MediaWiki talk:Sitenotice

message: Just to let you know that the Happy Bday banner pointing to the Shop does not display properly on my Firefox (completely missing the Wikimedia Shop. The Wikimedia Shop is operated by the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit that operates Wikipedia and its sister projects. part), unless I minimize the size of the text in the page, and I am pretty sure it is not meant to work like this. --Elitre (talk) 14:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The 15% discount banner is originating from the Wikimedia Foundation's Central Site Notice page at :meta:Special:CentralNotice, not here. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: 15% discount where?

message: There's no good reason to use reduced size text here; it only serves to make it more difficult to read. Could someone remove font-size: 80%; from the style attribute of the div tag? Also, please remember to increment MediaWiki:Sitenotice id per mw:Manual:Interface/Sitenotice#Dismissing when updating the sitenotice. Thanks. jcgoble3 (talk) 18:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Partly done: I've  the cookie counter, seeing as it hadn't been done today, but not sure about the font size - yes it is tiny, but it is being shown absolutely everywhere, and we already have complaints that it ought to be displayed on main page only. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:39, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The latest comments at WP:VPT#Users reporting site time issues and delay in visible update of edits are suggesting that this issue is present throughout the wiki, not just on the Main Page. Therefore, I would suggest pushing the change above through, and also change "the Main Page" to "some pages" or "many pages" and the "is" two words later to "are". jcgoble3 (talk) 22:28, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I generalized the wording before seeing this request.  The font size issue appears to require discussion.  —David Levy 23:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: font size is good as is. NE Ent 23:29, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Double edit request 

message: Hello, I am requesting a sitenotice for POTY 2012 Round 2 (Final Round) to run instead of a CentralNotice on this wiki. Picture of the Year is a widely recognized event and we would like to encourage ENWP editors to participate in celebrating Wikimedia's best pictures. The banner would remain visible to logged in editors from Feb 7 2012 to Feb 14 2013. You can view the banner here - the banner would appear in English only. Mono for the POTY 2012 committee at 20:30, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Out of curiosity, why is the CentralNotice insufficient? Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:33, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for sitenotice 

message: When doing a live beta, letting people back out is crucial to avoiding discontent, as well as providing a place to post bugs. Neither of these have been done. Indeed, the current attempt doesn't even explain what VisualEditor is. As such, I would suggest the following sitenotice be added immediately.
Wikipedia is happy to announce the live Beta of VisualEditor, a tool that offers a way to edit pages without needing to learn wikimarkup. This has been automatically activated on all accounts. If you need to edit without VisualEditor, you can choose "Edit source" instead of "Edit". For bug reporting, go to Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback.
To opt out of VisualEditor, simply go to , scroll down to "Editing", tick the box labelled "", then scroll to the bottom and click "Save". You can reactivate it at any time by unticking the box.
I've used a little colour to make sure people see it. I suggest Sitenotice, as whatever hack is being used for the uninformative message literally takes 3 seconds before it appears on the otherwise completely-loaded page.  This provides the necessary information, explains what's happening, and tells people where to report bugs, and how to opt out - things that should have been done 15 hours ago. 
Thank you. (Crossposted to WP:ANI) Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:36, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a 'hack', it's the CentralNotice extension, which we use for pretty much every big announcement. My feeling on this is clear; I feel it would totally undermine the software proper to fire everyone at an instant switch to permanently disable the VE, I think it is frankly unfair to push on to editors a sitenotice that contains no mechanism for disabling it, and I suspect that the Foundation will not appreciate attempts to do so. Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 14:56, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't understand how SiteNotice works if you think there's no way to disable it. That's part of sitenotice's core functionality. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:49, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: We've already had this conversation elsewhere, Adam; look at the timestamps. Can we try to focus on one venue, please? Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 16:32, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "Oh not again".  Yes, please, somebody either disable the crazy-never-loading-Javascript-thingy until a sitenotice has been properly applied with clear instructions on how to disable it.  There is nothing presently in Preferences→Editing that I can see that matches up.  —Sladen (talk) 16:45, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

