3RR warning on a regular in an edit war who had made 3 reverts. If I was edit warring, I'd personally appreciate the warning. I've never been blocked and want to avoid being blocked. But I've received negative responses about this from a couple of users.

First off, what is the definition of "regular". Am I a regular? I edit almost every day, and have been doing so for 4 months.

Anyway, back to my point. When a "regular" has made a clear violation of policy, I want to assume good faith. According to this page, only the level 1 warnings assume good faith. But they have all this welcome to Wikipedia verbiage perceived as condescending by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arthur_Rubin&diff=prev&oldid=147753384 some]. So, with a "regular", should we jump directly to level 2 warnings to avoid being condescending? or do we need some new level 1 warnings without the welcoming tone? [[User:IPSOS|IPSOS]] ([[User talk:IPSOS|talk]]) 15:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

:Why not leave them an actual ''message'', instead of a template? Don't you think someone is more likely to respond positively to your request if you take the time to talk to them, rather than dropping a form letter on their page? [[User:Antandrus|Antandrus ]] [[User_talk:Antandrus|(talk)]] 16:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

::I did. I was told I was wrong and a liar. This illustrates the problem with not being able to template regulars. Just because a user is regular, doesn't mean that they are always right, civil, assume good faith, etc. If those things were true, then certainly templating regulars would be silly. But "regulars" can be just as wrong as newbies... [[User:IPSOS|IPSOS]] ([[User talk:IPSOS|talk]]) 16:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

:::If you got a harsh response from a personalized message, then you probably would have gotten an even harsher response from a warning template. There are some special use templates that are appropriate helpful tips for "regulars" - e.g. {{tl|Uw-warn}}, {{tl|Uw-subst}}. Beyond that, I personally agree with [[WP:DTTR]] and Antandrus that it's much preferable to compose a personalized message when dealing with regulars.--<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size:11pt">[[User:Kubigula|Kubigula]] ''([[User talk:Kubigula|talk]])''</span> 16:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

::::I completely agree with DTTR and will remove any if i get them. It is not right to give a user a pre-made message. --<small>([[Wikipedia:Editor review/R|Review Me]])</small> [[User:R|'''R''']] ^{[[User_talk:R|Parlate]]}<small>[[Special:Contributions/R|Contribs]]_{[[Special:Emailuser/R|@]]} (Let's Go Yankees!)</small> 18:03, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

:::::There are situations that occur again and again. they require basically identical msgs again and again. I don't see why anyone should object to getting those msgs via a template. if "templatign the regulars" were forbidden i would just store my standard msgs offline and paste them in, to no particular gain for anyone. Now I do object to people who say "don't blame me, that was the template's language." If you put it on someone's talk page, you said it, a template is just a tool, particularly templates not part of a standard or mandated process. But consider an example. i patrol the speedy delete category a lot. I rather often find speedy tags placed on articles that I don't consider valid speedys. i remove those tags. i am not in anyway required to notify anyone, but I usually choose to do so. I do this both as a courtesy: to tell the user who placed the tag that it had been removed and why (so that it can be discussed if the user wishes) and as a form of education -- too many people are IMO too quick with db tags, and I have has a number indicate that they will rethink their practice after I have notified them. Now i notify with {{tl|Speedy-Warn}}. If I had to personally type the content of that every time, i would be far less likely to notify, and IMO something would be lost. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|^(talk)]] 21:45, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I've proposed a merge - the essays conflict too much to co-exist peacefully. If that fails, I suggest a joint MfD nomination. [[User:Carcharoth|Carcharoth]] 10:04, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

:Of course they conflict. They express precisely oppsoed points of view on a subject wher there is no consensus. That is why they are essay's, not poolicies. Each should include a link to the other, but there is no good reason for a merge, and les for an MfD. [[User:DESiegel|DES]] [[User talk:DESiegel|^(talk)]] 19:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

== need a template for labelling warnings as inappropriate? ==

As it is easy for trolls to add inappropriate warnings to people's talk pages, and difficult for the victim to remove them without further accusations arising from removing warnings, I feel that there needs to be a way to make it easy for editors of good standing to stand up in defence of a user who has been maligned with inappropriate warnings. We should maybe add a template (with some appropriate icon), which says something like:

::<font color="green">'''I believe that the preceding warning message is not applicable to the actions of this user.'''</font>

Of course, such support is only worth as much as the reputation of the user who has signed it; that is for the reader to judge. And the template documentation should make it clear that it is designed for defending ''other'' users against inappropriate warnings, and that anyone who uses it to respond to warnings on their ''own'' talk page will not enhance their reputation that way.

Your thoughts?

[[User:Sześćsetsześćdziesiątsześć|Sześćsetsześćdziesiątsześć]] 22:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

:There should be no problem with one removing templated warnings from one's user page. It is generally agreed that users are allowed to archive their user talk pages at will, and someone [[WP:POINT|pointedly]] raising an objection to this will hopefully be corrected. If you disagree with the application of a template and wish to say so, responding with feigned indifference (that is, with ''another'' template) will surely escalate mattters more than discussion, or merely ignoring the template, will. [[User:Gracenotes|<span style="color:#960;">Grace</span><span style="color:#000;">notes</span>]]^{[[User talk:Gracenotes|<span style="color:#960;">T</span>]]} <span title="Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace">§</span> 22:55, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

::Perhaps we need a template that explains the irony of using a template to disclaim the use of a template. Seriously though, I think the person can just type in that they feel the warning is not justified. [[User:Until(1 == 2)|<font color="maroon">Until</font>]][[User talk:Until(1 == 2)|<font color="black">(<font color="blue">1 <font color="maroon">==</font> 2</font>)</font>]] 23:16, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

== Tfd {{tl|uw-english}} ==

For those of you who don't have all the templates in your watch list, the above template has been proposed for TfD [[Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Uw-english|here]]. ^{[[User:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#6633cc>Khu</font>''']][[User_talk:Khukri|'''<font face="verdana" color=#CC66FF>kri</font>''']]} 23:41, 30 July 2007 (UTC)