Misplaced Pages

talk:Template index/User talk namespace: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages talk:Template index Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:17, 14 September 2024 editRemsense (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Template editors60,962 edits Reminder template for undue detail per WP:BALANCE?: new sectionTag: New topic← Previous edit Latest revision as of 10:32, 27 December 2024 edit undoKenneth Kho (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users908 editsm Can we write Template:uw-vandalism1 to encourage the reader to put their energy into good use? 
(98 intermediate revisions by 27 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skiptotoctalk}} {{Skiptotoctalk}}
{{Talk header|WT:UTM|WT:UW|wp=yes|noarchives=yes|search=yes|archive_age=30|archive_bot=lowercase sigmabot III}} {{Talk header|WT:UTM|WT:UW|wp=yes|noarchives=yes|search=yes}}
{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject User warnings/templates/talk-header}} {{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject User warnings/templates/talk-header}}
{{Central|text=all ] talk pages and ] project talk pages redirect here. If you are here to discuss one of the uw-* templates, be sure to identify which one.}} {{Central|text=all ] talk pages and ] project talk pages redirect here. If you are here to discuss one of the uw-* templates, be sure to identify which one.}}
Line 6: Line 6:
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 150K |maxarchivesize = 150K
|counter = 20 |counter = 21
|minthreadsleft = 5 |minthreadsleft = 5
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |minthreadstoarchive = 1
Line 44: Line 44:
{{clear}} {{clear}}


== Can we write ] in a more formal tone? ==
== Possibility for excluding appealing instructions on block templates? ==


In the user warning vandalism series of user message templates, I noticed that ] uses contractions and ends with "Thanks", but the rest of the user warning vandalism series templates do not. I propose we could rewrite ] as follows, using ] in this instance.
I noticed that most (if not all) of the ] included ], with no provision to exclude it from the template when adding to the user's talk page. Since the possibility for appeals to be accepted are very low (especially so with vandals), would it be possible to have an option to exclude such message in order to discourage them from doing so?


:{{{icon|]}}} Hello, I am <includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>. I wanted to let you know that one or more of ]{{<includeonly>safesubst:</includeonly>#if:{{{1|}}}|&#32;to ]}} have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use {{safesubst:<noinclude/>sandbox link}}. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the ] or the ]. {{{2|Thank you.}}}
- ] (]) 18:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
</noinclude>


Please let me know if this rewriting would work and if people could take users who post these messages more seriously. A more formal tone could convey seriousness. I think people would be more likely to heed the notice. ] (]) 18:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
:Beg your pardon? Have you considered that we care about not improperly applying sanctions, and so resolving the smaller number of false positives is clearly worth the entire process? This is obviously just the plain communication that's necessary to a robust and honest process. It is comparatively rare for an appeal to be initiated, and it usually does not require much extra work if it's clearly going to be denied. ]] 18:31, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
:{{replyto|Z. Patterson}} Have you looked at the other level 1 templates, such as ]? Most (if not all) end in either "Thanks" or "Thank you", because they ]. If it's clear that the user has begun with a ''bad'' faith edit, you don't need to begin the chain with {{tlxs|uw-vandalism1}}, you can go straight to {{tlxs|uw-vandalism2}} - or higher, if necessary. --] &#x1f339; (]) 19:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
::@Redrose64: I understand now. Thank you. ] (]) 20:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)


== Add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: unblock|reason=Your reason here ==
== Proposal: parametrize "one or more of your contributions may have been removed" ==
{{Courtesy link|Template:Uw-vandalism1/sandbox}}{{br}}
{{Courtesy link|Template:Contributions phrase}}


We use this same language in many block templates. I'm sure somebody has pointed out that the net result of this is very frequent unblock requests that follow the instructions we give the user quite literally; they add exactly that text to the bottom of the talk page. Though sometimes it's just the blocked miscreant being obtuse, as often as not, when asked to actually give a reason, they give a reason. Why are we wasting our time and theirs with this? It sets us up to be chastising the user for following our instructions literally. ]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 01:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
Do you ever wish you could be more forthright and less wishy-washy than saying, "{{xt|''one or more'' of your contributions ''may'' have been removed"}} when you place a user warning template that contains that phrase? As if you didn't know how many edits you are talking about, or forgot whether you removed them or not? I know I do.