text: . After speaking with the team in #mediawiki-visualeditor, there's an issue with CentralNotice's cookie handling which they're actively working on a fix for. For the time being, having some users see two notices is just going to make it harder for coordination. Leaving it centrally in one place is going to be easier for now. If they aren't able to get a fix working in a reasonable amount of time, then we should definitely re-visit the idea of using a local sitenotice. Legoktm (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It took a bit of going in circles on #mediawiki-visualeditor, but the answer was much simpler; the intended notice had expired because of |until=2013-06-30, before deployment had occurred .  —Sladen (talk) 19:27, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologies, I can see it now, it relies on a double-negative.  Ideally it should be changed to be [x] Use Visual Editor, so that unticking disables, rather than ticking disabling.  —Sladen (talk) 16:47, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That's more of a comment for MediaWiki talk:Gadgets-definition or WP:VPT. Legoktm (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visual Editor 

message: Hi. The notice about the RFC concerning default state of the VisualEditor should be removed until there's a consensus to include it in a site-wide notice for all users. (If such a consensus exists already, please provide a link to it. I checked this talk page and saw nothing.) --MZMcBride (talk) 03:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. I've removed it. If there is a consensus to include it somewhere, though, just let me know and I will restore it. At any rate, we should have either the sitenotice or the watchlist notice; both is definitely too much. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:30, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you! And an extra thank you for remembering to clear MediaWiki:Anonnotice as well. Well done. For what it's worth, I agree with you that we should have a watchlist notice or a site-wide notice; having both is a bit much. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:38, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove [[Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Default State RFC|VisualEditor default state RFC]] notice 

message: It's "VisualEditor", not "the Visual Editor".  Could someone correct this?  Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:26, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, if you're correcting things anyway, there's a complaint about the non-anonymous nature of "anonymous" users over at the RFC's talk page.  "Unregistered editors", "logged-out editors" or simply "all editors" might be appropriate.  Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:28, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The anonymous thing can probably be changed. I simply copied the text from the watchlist notice that was put in place. However, to your first point, mw:VisualEditor has "the" and "Visual Editor" interspersed all over the page. Is the team's brand image that it be used without the definite article and as one word? Because that's not clear to readers of the original documentation page. Killiondude (talk) 23:08, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know if "brand image" is the best way of putting it, but I'm told that it's "the VisualEditor environment" (or portal/team/project/whatever)" or just "VisualEditor" (no article) when the product is itself the noun.  The mw page is therefore mostly correct:  "The VisualEditor deployment...", etc.  Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:32, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

text: I've altered the name to VisualEditor and also switched "anonymous" to "logged-out". The question of whether "users" is redundant is another kettle of fish. — foxj 08:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct name 

message: I would suggest that seven days is probably enough time for having shown a site notice about an RFC to everyone.  Perhaps it is about time to take this notice down?  Dragons flight (talk) 16:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I reckon so too.  Let's ask for some  assistance.  —Sladen (talk) 17:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done. If anyone decides to restore it, please also remember to undo my changes at MediaWiki:Anonnotice as well, otherwise the notice will be visible to anonymous readers as well as logged-in editors. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 18:01, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove VisualEditor sitenotice 

message: Should we add one, following the examples of Commons, de.wp, es.wp, fr.wn? It Is Me Here t / c 19:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heartbleed sitenotice? 

message: Where does one make a request for a notice on an RFC? Any specific procedure? There is a discussion on Wikipedia_talk:MOS#Bird_common_name_capitalisation that might need more eyes. Shyamal (talk) 02:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sitenotice 

message: Should this request for comment re the use of the "Wiki Loves X" campaign title format be advertised here? It is going nowhere at the moment and I suspect very few editors know about it. HelenOnline 08:09, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question re RFC on "Wiki Loves X" title 

message: I cannot remove this site notice. I click on the X, and it goes, but when I go to a new page, or refresh, the notice returns. I use Opera. SilkTork ✔Tea time 09:42, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 130#Banner keeps reappearing. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I'm now suppressing site notices using the CSS code mentioned above. I'm trying to recall if any site notice was so important that I would regret missing it, and I don't think so. SilkTork ✔Tea time 16:02, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki loves monuments

