![]() |
Template:TFA editnotice is permanently
protected from editing because it is a
heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by
consensus, editors may use {{
edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's
documentation to add usage notes or
categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here. |
![]() | Wikipedia Help Template‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
"visible to everybody in the world" vs the original "live"? I prefer the original. It seems more accurate in a way (at least "everybody in the world" seems like an exaggeration), and the new version seems to me possibly, ever so slightly, to encourage vandalism. Rd232 talk 20:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Why the extra line breaks? It just makes it taller, and the first added line break introduces a grammatical issue because the sentence "You really are editing it ..." is broken off from the "it". Rd232 talk 13:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
To avoid a large number of later-blanked editnotices being created and to ease navigation for existing ones, why not add some code for auto-tagging it for speedy deletion--I used <noinclude>{{#ifeq:{{#time:Y-m-d}}|2010-05-15|This will auto-tag it for speedy deletion tomorrow.|{{db-G6}}}}</noinclude>
on yesterday's, but it could easily be configured as a parameter (like delete=no/yes depending if there is already an existing notice) using the existing {{{day}}} param for something like <noinclude>{{#ifeq:{{#time:d}}|{{{day}}}|Foo|{{db-G6}}}}</noinclude>
Or use {{CURRENTDAY}} for consistency rather than #time. Does this sound OK? — fetch · comms 00:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm no good at this. But at least it isn't blurry:
Amalthea 19:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
The current tone taken by the edit notice comes off as accusatory and assumes the editor-to-be has mal-intent (i.e. "don't waste your time"). Not only does this present a challenge to and further encourage vandals, it goes against
WP:FAITH. A neutral style of writing should be used, one that assumes the reader is here for benevolent purposes, along the lines of:
You really are editing it and if you press Save, your changes will be public — immediately. Don't worry, our volunteers work tirelessly to ensure the quality of your (and our!) hard work; vandalism will be swiftly reverted and malicious users prevented from editing, so you can rely on a positive editing environment in Wikipedia. We look forward to your contribution!
Anthiety (
talk)
04:47, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please change:
Vandalism and test edits are swiftly removed by Wikipedia volunteers, so please do not waste your time and theirs by saving changes which do not improve the article. Of course constructive changes are welcome – but know that vandals will be blocked from editing.
to:
Save, your changes will be public — immediately. Don't worry, vandalism will be swiftly reverted and malicious users prevented from editing; our volunteers work tirelessly to ensure the quality of your (and our!) hard work. We look forward to your contribution!
Because it is more in the spirit of
WP:FAITH and uses a less accusatory tone. Especially, the phrase "please do not waste your time" implicitly labels the reader as a would-be vandal and may encourage real vandals. See "Wording 2" on the talk page for a full explanation.
Anthiety (
talk)
07:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I propose we display the TFA editnotice this way: we create Template:TFA title/date for each day (instead of the editnotice for each article), editing of the subpages of this template are restricted to admins (and account creators) using the title blacklist, and we display the TFA editnotice using Template:TFA title/{{date}} in
template:editnotice loader{{
Editnotice load}}. This is faster to set up for each TFA and additionally, provides a way for users to know TFA's title through a template,
Template:TFA title, so they can for example embed recent changes to it, etc.
Cenarium (
talk)
17:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
{{#ifeq: {{PAGENAME}} | {{TFA title}} | {{TFA-editnotice}} }}
Shouldn't there be a link to WP:BLOCK? – dff gd 23:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please change <tt>Save</tt> to <tt>Save page</tt> to properly match the text shown on the save button. A minor point, but best to avoid any potential source of confusion when dealing with newbies.
Adrian J. Hunter(
talk•
contribs)
14:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thank you, for the work helping produce such a useful tool, much appreciated! User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 20:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
There have been comments above and on the related Template talk:New release editnotice regarding the current wording. As this template is fully protected no significant wording changes can be made even by an admin without consensus, or lack of opposition to a proposal.
I propose the following three wording changes:
1 Vandalism and test edits are swiftly removed by Wikipedia volunteers, so please do not waste your time and theirs by saving changes which do not improve the article. Be aware that vandal accounts are blocked so the IP address cannot be used to edit Wikipedia in future. Constructive changes, however, are welcome.
2 You are actually editing it and if you press Save page below, your changes will be publicly viewable – immediately. Please double check that your changes are correct and constructive.
3 There has also been concern that the template is edged slightly toward assuming bad faith, and that the positive statements are too little or too late or awkwardly worded. For example the "We are excited to have you contribute!" right at the end. I think that on the whole the template is appropriately informative, so much so that the "We are excited to have you contribute!" sits badly, making the template appear a little insincere. The template is essentially not about welcoming someone to contribute, it is about advising them to be careful. There is nothing wrong with being factual and informative, and no need to apologise. On the whole I suspect most people prefer a neutral informative sign to one that sends out confusing or conflicting messages. I suggest cutting "We are excited to have you contribute " SilkTork * Tea time 17:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
I oppose all of the above. Point 1: More formal is not better; mentioning IP address is confusing (many won't know what it means) and also misleading (implies it would be blocked forever); we don't want to send newbies to WP:BLOCK if they're not actually blocked or threatened with it - we want them to go to the sandbox or tutorial or talkpage. Moving "constructive" down weakens its significance, as if it's an after thought, and changes the emphasis of the whole thing, and makes the whole notice much more about Don't Do That. Point 2: unnecessary and slightly patronising. In the same boldface as the "actually editing" warning it's also too prominent, and if moved to the next paragraph, it's duplicative. Point 3: we absolutely want something that conveys some sense of an enthusiastic and lively community, and not a webpage that you happen to be able to edit. Rd232 talk 17:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Methinks autoconfirmed users are already aware that they are editing Wikipedia and most are probably aware of the issues surrounding vandalism. So why display the obvious to autoconfirmed users? Just saying. — Rickyrab. Yada yada yada 20:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed this template for the first time, over two months after this discussion. Maybe if no one cares enough to address this request, then we ought to just delete this eyesore. -- llywrch ( talk) 16:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I assumed I was being shown this message by mistake. Why do autoconfirmed users need to be provided with links to the sandbox and the tutorial? DoctorKubla ( talk) 06:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi. Can someone please add quotation marks around the article title? It currently reads like this:
Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962 is Today's featured article
It should instead read like this:
"Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962" is Today's featured article
Thanks! -- MZMcBride ( talk) 17:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
This template comes across as incredibly patronising. As noted above, the "We are excited to have you contribute!" seems awkward and insincere, but if there's no consensus for that to be removed, I think a small step in the right direction would be to replace the hysterical "You are editing Wikipedia right now!" with "You are editing {{PAGENAME}}". The body of the template could then begin "If you press save page below...", etc. If I've understood it right, this template is designed to offer helpful advice to new editors, so the link to WP:TFA is unnecessary. If I'm wrong about that, the header could read "{{PAGENAME}} is today's featured article/list" instead. Either way works. The point is to be a little more straightforward and professional, without having to resort to exclamation marks and obnoxious bold text that imparts absolutely no useful information. DoctorKubla ( talk) 07:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The text parameter of the editnotice template currently has the following source code:
| text = "{{PAGENAME}}" is {{#ifeq:{{{list}}}|yes |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured list|Today's featured list]] |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured article|Today's featured article]]
For better capitalization, I think it should be changed to:
| text = "{{PAGENAME}}" is {{#ifeq:{{{list}}}|yes |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured list|today's featured list]] |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured article|today's featured article]]
Michaelzeng7 ( talk) 00:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could we replace the Wikipedia:VAND link to Wikipedia:Vandalism? Redirects in piped links always bother me... Eman235/ talk 18:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
[[file:note icon.svg]] --> [[file:ambox important.svg]] 95.49.251.199 ( talk) 15:21, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change Save changes to Publish changes to match the interface. Home Lander ( talk) 01:09, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Plz unlink the Publish Changes button 110.227.66.218 ( talk) 06:57, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Can the attempt not to damage section link to Wikipedia:Vandalism not WP:VAND please? Goveganfortheanimals ( talk) 15:41, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
[[File:Note icon.svg|70px]] → [[File:Note icon.svg|70px|link=]]. The image is in the public domain and you would not be redirected commons when you click the image. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA talk 04:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add a tooltip showing that the 95.49.85.227 ( talk) 22:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
button in the notice itself does not publish changes when clicked.{{
edit protected}}
template. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
10:35, 26 June 2020 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Instead of
<td>Use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|Sandbox]] for test edits, or go to [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}]] to make comments or suggestions. See the [[Wikipedia:Tutorial|Tutorial]] on how to get started editing. We are excited to have you contribute! Thank you.</td>
I think it would be better if these changes occured.
<td>Use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]] for test edits, or go to [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}]] to make comments or suggestions. See our [[Help:Introduction|introduction]] on how to get started editing. We are excited to have you contribute! Thank you.</td>
Interstellarity (
talk)
00:24, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
I've made three smallish design tweaks to Template:TFA-editnotice/sandbox:
Do these all sound alright? {{u| Sdkb}} talk 14:17, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
I believe users whose edits will be subject to review under pending changes don't have a "publish changes" button, but instead their button is called "submit changes". Would it be helpful to provide both options in the edit notice? (e.g. 'X' is today's featured article. You are editing it, and if you press Publish changes or Submit changes...)
Pinging Sdkb, as I think you were involved in organising this trial. Jr8825 • Talk 02:20, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I've tried to edit a featured article via mobile and the warning notice was displayed incorrectly (please see the image). There should be no repetition (the sandbox/your sandbox) and there should be an empty line above the links to the template. Could someone please have a look at this and fix accordingly? Thank you! -- TadejM my talk 14:15, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
P.S.: I think I've fixed the first issue but the second issue remains. -- TadejM my talk 14:28, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the Publish changes button to look like the actual button. foo bar baz 23:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Per
WP:EGG and
WP:EEGG, replace “Use {{If IP|the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox{{!}}sandbox]]|your [[Special:MyPage/sandbox{{!}}sandbox]]}}
” with “Use {{If IP|[[Wikipedia:Sandbox{{!}}the sandbox]]|[[Special:MyPage/sandbox{{!}}your sandbox]]}}
” (‘the’ or ‘your’ is moved into its respective link: “Use
the sandbox
your sandbox”). –
Gluonz
talk
contribs
18:00, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
When editing in dark mode (now enabled for all logged in users) I see the following popup, which is unreadable (which I assume it bad): https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/F56142153
I'm not exactly sure how to fix this particular issue but https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Recommendations_for_night_mode_compatibility_on_Wikimedia_wikis should provide the guidance to someone who understands this template better than me!
Thanks in advance! Jon (WMF) ( talk) 23:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
![]() |
Template:TFA editnotice is permanently
protected from editing because it is a
heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by
consensus, editors may use {{
edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's
documentation to add usage notes or
categories.
Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. This template does not have a testcases subpage. You can create the testcases subpage here. |
![]() | Wikipedia Help Template‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
|
"visible to everybody in the world" vs the original "live"? I prefer the original. It seems more accurate in a way (at least "everybody in the world" seems like an exaggeration), and the new version seems to me possibly, ever so slightly, to encourage vandalism. Rd232 talk 20:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Why the extra line breaks? It just makes it taller, and the first added line break introduces a grammatical issue because the sentence "You really are editing it ..." is broken off from the "it". Rd232 talk 13:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
To avoid a large number of later-blanked editnotices being created and to ease navigation for existing ones, why not add some code for auto-tagging it for speedy deletion--I used <noinclude>{{#ifeq:{{#time:Y-m-d}}|2010-05-15|This will auto-tag it for speedy deletion tomorrow.|{{db-G6}}}}</noinclude>
on yesterday's, but it could easily be configured as a parameter (like delete=no/yes depending if there is already an existing notice) using the existing {{{day}}} param for something like <noinclude>{{#ifeq:{{#time:d}}|{{{day}}}|Foo|{{db-G6}}}}</noinclude>
Or use {{CURRENTDAY}} for consistency rather than #time. Does this sound OK? — fetch · comms 00:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm no good at this. But at least it isn't blurry:
Amalthea 19:13, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
The current tone taken by the edit notice comes off as accusatory and assumes the editor-to-be has mal-intent (i.e. "don't waste your time"). Not only does this present a challenge to and further encourage vandals, it goes against
WP:FAITH. A neutral style of writing should be used, one that assumes the reader is here for benevolent purposes, along the lines of:
You really are editing it and if you press Save, your changes will be public — immediately. Don't worry, our volunteers work tirelessly to ensure the quality of your (and our!) hard work; vandalism will be swiftly reverted and malicious users prevented from editing, so you can rely on a positive editing environment in Wikipedia. We look forward to your contribution!
Anthiety (
talk)
04:47, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please change:
Vandalism and test edits are swiftly removed by Wikipedia volunteers, so please do not waste your time and theirs by saving changes which do not improve the article. Of course constructive changes are welcome – but know that vandals will be blocked from editing.
to:
Save, your changes will be public — immediately. Don't worry, vandalism will be swiftly reverted and malicious users prevented from editing; our volunteers work tirelessly to ensure the quality of your (and our!) hard work. We look forward to your contribution!
Because it is more in the spirit of
WP:FAITH and uses a less accusatory tone. Especially, the phrase "please do not waste your time" implicitly labels the reader as a would-be vandal and may encourage real vandals. See "Wording 2" on the talk page for a full explanation.
Anthiety (
talk)
07:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I propose we display the TFA editnotice this way: we create Template:TFA title/date for each day (instead of the editnotice for each article), editing of the subpages of this template are restricted to admins (and account creators) using the title blacklist, and we display the TFA editnotice using Template:TFA title/{{date}} in
template:editnotice loader{{
Editnotice load}}. This is faster to set up for each TFA and additionally, provides a way for users to know TFA's title through a template,
Template:TFA title, so they can for example embed recent changes to it, etc.
Cenarium (
talk)
17:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
{{#ifeq: {{PAGENAME}} | {{TFA title}} | {{TFA-editnotice}} }}
Shouldn't there be a link to WP:BLOCK? – dff gd 23:26, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Please change <tt>Save</tt> to <tt>Save page</tt> to properly match the text shown on the save button. A minor point, but best to avoid any potential source of confusion when dealing with newbies.
Adrian J. Hunter(
talk•
contribs)
14:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thank you, for the work helping produce such a useful tool, much appreciated! User:MikeBeckett Please do say 'Hi!' 20:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
There have been comments above and on the related Template talk:New release editnotice regarding the current wording. As this template is fully protected no significant wording changes can be made even by an admin without consensus, or lack of opposition to a proposal.
I propose the following three wording changes:
1 Vandalism and test edits are swiftly removed by Wikipedia volunteers, so please do not waste your time and theirs by saving changes which do not improve the article. Be aware that vandal accounts are blocked so the IP address cannot be used to edit Wikipedia in future. Constructive changes, however, are welcome.
2 You are actually editing it and if you press Save page below, your changes will be publicly viewable – immediately. Please double check that your changes are correct and constructive.
3 There has also been concern that the template is edged slightly toward assuming bad faith, and that the positive statements are too little or too late or awkwardly worded. For example the "We are excited to have you contribute!" right at the end. I think that on the whole the template is appropriately informative, so much so that the "We are excited to have you contribute!" sits badly, making the template appear a little insincere. The template is essentially not about welcoming someone to contribute, it is about advising them to be careful. There is nothing wrong with being factual and informative, and no need to apologise. On the whole I suspect most people prefer a neutral informative sign to one that sends out confusing or conflicting messages. I suggest cutting "We are excited to have you contribute " SilkTork * Tea time 17:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
I oppose all of the above. Point 1: More formal is not better; mentioning IP address is confusing (many won't know what it means) and also misleading (implies it would be blocked forever); we don't want to send newbies to WP:BLOCK if they're not actually blocked or threatened with it - we want them to go to the sandbox or tutorial or talkpage. Moving "constructive" down weakens its significance, as if it's an after thought, and changes the emphasis of the whole thing, and makes the whole notice much more about Don't Do That. Point 2: unnecessary and slightly patronising. In the same boldface as the "actually editing" warning it's also too prominent, and if moved to the next paragraph, it's duplicative. Point 3: we absolutely want something that conveys some sense of an enthusiastic and lively community, and not a webpage that you happen to be able to edit. Rd232 talk 17:33, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Methinks autoconfirmed users are already aware that they are editing Wikipedia and most are probably aware of the issues surrounding vandalism. So why display the obvious to autoconfirmed users? Just saying. — Rickyrab. Yada yada yada 20:12, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed this template for the first time, over two months after this discussion. Maybe if no one cares enough to address this request, then we ought to just delete this eyesore. -- llywrch ( talk) 16:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
I assumed I was being shown this message by mistake. Why do autoconfirmed users need to be provided with links to the sandbox and the tutorial? DoctorKubla ( talk) 06:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hi. Can someone please add quotation marks around the article title? It currently reads like this:
Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962 is Today's featured article
It should instead read like this:
"Wage reform in the Soviet Union, 1956–1962" is Today's featured article
Thanks! -- MZMcBride ( talk) 17:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
This template comes across as incredibly patronising. As noted above, the "We are excited to have you contribute!" seems awkward and insincere, but if there's no consensus for that to be removed, I think a small step in the right direction would be to replace the hysterical "You are editing Wikipedia right now!" with "You are editing {{PAGENAME}}". The body of the template could then begin "If you press save page below...", etc. If I've understood it right, this template is designed to offer helpful advice to new editors, so the link to WP:TFA is unnecessary. If I'm wrong about that, the header could read "{{PAGENAME}} is today's featured article/list" instead. Either way works. The point is to be a little more straightforward and professional, without having to resort to exclamation marks and obnoxious bold text that imparts absolutely no useful information. DoctorKubla ( talk) 07:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The text parameter of the editnotice template currently has the following source code:
| text = "{{PAGENAME}}" is {{#ifeq:{{{list}}}|yes |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured list|Today's featured list]] |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured article|Today's featured article]]
For better capitalization, I think it should be changed to:
| text = "{{PAGENAME}}" is {{#ifeq:{{{list}}}|yes |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured list|today's featured list]] |[[Wikipedia:Today's featured article|today's featured article]]
Michaelzeng7 ( talk) 00:17, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Could we replace the Wikipedia:VAND link to Wikipedia:Vandalism? Redirects in piped links always bother me... Eman235/ talk 18:20, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
[[file:note icon.svg]] --> [[file:ambox important.svg]] 95.49.251.199 ( talk) 15:21, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change Save changes to Publish changes to match the interface. Home Lander ( talk) 01:09, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Plz unlink the Publish Changes button 110.227.66.218 ( talk) 06:57, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Can the attempt not to damage section link to Wikipedia:Vandalism not WP:VAND please? Goveganfortheanimals ( talk) 15:41, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
[[File:Note icon.svg|70px]] → [[File:Note icon.svg|70px|link=]]. The image is in the public domain and you would not be redirected commons when you click the image. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA talk 04:21, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please add a tooltip showing that the 95.49.85.227 ( talk) 22:06, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
button in the notice itself does not publish changes when clicked.{{
edit protected}}
template. --
Redrose64 🌹 (
talk)
10:35, 26 June 2020 (UTC)![]() | This
edit request to
Template:TFA-editnotice has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Instead of
<td>Use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|Sandbox]] for test edits, or go to [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}]] to make comments or suggestions. See the [[Wikipedia:Tutorial|Tutorial]] on how to get started editing. We are excited to have you contribute! Thank you.</td>
I think it would be better if these changes occured.
<td>Use the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|sandbox]] for test edits, or go to [[{{TALKPAGENAME}}]] to make comments or suggestions. See our [[Help:Introduction|introduction]] on how to get started editing. We are excited to have you contribute! Thank you.</td>
Interstellarity (
talk)
00:24, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
I've made three smallish design tweaks to Template:TFA-editnotice/sandbox:
Do these all sound alright? {{u| Sdkb}} talk 14:17, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
I believe users whose edits will be subject to review under pending changes don't have a "publish changes" button, but instead their button is called "submit changes". Would it be helpful to provide both options in the edit notice? (e.g. 'X' is today's featured article. You are editing it, and if you press Publish changes or Submit changes...)
Pinging Sdkb, as I think you were involved in organising this trial. Jr8825 • Talk 02:20, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I've tried to edit a featured article via mobile and the warning notice was displayed incorrectly (please see the image). There should be no repetition (the sandbox/your sandbox) and there should be an empty line above the links to the template. Could someone please have a look at this and fix accordingly? Thank you! -- TadejM my talk 14:15, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
P.S.: I think I've fixed the first issue but the second issue remains. -- TadejM my talk 14:28, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the Publish changes button to look like the actual button. foo bar baz 23:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Per
WP:EGG and
WP:EEGG, replace “Use {{If IP|the [[Wikipedia:Sandbox{{!}}sandbox]]|your [[Special:MyPage/sandbox{{!}}sandbox]]}}
” with “Use {{If IP|[[Wikipedia:Sandbox{{!}}the sandbox]]|[[Special:MyPage/sandbox{{!}}your sandbox]]}}
” (‘the’ or ‘your’ is moved into its respective link: “Use
the sandbox
your sandbox”). –
Gluonz
talk
contribs
18:00, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
When editing in dark mode (now enabled for all logged in users) I see the following popup, which is unreadable (which I assume it bad): https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/F56142153
I'm not exactly sure how to fix this particular issue but https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Recommendations_for_night_mode_compatibility_on_Wikimedia_wikis should provide the guidance to someone who understands this template better than me!
Thanks in advance! Jon (WMF) ( talk) 23:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)