Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User warnings/Archives/2005/01

message: This is a list of subpages used for this project. Note that all discussion pages should redirect to this talk page.
*warnings -- the main page, with an explanation and examples of the latest revision.
**warnings2.0 -- the proposal under development for a parallel warning system, intended to create a full suite of guide-adapted warning templates.
***warnings/warnings -- An exhaustive list of the current guide template suite. This page is highly experimental.
:The quoted text above was moved from User_talk:Pathoschild/templates/warnings. Note that the subpage links are no longer correct; please see the WikiProject main page for the list of subpages and templates. // Pathoschild 14:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Subpages

message: One of the problems I see with the current templates is that some have both named and unnamed warnings, but others don't; those that do accomplish this with two versions of each warning. I'm using  in the guide templates to make them all optionally named or unnamed, but I run into a problem in doing so.
If we aren't concerned with server load, I can simply use  as-is without problem. However, templates on talk pages should ideally be entirely subst'd to reduce server load. Unfortunately, there is no auto-subst that I'm aware of and, in fact,  cannot be subst'd without adding the page to the template's category. One possible solution is to convert  into the programming code it refers to in each template. I'm going to be experimenting a bit, but I probably lack the technical knowledge to do so. More contributors would be helpful indeed. // Pathoschild 23:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The quoted text above was moved from User_talk:Pathoschild/templates/warnings. // Pathoschild 14:29, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem with {{if}&#125; in templates

message: ===Good job===
It's looking great.  Wikibofh 20:38, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. // Pathoschild 13:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Praise

message: It's looking great.  Wikibofh 20:38, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. // Pathoschild 13:32, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Good job

message: Its always great to have boilerplates when dealing with sticky situations -- promotes equalness of response and easier tracking later should the issue by disputed. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 14:49, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very nice idea 

message: This looks very interesting. I wish I could contribute, but in the near future I can't. Still, one oddity caught my eye: Intent: warns against adding information about subjects judged insufficiently notorious to merit an encyclopedic entry. Er, come again? I understand that Adolf Hitler (most extreme) to Mariah Carey's worst ever album (far from the most extreme) are notorious enough to deserve articles, but when I look at what happens to be on the main page right now I see Felice Beato, [Black Tree Fern]], etc.: where's the notoriety? (Do you mean renown, perhaps?) -- Hoary 14:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A more accurate term would be 'notable' (see: Wikipedia:Notability); thanks for contributing. ;) // Pathoschild 15:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Notoriety

message: How can I help? --FireFox ™ 17:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to take initiative. I've updated the Tasks list and added a Misc. Help section; those may give you some ideas for contributing. // Pathoschild 20:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Should I add myself to the particpants list? --FireFox ™ 18:18, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free. ;) // Pathoschild 22:42, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I may not be too active on this project, but it you ever need any specific help or anything, leave me a message. --FireFox ™ 18:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looks interesting... 

message: Howdy!  I'd like to suggest that since the vast majority of warning templates are used on ip addresses, the majority of which are dynamic, that organizing them by by month/year is unnecessary.  In some cases, where the last warning on an IP talk page is more than a month old, I'll just clear the other warnings because there's no reason to believe they apply to the same person now as they did before.  That brings up another subject regarding user warning procedures I'd like to suggest, basically that, in the interests of clarity, a common agreement be reached for when it's appropriate to clear old warnings from an IP talk page.  Regards, - CHAIRBOY (☎) 02:57, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I prefer to archive older warnings, though I can see how clearing can be justified. We should seek more voices before making any such guideline. Chronological ordering is intended to organise warnings over a somewhat short period of time, perhaps 3 months or less. Since some IPs are more vandal-prone than others, a month or two of warning history is useful for admins. For example, User_talk:169.244.143.115 has borne many vandals and is rapidly blocked because of its history. // Pathoschild 03:11, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've come to partially agree with one of Chairboy's comments above, although I think a good age before clearing (without archival) is two or three months. This period of time provides a good view of recent negative contributions, and helps administrators decide if the vandalism is the result of many new users' test or the dedicated work of a single vandal. // Pathoschild 18:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Chronological organisation