message: Hello, good news! Thanks to FreedomFighterSparrow and Brion, unregistered users can now hide the sitenotice again. Previously, they were forced to see it continuously.
In all cases, please use the sitenotice with care, and keep in mind that occasional visitors see sitenotices on all their visits, if they visit less than once a month or they don't click "dismiss" and save a cookie. Nemo 15:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, . Unfortunatly, the trick of replacing Mediakiwi:Anonnotice with , as explained in the top box, does not avoid the [hide] button with nothing to hide. --Vriullop (talk) 18:47, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{int:sitenotice_close}} 

message: Similar to how SOPA was voted on, I'd like to request this important discussion (Wikipedia talk:Freedom of Panorama 2015) be put on the sitenotice. This banner would only be shown in Europe. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 20:19, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought that sitenotices didn't support geolocation.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:29, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Freedom of Panorama 2015 -- A Certain White Cat chi? 22:33, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

text: I don't mind the message, but the implementation leaves something to be desired.  For whatever reason the banner appears scrunched up on my screen so that the text runs into a long vertical stripe covering an obnoxious fraction of every browser window.  I'm assuming that is not how it is intended to appear.  My laptop screen is on the small side, but not so small that it is unreasonable to expect things to be laid out in a sensible fashion.  Dragons flight (talk) 21:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have a look at re-implementing it via CentralNotice and see how that looks on narrow screen before activating it. -- KTC (talk) 21:38, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  Judging by the font size on the webpage versus the font size of the buttons in your browser, you have adjusted the zoom level of the web page. This would cause similar visual irregularities across much of the web. Try  to restore the normal zoom level — MusikAnimal talk 21:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

text: Umm, what. You have a ton of custom CSS. I'm not surprised it looks weird. Please re-test as a logged out user with normal browser settings. Legoktm (talk) 21:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: In the page preview it covers the full width of the screen, but just barely fits in a way that looks acceptable.  This doesn't change whether I am logged out or logged in.  However, when it was deployed there was extra margin to the left and right of the notice (the white space in the screenshot on either side of the banner).  Not sure what is causing the extra margin, but it was enough to take something that would just barely fit across the screen and make it untenable.  For the record, I don't believe I have any custom CSS that ought to affect this.  Dragons flight (talk) 22:06, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it's custom CSS, rather the zoom level of the browser itself (so won't matter if you're logged out or not). This is an accessibility feature that sometimes people turn on accident. On Windows it should be  to restore the normal zoom level, or go to the browser settings menu thing. — MusikAnimal talk 22:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The zoom level is not an accident.  The native 1920px width is bit much for me on the laptop screen without reading glasses so I keep Wikpedia zoomed, but the effective screen size after zooming isn't exactly crazy (compare for example the size of other Wikipedia elements on the screen).  I doubt I'm the only one in the world who zooms websites.  In addition, some computers and many tablets / mobile devices still use a smaller effective screen resolution.  As mentioned above, the extra white margin (whatever is causing it) was eating a rather large chunk of the available real estate.  If there is a consensus that it is just my problem, then I'll hide the damn thing and go away, but I don't actually think it is unreasonable to expect things to layout in a sensible way for small screens.  Dragons flight (talk) 22:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to imply it was accident! I tried zooming in Gmail and Amazon and saw that tabs and other content were cut off. The banner could probably use some tweaking, but all I'm saying is that in general the zooming is not easy to combat from a web development perspective. I don't think the banner should be showing at all on mobile devices. If we want  we can use media queries to hide it? — MusikAnimal talk 22:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

text: I think it's an excellent thing to highlight to site visitors, but agree that the briefly shown version was the wrong implementation.  I normally work with 2 portrait orientation browser windows side by side on a HD widescreen, and it was taking up going on for 50% of the vertical content space.  I strongly suggest having the pictures either above or below the text (so that the text is allowed to use the full width of the content space), or just having the text either on its own or with a single picture.  While many people have widescreen format displays these days, it's very wrong to draw the conclusion that they work with a full screen or landscape orientation window.  --Murph9000 (talk) 21:49, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

