Template talk:Advert

message: Can all three of the "Page Issue" templates be removed from this page? I worked to simplify, to make it no longer read like a resume and not sound like an advertisement. The man is super accomplished, but there aren't any mentions of "outstanding, remarkable etc." Thank you! Applepie65 (talk) 19:21, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template . Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'r there 19:58, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template-protected edit request on 18 October 2022 

message: From the sandbox, remove the second sentence "Please help improve it by removing promotional content and inappropriate external links, and by adding encyclopedic content written from a neutral point of view." because it is self-evident. Replace that sentence with "You can help improve this article". Relevant discussion can be found here: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Shorten_most_clean_up_messages_to_two_sentences. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see a consensus at that discussion, and this template's content is already two sentences. The sandbox version would remove three "link(s) to other policy/guideline/how-to pages/resources", contrary to the VPP proposal. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:39, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request 9 November 2023 

message: The documentation of this template says:
The documentation of  goes further (highlighting in original):
I propose to change the former to the latter. 
My rationale is that it is often impossible to determine what issues the tagger thinks are present, nor how to resolve them. Or even that they have already been resolved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Support. I might soften the last few words to "justified in removing the tag if they judge that there are no promotional concerns in the article." – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: My thought was to keep the wording consistent between templates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to make this task bigger, but I would change the wording on the COI template in a similar manner. I would write "justified in removing the tag if they judge that there are no conflict-of-interest concerns in the article." The phrase "without warning" seems out of place to me; who would be warned, exactly? – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

text: I support this addition.  I have seen this tag on articles when it's obvious (to me) what the problems are, but I've also seen it when I have no idea what the alleged problem is, and no way of figuring out whether it's been addressed.  For example, this tag has been on Medical simulation for five years.  I see no advertising at a glance, and I see that two edits later, someone blanked a lot of content, but did that fix everything? WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Alpha Omega Alpha seems to be a good illustration of the problem that needs to be solved.  It's obviously not a case of Wikipedia:Identifying blatant advertising (nor is it alleged to be), but that means that it's harder to tell if there's still a significant problem.  @Folly Mox cleaned up the article (thank you!) and removed the advert template.  @Pppery re-added the template with no explanation.  I glance through the article and have no idea what Pppery wants to have changed.  Did he just not notice the clean-up work, so it was a mistaken tagging?  Is there something wrong that I missed?  A note on the talk page like "Sentences such as <quote> and <quote> don't have an appropriate encyclopedic tone" would be really helpful at this point. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not my responsibility - I readded the tag as a procedural action since my understanding was that Folly Mox only removed it as a hack to stop bad newcomer task edits, not becasue they thought the advert issue was resolved. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposal: Make identification of issues mandatory