:Are we really wasting our time? The key part before even asking the user to use the unlock template is they understand why they were blocked. We have the same set of instructions for any other template like XfC and XfD regardless of user experience. – ] (]) 14:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
I propose to enhance the line "{{xt|one or more of your contributions may have been removed}}" in the <span class=plainlinks></span> that have it, to make it variable under parameter control, and allow the following options, in addition to the current default:
:Delete ] (]) 12:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
* avoid the "may" conditional, so it says "{{xt|contributions have been removed}}";
* use the singular when only one edit is involved, so it says "{{xt|contribution has been removed}}"; and
* indicate how many edits you mean (when it matters), instead of the hand-wavy, "{{xt!|one or more contributions}}".
The current, vague wording makes it sound very template-y, more so than is necessary. I use these templates, and it has always irked me to leave such a vague statement. As a result, the great majority of the time I make two edits on their page: one to subst the template, and a second one to fix it, so it is worded more accurately. That is wasteful of my time, and I suspect I'm not the only one.


== Or you may simply create a new account for editing ==
It would be fairly easy to remedy this. As proof of concept, I have added a possible sandbox implementation of this proposal to {{tl|uw-vandalism1/sandbox}}, which adds the new parameter {{para|number}} to support the parametrizable contributions phrase. Documentation of the new parameter is available at the end of the Usage section at {{tl|Uw-vandalism1/sandbox}}. (If adopted, the doc could be expanded if needed, or shortened to just a link to explanation elsewhere.) The variable phrase is provided by template {{tl|contributions phrase}}; testcases for it are {{tl|contributions phrase/testcases|here}}. Feedback sought, and welcome. Thanks, ] (]) 10:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)


The last sentence ends with, "{{xt|or you may simply create a new account for editing}}". This almost sounds like a solicitation of ], something the new user is almost surely unaware of as something to be avoided. Rather, it would be better if this sentence said this instead:
:This seems reasonable to me, given that those who don't want to use it don't have to use it and it will clearly be useful to some people. I'll bet that this could be integrated with tools like Twinkle as well, given that the tools certainly know what they've done. I certainly agree with you about not loving the current wording (but I don't see "may" used in any of the templates you link as you seem to suggest, though it is used in some other ones like ] which don't include "one or more...").
* {{xt|...or you may simply abandon this username, and <nowiki>]</nowiki> for editing.}}
:I would suggest that the {{code|number}} field should probably accept any text, so that people can choose to use whatever word they feel is most appropriate or just personally prefer, given that there are so many things that could go there (some, a few, etc., in addition to the ones it currently supports).
Thanks, ] (]) 23:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:The only other issue I see is that one/1 being passed does not necessarily imply it was the only contribution they made to the page: I think "only" should be the only input that results in "your recent contribution" rather than "___ of your recent contributions". ] (]) 07:50, 14 August 2024 (UTC)


:The last sentence of what? ] (]) 08:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
== Using AFC ==
::I'm assuming it's <nowiki>{{</nowiki>]<nowiki>}}</nowiki> ] (]) 14:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)


== We should change LLM misuse level 4 in the table in ] ==
Various policies and guidelines tell conflicted or paid editors to use ].