text: Also a complaint to wikitech-l that it breaks the mobile site:   Dragons flight (talk) 21:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The mobile site breaks on its own without our intervention. Also, why does the mobile version use MediaWiki:Sitenotice? When has a sitenotice ever been formatted to fit a mobile screen? Killiondude (talk) 22:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there hadn't been a Sitenotice for 2 years, so who knows. -- KTC (talk) 22:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Could we use media queries to hide it just on mobile? — MusikAnimal talk 22:43, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Desktop/mobile targetting is a native feature of CentralNotice, so I'm doing it over there and this wouldn't be an issue. -- KTC (talk) 22:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

text: I suspect we need a Geonotice then. Those can only go to logged-in users, because they sit top of watchlist. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the spirit of the discussion is for it to be displayed in Europe (EU and EEA countries). If that requires it to be shown in the US as well, I do not think many would oppose. I think Central Notice is a fine destination if Sitenotice isn't sufficient for the task. -- A Certain White Cat chi? 10:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: No, the discussion was specifically held under the pretense that it would only be displayed to European users.  You can't claim that as an authority to display it to everyone.  You have no idea what opinions might have been had it been revealed that everyone across the planet would be subjected to an irrelevant banner about somebody else's politics. --B (talk) 11:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia talk:Freedom of Panorama 2015#Proposal: Banner alert campaign|Freedom of Panorama 2015]] 

message: Hi all, we made a request for a consensus for semi-regular site notices for the Wikipedia Library at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Wikipedia_Library:_Running_a_SiteNotice_for_logged-in_users. Please comment, we would appreciate feedback/support. Cheers, Astinson (WMF) (talk) 16:44, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Library semi-regular concensus converstaion 

message: The 2016 WikiCup begins this week.  We'd like to have a site-wide notice, running for the rest of December and all of January, with this text:
The 2016 WikiCup, our yearly site-wide competition dedicated to improving Wikipedia, starts January 1.  Sign-ups remain open until February 5.
Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:59, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The sitenotice is for important messages of relevance to Wikipedia's users in general.  On what do you base the assertion that this request to display an editor-centric advertisement throughout the encyclopedia for more than a month is "either uncontroversial or supported by consensus"?  Why shouldn't the message appear above watchlists instead?  —David Levy 07:26, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: We've used sitenotice before, for announcements for past WikiCups.  The judges believe that all users should know about it because it displays an aspect of WP that encourages active editing, something we dearly need.  We also want to get the word out to as many people as possible, including editors that don't visit their watchpages often.  It's all in good fun, you know. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:45, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  When was that? Certainly it wasn't in either December 2014 or December 2013. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually it was on watchlist last year, apparently I put it there. — xaosflux Talk 01:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

text: I think that watchlist notice would suffice, would also support additional mass message to prior participants and notice baord postings. — xaosflux Talk 17:55, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess I was given faulty information, since I didn't set it up myself in previous years.  Will request a watchlist notice shortly.  Thank you for your time. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:03, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request on 28 December 2015 

message: A site notice is getting ready to go live, barring any objections.  This will be for logged in users only.  Please comment at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Why_am_I_seeing_a_.22Welcome.22_message.3F. — xaosflux Talk 23:49, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Note - discussion at VPT does not favor this at this time - on hold unless that develops. — xaosflux Talk 01:48, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  20160519 - notice notice 

message: Please post the following notice (and remember to increment the MediaWiki:Sitenotice id):
The English Wikipedia will be read-only for up to 30 minutes beginning 06:00, 18 July , because of maintenance work. Everyone will be able to read the wiki, but you won't be able to edit. --Pipetricker (talk) 02:33, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected edit request regarding imminent ''read-only'' state, 18 July 2018 

message: Would it be worth this year or subsequent years putting up a banner linking to the videos of presentations at wikimania? It might be a way of making it more broadly known the sorts of things that are going on 'behind the scenes' for readers who otherwise don't know how extensive the wikimedia community activities are. Might even inspire people to think about getting involved. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 02:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: funny we keep running in to each other. (Somehow I'm the "notice guy") This page isn't watched much - and being reader-impacting this is going to need some affirmative support (much more so than editor-facing wishlist notices). Please bring this up at WP:VPPR as a new section. I wonder if this is something the foundation would want to sponsor with a CentralNotice campaign? (see :meta:CentralNotice/Request). — xaosflux Talk 02:19, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ha! Thanks for the tip - I wasn't really certain where a sensible place to post it was, so I'll copy the post over to there. T.Shafee(Evo&Evo)talk 02:26, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikimania presentation videos? 

message: Hello
There is a read only phase that will happen for your wiki, on Thu 14th November from 05:00 to 05:30 AM UTC. Please see T234800 for details; in short, it is because of a database decommission.
I suggest you to setup a banner (so as an Anon-notice banner) 30 minutes before the read-only.
It could just say "A maintenance will be performed soon - 14th November from 05:00 to 05:30 AM UTC" and "You may not be able to save any edits during this time."
In any case, the read-only message will be displayed when the read-only will happen, but have a warning message prior the intervention is needed to warn people.
Thank you, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 15:50, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Leaving this open for further input, but I generally agree with ' response to the 2018 occurrence — unlikely to be hugely necessary. ~  Amory (u • t • c) 17:59, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  agree, I don't think this is going to be necessary here - similar to how we have recurring other outage periods. — xaosflux Talk 18:02, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

text: per the above and prior precedent.  If this was going to be an exceptionally lengthy activity I could see a need.  I suggest you include this in the meta:Tech/News prior to the event.  Will add comments at phab:T234801. — xaosflux Talk 14:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Banner for read-only -  Thu 14th November from 05:00 to 05:30 AM UTC 

message: Recently for the Main Page with the WP:ITN box we've added a banner for recent coverage and news related to the COVID-19 pandemic which many have found helpful. 
From a separate angle, a discussion was raised on Jimbo Wales' page, and he offered his comment related to site-wide messages, , which while rejected the original comment, did offer the suggestion that with the current situation around COVID-19 this may be a point to use a Sitenotice to provide helpful links to our pages on it. 
Exactly what those links are, I don't know but we could replicate something like the ITN box easily, or offer something differently. --Masem (t) 14:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: SN should have a strong consensus of support to be used, especially as this one would really need to be for all readers as well.  Once a specific proposal and mock up are ready, please widely advertise this so we can get good support.  For SN mock ups, please be sure to test on mobile web (<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page>) as well, since we have a large number of readers that use the mobile web. Thank you, — xaosflux Talk 14:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  COVID-19 information 

message: We've given everyone a week to get used to it and given that both sides are claiming silent majorities I'm planning to add the following notice:
Assuming everything still works the way I think it does the notice should only display for logged in users.©Geni (talk) 17:09, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: We're talking about something that will impact every user for the next decade. Not just those that use watchlists.©Geni (talk) 17:16, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: And registered users can just opt out of it if they want, the real impact is to readers - that you are already not going to poll. — xaosflux Talk 17:21, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: And if you want to drop it into MediaWiki:Anonnotice you are free to make the case.©Geni (talk) 17:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, I don't think either one of these is appropriate. Skin links and Central Notices were also already deployed with links on them to solicit feedback from endusers. — xaosflux Talk 17:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: And it is on cent, and it is on top of the landing page (Wikipedia:Vector 2022). — xaosflux Talk 17:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless I'm missing something nothing at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralNotice suggests there is a central notice pointing at the RFC.©Geni (talk) 17:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm saying the banner DesktopImprovements_deployment (now expired) pointed to Wikipedia:Vector 2022, which has the RFC banner on top. — xaosflux Talk 18:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: So it expired on the 20th but the RFC wasn't added to it until the 21st. So not on central notice.©Geni (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

text: thats for the WMF to make a statement on not for us to guess at.©Geni (talk) 00:04, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: RFC notice