Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 18:02, 15 September 2024 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:Template index/User talk namespace/Archive 20) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.

Proposal: parametrize "one or more of your contributions may have been removed"

 Courtesy link: Template:Uw-vandalism1/sandbox
 Courtesy link: Template:Contributions phrase

Do you ever wish you could be more forthright and less wishy-washy than saying, "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.

I propose to enhance the line "one or more of your contributions may have been removed" in the other user warning templates that have it, to make it variable under parameter control, and allow the following options, in addition to the current default:

• avoid the "may" conditional, so it says "contributions have been removed";
• use the singular when only one edit is involved, so it says "contribution has been removed"; and
• indicate how many edits you mean (when it matters), instead of the hand-wavy, "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.

It would be fairly easy to remedy this. As proof of concept, I have added a possible sandbox implementation of this proposal to {{uw-vandalism1/sandbox}}, which adds the new parameter |number= to support the parametrizable contributions phrase. Documentation of the new parameter is available at the end of the Usage section at {{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 {{contributions phrase}}; testcases for it are {{contributions phrase/testcases}}. Feedback sought, and welcome. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 10:30, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

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 Template:Uw-npa1 which don't include "one or more...").

I would suggest that the 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).

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". Tollens (talk) 07:50, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Using AFC

Various policies and guidelines tell conflicted or paid editors to use WP:AFC.

On {{uw-coi}}, shouldn't:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;

say something like:

other than in the Draft namespace (where you should declare your CoI), avoid avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;

(which could be split over two bullet points)? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:53, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

No, I prefer it as it is. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

It's not a matter of personal preference; it's a matter of giving (new) users correct and relevant information. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:36, 27 August 2024 (UTC)

Uw-block edit request for dark mode compatibility

This edit request to Template:Uw-block has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please merge changes at Template:Uw-block/sandbox so future substitutions are dark mode compatible. You can also check testcases (Template:Uw-block/testcases). —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 07:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done Sohom (talk) 12:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 1 September 2024

This edit request to Template:Uw-editsummary2 has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Currently, {{uw-editsummary2}} uses File:Information.svg with the empty argument |link=, preventing it from linking to its information page. According to Help:Pictures § Links, since the file's CC BY-SA license requires attribution, the image should link to its information page. Therefore, I think it should be changed from:

]

to:

]

jlwoodwa (talk) 17:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

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

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed.  20:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

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. Sdkb  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. Tollens (talk) 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 (File:Information icon4.svg). Tollens (talk) 04:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Reminder template for undue detail per WP:BALANCE?

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. {{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 Remsense ‥ 论 22:17, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

• WikiProject User warnings