Right now, it indicates that the warning template should be <nowiki>{{</nowiki>]:]<nowiki>}} but we already have ] for that purpose - should the table be edited? ] (]) 14:49, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
On {{Tl|uw-coi}}, shouldn't:


:I ] - if anyone disagrees, feel free to revert and we'll discuss. ] (]) 13:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Blockquote|avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;}}


== Can we write ] to encourage the reader to put their energy into good use? ==
say something like:


I propose adding "If you see a paragraph and you can improve it, please be ] and improve it! If it makes the encyclopedia better, it is less likely to be undone." after the reminder on the unconstructive edit. The reason is that vandals often want to leave their mark, we are aiming to provide them the good path to do so. This is in the spirit of a current RfC to rewrite a friendlier version of ]. ] (]) 18:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
{{Blockquote|other than in the ] (where you should declare your CoI), avoid avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;}}
: ], see {{tl|uw-subtle1}}. I would think if we are going to make any changes to a vandalism template, it would be to that one, and not to {{tl|uw-vandalism1}}. Another way to be friendlier, is if you believe that the user in question is trying to get it right but failing (as opposed to a malicious user or troll), then leave them a ] on their Talk page, which will mitigate the BITEY-ness of the vandalism template, as well as provide them a bunch of links to helpful pages that will show them the path forward. ] (]) 00:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

::@] I am actually picturing a pure vandal here. I am not endeavoring to teach them about Misplaced Pages, or to be civil at them.
(which could be split over two bullet points)? <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 11:53, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
::However, ] shows that most vandalism are juvenile vandalism. They are here to have fun, they mean no harm.

::I pray they who initially thought "let's screw around", could be persuaded that being reverted sucks, while making bold good-faith improvements would turn out good for them. Hence, my proposed two-sentence addition.
:No, I prefer it as it is. ] (]) 12:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
::Remember, a lot of these juvenile vandals represent a large part of our loyal readership who ] and they bring in fresh perspectives to Misplaced Pages when they choose to contribute in good-faith. ] (]) 07:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
::It's not a matter of personal preference; it's a matter of giving (new) users correct and relevant information. <span class="vcard"><span class="fn">]</span> (<span class="nickname">Pigsonthewing</span>); ]; ]</span> 12:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)
::: {{u|Kenneth Kho}}, if you know templating language, why don't you propose a specific example in the sandbox? And if you don't, you can just enter your proposed text of such a template below. ] (]) 09:31, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

::::@] I created it in my talk page <s></s>, it was modified from the source found using view source on the template page, does that look right? ] (]) 09:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
== Uw-block edit request for dark mode compatibility ==
:::::I used the wording "If you see a paragraph and you can improve it, you may ] and improve it. If it makes the encyclopedia better, it is less likely to be undone!" - The reason is that I want them to get excited about not getting reverted, rather than the bold edits themselves. This will set a great mindset when they start becoming constructive, but still stumble upon a few rules and get reverted, they would want to avoid making the same mistakes to get their work kept. ] (]) 10:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

{{edit template-protected|Template:Uw-block|answered=yes}}
Please merge changes at ] so future substitutions are dark mode compatible. You can also check testcases (]). —'''Matrix(!)''' <nowiki>{</nowiki>''] - ] - ]''<nowiki>}</nowiki> 07:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ETp --> ] (]) 12:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

== Template-protected edit request on 1 September 2024 ==

{{edit template-protected|Template:Uw-editsummary2|answered=yes}}
Currently, {{tl|uw-editsummary2}} uses ] with the empty argument <code><nowiki>|link=</nowiki></code>, preventing it from linking to its information page. According to {{slink|Help:Pictures#Links}}, since the file's ] license requires attribution, the image ''should'' link to its information page. Therefore, I think it should be changed from:
<syntaxhighlight lang=wikitext>
]
</syntaxhighlight>
to:
<syntaxhighlight lang=wikitext>
]
</syntaxhighlight> ] (]) 17:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

:I noticed {{tl|uw-editsummary}} also had this issue, I have fixed it as described above. {{tl|uw-editsummary2}} still needs this fix. ] (]) 18:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