message: Often on my patrol, I find that some of the anon IPs add some nonsense and immediately remove it - just as a test to see if they can really edit. Most of the patrollers (incl. me) do not warn them either because they have reverted their mistake or because we believe in atching hold of & warning more serious vandals or more importantly, because none of the warning messages are suitable. It would be great if a friendly warning template is created to let them know that they can test in the sandbox. --Gurubrahma 07:16, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the suggestion, though that idea is already proposed in the section just above. ;) All templates are proposed to have a level 0 severity (test0, blanking0, etc) that "Assumes good faith; very polite pointer to sandbox or relevant page." If you're interested, you're welcome to stay and help craft these level 0 templates (or any other part of the WikiProject). // Pathoschild 07:20, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Testers 

message: This may be of some interest - Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Behave. --Gurubrahma 07:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  tfd 

message: I've only been vandal fighting for about a month, but I definitely see the value in this. Are we trying out templates on here and then moving them to the project page? How is this working? Asking because each Wikiproject is a bit different. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 15:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's pretty much it. Following the template creation guidelines (see /Documentation), we create and discuss templates here and move it to the Project page when we get consensus. Welcome to the WikiProject. :) // Pathoschild 09:25, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. This is my 328th WikiProject. Not really. :) But close! :) --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 09:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Joining the group 

message: === series===
I've created preliminary versions of the  series, aimed at general or unspecified vandalism. They're in much need of improvement, though. Further, I don't know if "test" is a very good name for them (since they stopping assuming it was a test after test0). Any thoughts? // Pathoschild 11:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't 'nonsense' overly strong?  I'm guessing that this warning might be sent to someone who is having genuine repeated difficulties getting a grip with Wikipedia.  Even if not, 'nonsense' might come across as provocative. Crosbie 12:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Above comment moved from Wikipedia talk:Wikiproject user warnings/test2. Yep, it is. If you look at the new proposals in the sandbox, you'll see they're very differently worded, such that users can choose between tones for each individual case. // Pathoschild 13:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Template creation

message: I've created preliminary versions of the  series, aimed at general or unspecified vandalism. They're in much need of improvement, though. Further, I don't know if "test" is a very good name for them (since they stopping assuming it was a test after test0). Any thoughts? // Pathoschild 11:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't 'nonsense' overly strong?  I'm guessing that this warning might be sent to someone who is having genuine repeated difficulties getting a grip with Wikipedia.  Even if not, 'nonsense' might come across as provocative. Crosbie 12:39, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Above comment moved from Wikipedia talk:Wikiproject user warnings/test2. Yep, it is. If you look at the new proposals in the sandbox, you'll see they're very differently worded, such that users can choose between tones for each individual case. // Pathoschild 13:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: {{s/test&#125;} series

message: This probably should be moved to the above page, as the de facto standard form has a capital "P" in "project" and the first word after the word "WikiProject" capitalized. Not that it's paticularly important, but I figured I'd mention it. Blackcap (talk) 07:41, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've made that a redirect to the WikiProject. Moving would involve moving all the subpages, so it's not really worth the trouble. Thanks for pointing that out. // Pathoschild 13:55, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings]] 

message: IMO, this icon () is associated with an action the user takes, and should only be used in warnings, while this icon () denotes an action taken against the user, and should be used in block messages.  This is what I have been advocating with the legacy templates recently.  FWIW, I created the second icon. --  Denelson83  09:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw you changing that in the legacy templates, but I don't think the same reasons apply to changing the symbol in the standardised templates. For one, blocks are almost always temporary; the stop hand applies just as well in this context as it does as a road sign. The symbol succintly summmarises the point of the block, which is to stop vandalism; the octagon warning symbol instead focuses on the fact of the block itself. For another, the standardised messages may not use the stop hand symbol on warnings (such as  does), since repeated stop hands across a talk page without a block erodes trust in the administrator intervention process. I can see the need to distinguish standardised block messages from legacy templates filled with stop hand symbols; however, I think the colourful box surrounding the block notices does that quite well. // Pathoschild 15:50, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Icon to use for block messages