Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace

{{Talk Rosdiablatiff01 header|WT:UTM|WT:UW|wp=yes|noarchives=yes}}

Edit request for Uw3

Two sentences ending with the same word are poor style, aren't they? See my recent edit to the corresponding Wikidata template for a reference. — Mike Novikoff 01:35, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

If I were a template editor, I'd probably deny this edit, as there's really no need to change it. Template:Uw3 is a template used to create level 3 warnings. The first sentence is a generic sentence used as a default. Invalid^OS (talk) 13:48, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but could it possibly be that I do know what these templates are since I use them almost daily?

And I don't suggest changing the first sentence, I propose shortening the second one. Or maybe someone can come up with a different wording so as to avoid the current tautology and redundancy? — Mike Novikoff 00:20, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Mike Novikoff, a late reply: This is not as redundant as it may seem to. Contrary to closed communities like online games, a block on Wikipedia does not prevent reading access. Contrary to internet forums, writing is not even the main purpose of the website, which is an encyclopedia dedicated to its readers. While blocked from editing, users can still send e-mails unless this access is separately revoked. And in the future, even "editing" can be further broken down: WP:PARBLOCK2019. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of all this, including the newly introduced partial blocks. Since WP:Blocking policy is already linked, there's hardly a need to describe it further in a short message. It's enough that it reads "blocked", not "banned" that most Internet users are used to, and wikilinked so that they can learn what it means if they're not sure.

You know, I'm a huge fan of MoS since my very early days at WP, and one of the major points of MoS is to avoid the redundancy. It's just a miracle (that I've noticed myself after I've done it myself several times) how articles can become much clearer if MoS is carefully and consistently implemented. And I do believe that it applies to any other WP text as well.

As Anton Chekhov had put it in 1889, "brevity is a sister of talent", and it's even more so in our century of SMS.

Furthermore, it had been noticed by psychologists and linguists that the emphasis in a sentence goes on its last word, so for L3 warning it would better be not "editing", but "blocked". — Mike Novikoff 03:45, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Rosdiablatiff01 Rosdiablatiff01 (talk) 00:10, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 17 December 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the template as proposed at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 05:54, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

---

• Template:Uw-ublock-famous → Template:Uw-ublock-wellknown

– The content of this template is already using "well-known" instead of "famous" for many years. Likewise Twinkle edit summary when using the template. Now it was suggested to modify the Twinkle "reason" label for this template. But it seems even better to rename the template and make everything consistent. More rationale can be seen here by by Beeblebrox. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:52, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

• Support "Famous" is simply not reflected by long-standing practice, policy, or even the original language of the template itself. Beeblebrox (talk) 06:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
• Rename, probably better to leave the other as a redirect though. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 06:24, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

  Yes, that's already expected as the redirect will not fit any deletion criterion. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:41, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

• Support Everyone makes good arguments. The word "famous" doesn't appear once in the template. --LiamUJ (talk) 15:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
• Support This move is rational and no big deal. StonyBrook (talk) 23:14, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
• Always bugged me — we're not interested in famous, we're interested in impersonation. -wellknown seems appropriate, as it's used by the template itself. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:10, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
• Support, seems reasonable to me on the condition that the first account we block be an Elvis impersonator ^creffpublic _{a creffett franchise} (talk to the boss) 20:34, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Encourage the newcomers

Template:Uw-bite links to WP:BITE. Should it also link to Wikipedia:Encourage the newcomers for some positive advice? I am currently the main author on this essay, so I have a COI; please only make this change if you think it will improve the template. HLHJ (talk)

These warning templates should ideally link to established policies, or at least guidelines, and not essays. If the guideline needs improvement, do feel free to suggest it on the guideline's talk page. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:16, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed rewording of uw-vblock

{{uw-vblock}} currently reads "You have been blocked temporarily from editing for persistent vandalism." As blocks are preventative not punitive, I propose this should be changed to "You have been blocked temporarily to prevent further vandalism." Any thoughts? — O Still Small Voice of Clam 15:09, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Sounds good, but as this gets used on dynamic IPs, an acknowledgement that the person reading it may not have vandalized anything might be good (can the template detect if it is on a registered-editor talkpage or an IP one?). People get mad when unfairly accused of bad behaviour, but will probably understand being bycatch in a technical measure to prevent vandalism. Also, they may know the other people using their dynamic IP, and so this may exert social pressure against vandals ("Great, some jerk has been vandalizing Wikipedia again and now I can't fix this typo."). HLHJ (talk) 00:57, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

HLHJ: The template already reads "Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked" when only anonymous editors from an IP address are blocked. In this regard, there is no need for a change.