:{{complete2}}. ''''']'''''&thinsp;,&nbsp;]&nbsp;]&nbsp;<small>20:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)</small>
::Thanks for the license fix. It's unfortunate that it's necessary, though — from a usability standpoint, it's not very helpful to have a link to an icon file page in a notice. <span style="border:3px outset;border-radius:8pt 0;padding:1px 5px;background:linear-gradient(6rad,#86c,#2b9)">]</span> <sup>]</sup> 21:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
:::I agree that these links are annoying as a user, I've clicked them by accident before and it is very confusing to get suddenly sent to the media viewer. It would be great if a CC0 icon set could be found or created to replace the ones often used for these templates, since it wouldn't require any attribution whatsoever. I'm sure such icons probably exist but am also nearly certain that changing these very commonly-used icons would make a non-zero amount of people unreasonably upset. ] (]) 04:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
::::Looks like the information icon currently displayed on the side of the closed edit request template in this section, for instance, is public domain (]). ] (]) 04:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

== Reminder template for undue detail per ]? ==

It's possible that a majority of edits I have to routinely revert are that aren't covered by a template are substantial additions of sourced, verifiable, but deleterious material that is some combination of tangential, excessively detailed, redundant, or otherwise irreparably undue as to unbalance the coverage or coherence of the article. {{tlx|uw-fringe1}} is the closest, but is obviously not appropriate in most cases described above. Perhaps the template can standardize the common suggestions to move the content to a more specific article, more briefly summarize it in context, or compare with how analogous content is treated across several related articles <span style="border-radius:2px;padding:3px;background:#1E816F">]<span style="color:#fff">&nbsp;‥&nbsp;</span>]</span> 22:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 10:32, 27 December 2024

Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing Template index/User talk namespace and anything related to its purposes and tasks.
Shortcuts
This page is part of the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject User warnings. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as part of the user warning system. The WikiProject itself is an attempt to standardise and improve user warnings, and conform them to technical guidelines. Your help is welcome, so feel free to join in.
To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, all uw-* template talk pages and WikiProject User warnings project talk pages redirect here. If you are here to discuss one of the uw-* templates, be sure to identify which one.

Archives
  1. WP:UW Archives 1
  2. WP:UW Archives 2
  3. WP:UW Archives 3
  4. WP:UW Archives 4
  5. WP:UW Archives 5
WP:UTM archives
  1. April 2005–April 2006
  2. April 2006–October 2006
  3. October 2006–January 2007
  4. January 2007–February 2007
  5. February 2007
  6. February 2007–March 2007
  7. March 2007–September 2007
  8. September 2007–May 2008
  9. April 2008–June 2009
  10. June 2009–May 2010
  11. May 2010–February 2011
  12. February 2011–September 2013
  13. October 2013–July 2015
  14. July 2015–December 2016
  15. December 2016–August 2018
  16. August 2018–February 2020
  17. February 2020–November 2020
  18. December 2020–November 2021
  19. November 2021–March 2023
  20. March 2023–present


This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Can we write Template:uw-vandalism1 in a more formal tone?

In the user warning vandalism series of user message templates, I noticed that Template:uw-vandalism1 uses contractions and ends with "Thanks", but the rest of the user warning vandalism series templates do not. I propose we could rewrite Template:uw-vandalism1 as follows, using User:Example in this instance.

Information icon Hello, I am Example. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thank you.


Please let me know if this rewriting would work and if people could take users who post these messages more seriously. A more formal tone could convey seriousness. I think people would be more likely to heed the notice. Z. Patterson (talk) 18:55, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

@Z. Patterson: Have you looked at the other level 1 templates, such as Template:Uw-unsourced1? Most (if not all) end in either "Thanks" or "Thank you", because they assume good faith. If it's clear that the user has begun with a bad faith edit, you don't need to begin the chain with {{subst:uw-vandalism1}}, you can go straight to {{subst:uw-vandalism2}} - or higher, if necessary. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
@Redrose64: I understand now. Thank you. Z. Patterson (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: unblock|reason=Your reason here

