This is the
talk page for discussing
Template index/User talk namespace and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
This page is part of the Wikipedia: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 centralise 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
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This
edit request to
Template:Uw-vaublock has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hey everyone! I've just made some changes to the template's sandbox because the text that we're seeing right now looked really vague and outdated compared to its sister uw-uhblock. The table below shows why we need this change and why it's worth it. More details about the change can be found here.
Current | New | Notes |
---|---|---|
it is being used only for vandalism | it is being used only for vandalism | This text should remain the exact same as no significant changes are needed. |
Furthermore, your username is a blatant violation of our username policy | Additionally, your username is a clear violation of Wikipedia's username policy | To remain in line with the block notice, the furthermore has been changed to additionally. and the word our has been changed to Wikipedia's to make clear that this is indeed Wikipedia. Blatant is now clear for added clarity. |
meaning that it is profane, threatens, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia | it is obviously offensive, profane, violent, threatening, sexually explicit, disruptive, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that you do not intend to contribute positively to Wikipedia | The third sentence has been completely change for added clarity. We now have a detailed reason of why the username is in violation of the username policy. It's now more detailed and more explanatory than the old one.
|
If you have any questions about this change feel free to reply below! kleshkreikne. T 15:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Uw-ublock-double has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add a section which says "Please check here (linking to Special:CentralAuth) to see if your username is similar to a different one." Waylon (he was here) ( Does my editing suck? Let's talk.) ( Also, not to brag, but...) 17:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)"
Hey @ Mathglot: In the template edit to {{ Uw-copyright}}: I disagree with your removal of 'infringement', which changes the text from:
Wikipedia takes copyright infringement very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing.
Reason being: Copyright is the legal right granted by law to the creator of original works. Whereas, copyright infringement occurs when someone uses a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder. In this specific sentence, Wikipedia as an entity is taking copyright infringement very seriously as those who violate the copyright policy will be blocked from editing. An editor violates the copyright policy by committing a copyright infringement.
Hence, I suggest we use the terminology copyright infringement, seen in green above. waddie96 ★ ( talk) 18:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
There are a huge ton of warning templates and they have appeared to turn into scope creep. There are easily over 200+ templates all just for warnings, and the functionality might actually be better with a different warning system, using {{ uw}} ({{ uw1}}, {{ uw2}}, {{ uw3}}, {{ uw4}}) (which is a meta warning template) and related. A TfM I started at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_27#Uw_meta_templates found no consensus for merging the meta templates above but maybe we find something here.
My opinion is we should only have warnings for common problems that contributors make and in most cases we should try to personally hand write warning messages rather than standardize. Most of the cases above "level 3" can be addressed with "uw-disrupt3", etc. It IMHO is also counterproductive to warn vandals (as that is "feeding the trolls"); maybe just one or two warnings for "unconstructive editing" before pouncing with a block. I don't think all these templates document common problems, which is why we need standardization. Awesome Aasim 19:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Is there currently a user warning template about users breaking templates? I see a lot of that in Recent Changes and I don't want to leave a handwritten note every time I warn a user who breaks a template. 2003 LN 6 15:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
The way the main body of
Template:Uw-copyright-img is worded suggests it's meant only for cases where the warning editor can reasonably conclude that the image being warned against is made by the uploader. Yet the opening sentence An image you uploaded appears to be copyrighted content borrowed from another website.
, does not take this into account, nor is any other path of action for cases where the uploader does not have the rights to redistribute the image. Should we retool this template to focus only on this case, or add a path of action in case they do not? Regards,
User:TheDragonFire300. (
Contact me |
Contributions). 15:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing
Template index/User talk namespace and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
This page is part of the Wikipedia: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 centralise 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
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
This
edit request to
Template:Uw-vaublock has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hey everyone! I've just made some changes to the template's sandbox because the text that we're seeing right now looked really vague and outdated compared to its sister uw-uhblock. The table below shows why we need this change and why it's worth it. More details about the change can be found here.
Current | New | Notes |
---|---|---|
it is being used only for vandalism | it is being used only for vandalism | This text should remain the exact same as no significant changes are needed. |
Furthermore, your username is a blatant violation of our username policy | Additionally, your username is a clear violation of Wikipedia's username policy | To remain in line with the block notice, the furthermore has been changed to additionally. and the word our has been changed to Wikipedia's to make clear that this is indeed Wikipedia. Blatant is now clear for added clarity. |
meaning that it is profane, threatens, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that your intention is not to contribute to the encyclopedia | it is obviously offensive, profane, violent, threatening, sexually explicit, disruptive, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that you do not intend to contribute positively to Wikipedia | The third sentence has been completely change for added clarity. We now have a detailed reason of why the username is in violation of the username policy. It's now more detailed and more explanatory than the old one.
|
If you have any questions about this change feel free to reply below! kleshkreikne. T 15:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Template:Uw-ublock-double has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add a section which says "Please check here (linking to Special:CentralAuth) to see if your username is similar to a different one." Waylon (he was here) ( Does my editing suck? Let's talk.) ( Also, not to brag, but...) 17:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)"
Hey @ Mathglot: In the template edit to {{ Uw-copyright}}: I disagree with your removal of 'infringement', which changes the text from:
Wikipedia takes copyright infringement very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing.
Reason being: Copyright is the legal right granted by law to the creator of original works. Whereas, copyright infringement occurs when someone uses a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder. In this specific sentence, Wikipedia as an entity is taking copyright infringement very seriously as those who violate the copyright policy will be blocked from editing. An editor violates the copyright policy by committing a copyright infringement.
Hence, I suggest we use the terminology copyright infringement, seen in green above. waddie96 ★ ( talk) 18:02, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
There are a huge ton of warning templates and they have appeared to turn into scope creep. There are easily over 200+ templates all just for warnings, and the functionality might actually be better with a different warning system, using {{ uw}} ({{ uw1}}, {{ uw2}}, {{ uw3}}, {{ uw4}}) (which is a meta warning template) and related. A TfM I started at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_27#Uw_meta_templates found no consensus for merging the meta templates above but maybe we find something here.
My opinion is we should only have warnings for common problems that contributors make and in most cases we should try to personally hand write warning messages rather than standardize. Most of the cases above "level 3" can be addressed with "uw-disrupt3", etc. It IMHO is also counterproductive to warn vandals (as that is "feeding the trolls"); maybe just one or two warnings for "unconstructive editing" before pouncing with a block. I don't think all these templates document common problems, which is why we need standardization. Awesome Aasim 19:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Is there currently a user warning template about users breaking templates? I see a lot of that in Recent Changes and I don't want to leave a handwritten note every time I warn a user who breaks a template. 2003 LN 6 15:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
The way the main body of
Template:Uw-copyright-img is worded suggests it's meant only for cases where the warning editor can reasonably conclude that the image being warned against is made by the uploader. Yet the opening sentence An image you uploaded appears to be copyrighted content borrowed from another website.
, does not take this into account, nor is any other path of action for cases where the uploader does not have the rights to redistribute the image. Should we retool this template to focus only on this case, or add a path of action in case they do not? Regards,
User:TheDragonFire300. (
Contact me |
Contributions). 15:16, 15 April 2024 (UTC)