Voice of Clam, I had the same thought, and it applies to all the blocking templates. "For" could be replaced by "to prevent further" in almost all cases, and when I manually personalize a block template, I often do change this wording too. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:10, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I've updated {{uw-vblock}} - I haven't looked at the wording of others, but I may do so in the next few days. — O Still Small Voice of Clam 17:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Voice of Clam, thanks, it looks wonderful. I just noticed the change positively. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:23, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Looks good to me. If used on an IP, with a null reason=, it says: "Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of Duration to prevent further vandalism, as done at Targeted page. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked." The bit about "your" talk page seems a bit odd; "this block includes user talk pages such as this one"? Thanks, BTW, ~ ToBeFree, I'd missed that. HLHJ (talk) 01:21, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

No problem. Regarding talk page access revocation, this is not about the whole user talk namespace. When a user is blocked, they can still edit their own talk page, and no others. This access should usually only be used to create an unblock request, or to ask the blocking administrator for clarification. Administrators rarely revoke this last method of on-Wikipedia appeal, unless it has been misused. Revoking a user's talk page access is an action done after blocking almost all cases. The template's "In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked" variant is, due to the existence of {{uw-tparevoked}}, only needed in extremely rare cases where talk page access is revoked immediately at the time of the original block.

This does not make the proposed text unsuitable, but the reason for proposing a change might have been a misinterpretation. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:25, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Oh right, that's fine then; in context of appeal procedures, it makes sense to focus on the IP's talk page. Sorry, I know nothing about blocking, and overlooked that parameter. Apologies for twice wasting your time, ~ ToBeFree, and thank you for your patience. HLHJ (talk) 02:35, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

No worries, HLHJ, no worries. Not wasted; spent practising a foreign language and spreading knowledge. That's what Wikipedia is about, after all. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:39, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion for ALLCAPS template

I have requested this a month and a half ago on WP:RT and Redrose64 redirected me here. That was before my WikiBreak. Thanks Bishonen. I am reposting my original message here as I think this template may still be necessary. Thank you.

I have encountered a few users that write messages in ALL CAPS when they want to put emphasis while I am patrolling. For that, I have used personal messages, but I think there may be a need for templates {{uw-allcaps1}} and {{uw-allcaps2}} that may be necessary. The templates I am proposing may have the wording something like this:

• Level 1: "Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}} and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed you left a message in ALL CAPS, which is considered shouting. This may not be your intent, but check your caps lock key before you continue editing. If you need to emphasize text, you can use '''Bold text''' or ''Italics text'' or <u>Underlined text</u>. Thank you."
• Level 2: "Please refrain from leaving messages in ALL CAPS as it is considered shouting and uncivil. If you need to emphasize text, you can use '''Bold text''' or ''Italics text'' or <u>Underlined text</u>. Thank you."
• Level 3 and higher: use {{uw-npa3}} and {{uw-npa4}}.

Thank you. Awesome Aasim 19:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Awesome Aasim 20:42, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

I think that may be a bit over-specific, and if needed, could be addressed by a single warning template, not a multi-level one. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:14, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

@ToBeFree: Okay. So maybe we can just have the level 1 warning message. It may be needed, though, as to prevent posts in ALL CAPS. Awesome Aasim 01:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Awesome Aasim, I personally have not yet encountered a case where pure "all caps" had been the main problem to explain to a user. If I had, I would probably have written a short custom message for the unique case.

I'd guess that users who write in "all caps" are more likely causing more significant disruption in other ways too. If not, it could even be possible to completely ignore the way their messages are written, and respond to their (likely incorrect) arguments instead. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

Edit request (January 13, 2020)

I am requesting that the text "ask for independent help at one of the relevant notice boards" be amended to "... relevant noticeboards" on both of these warning templates. 'Noticeboards' is un-spaced in nearly every other instance on the wiki; see for example Wikipedia:Noticeboards and its list of noticeboards. These are the only two Uw-series templates that mention them as far as I can tell. Thanks, –Erakura^(talk) 00:27, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done DannyS712 (talk) 00:32, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Shouldn't {{uw-preview}} direct users to the Teahouse instead?

Currently this template directs users to the helpdesk, but as far as I can tell, the users who will see this template are almost always new, in which case direction to the teahouse would be better. --MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 16:51, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome templates, like Template:Welcome, which are regularly used in combination with user warnings for new users who have not been previously welcomed, already direct new users to the Teahouse. I would prefer to see the user warning template left with the more generic link to the help desk. --Bsherr (talk) 17:14, 16 January 2020 (UTC)