We use this same language in many block templates. I'm sure somebody has pointed out that the net result of this is very frequent unblock requests that follow the instructions we give the user quite literally; they add exactly that text to the bottom of the talk page. Though sometimes it's just the blocked miscreant being obtuse, as often as not, when asked to actually give a reason, they give a reason. Why are we wasting our time and theirs with this? It sets us up to be chastising the user for following our instructions literally. --jpgordon 01:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Are we really wasting our time? The key part before even asking the user to use the unlock template is they understand why they were blocked. We have the same set of instructions for any other template like XfC and XfD regardless of user experience. – The Grid (talk) 14:21, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete 175.157.61.175 (talk) 12:10, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Or you may simply create a new account for editing

The last sentence ends with, "or you may simply create a new account for editing". This almost sounds like a solicitation of WP:SOCKING, something the new user is almost surely unaware of as something to be avoided. Rather, it would be better if this sentence said this instead:

  • ...or you may simply abandon this username, and ] for editing.

Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

The last sentence of what? DonIago (talk) 08:30, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm assuming it's {{subst:uw-username}} Heythereimaguy (talk) 14:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

We should change LLM misuse level 4 in the table in Misplaced Pages:Template index/User talk namespace#Multi-level templates

Right now, it indicates that the warning template should be {{subst:uw-generic4<nowiki>}} but we already have uw-ai4 for that purpose - should the table be edited? Heythereimaguy (talk) 14:49, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I did it myself - if anyone disagrees, feel free to revert and we'll discuss. Heythereimaguy (talk) 13:02, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Can we write Template:uw-vandalism1 to encourage the reader to put their energy into good use?

I propose adding "If you see a paragraph and you can improve it, please be bold and improve it! If it makes the encyclopedia better, it is less likely to be undone." after the reminder on the unconstructive edit. The reason is that vandals often want to leave their mark, we are aiming to provide them the good path to do so. This is in the spirit of a current RfC to rewrite a friendlier version of WP:BITE. Kenneth Kho (talk) 18:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Kenneth Kho, see {{uw-subtle1}}. I would think if we are going to make any changes to a vandalism template, it would be to that one, and not to {{uw-vandalism1}}. Another way to be friendlier, is if you believe that the user in question is trying to get it right but failing (as opposed to a malicious user or troll), then leave them a Welcome message on their Talk page, which will mitigate the BITEY-ness of the vandalism template, as well as provide them a bunch of links to helpful pages that will show them the path forward. Mathglot (talk) 00:37, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
@Mathglot I am actually picturing a pure vandal here. I am not endeavoring to teach them about Misplaced Pages, or to be civil at them.
However, WP:VANDAL shows that most vandalism are juvenile vandalism. They are here to have fun, they mean no harm.
I pray they who initially thought "let's screw around", could be persuaded that being reverted sucks, while making bold good-faith improvements would turn out good for them. Hence, my proposed two-sentence addition.
Remember, a lot of these juvenile vandals represent a large part of our loyal readership who "tend to be pretty smart people" and they bring in fresh perspectives to Misplaced Pages when they choose to contribute in good-faith. Kenneth Kho (talk) 07:23, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Kenneth Kho, if you know templating language, why don't you propose a specific example in the sandbox? And if you don't, you can just enter your proposed text of such a template below. Mathglot (talk) 09:31, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
@Mathglot I created it in my talk page , it was modified from the source found using view source on the template page, does that look right? Kenneth Kho (talk) 09:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
I used the wording "If you see a paragraph and you can improve it, you may be bold and improve it. If it makes the encyclopedia better, it is less likely to be undone!" - The reason is that I want them to get excited about not getting reverted, rather than the bold edits themselves. This will set a great mindset when they start becoming constructive, but still stumble upon a few rules and get reverted, they would want to avoid making the same mistakes to get their work kept. Kenneth Kho (talk) 10:29, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Category: