m Signing comment by Skyprincentsofficial - "→music: new section" |
David Biddulph (talk | contribs) m Rollback edit(s) by SineBot (talk): rv - irrelevant (RedWarn 15) Tag: Rollback |
||
Line 127: | Line 127: | ||
== music == |
== music == |
||
I'm Sky prince nts from Delta State am happy to be here |
|||
I'm Sky prince nts from Delta State am happy to be here <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Skyprincentsofficial|Skyprincentsofficial]] ([[User talk:Skyprincentsofficial#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Skyprincentsofficial|contribs]]) 10:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Revision as of 11:49, 8 August 2020
Wikipedia Help NA‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Putting parts of this guideline in the software
Please see mw:New requirements for user signatures. This is a proposed change to MediaWiki software that would prevent editors from accidentally setting certain types of WP:CUSTOMSIGs (such as a custom signature with no links, or certain types of WP:SIGFORGEs). This would, hopefully, reduce the amount of effort volunteers expend in explaining what's okay and what's not, by producing an error message whenever someone tries to add an invalid signature to their prefs. It's basically a way of putting some of this guideline into the software.
Please share information or examples of (wanted or unwanted) signatures over there. Also, they're not planning to invalidate any existing signatures (this software change would only take effect if you actively tried to change your sig). If you have an opinion on whether they should or shouldn't invalidate old, non-compliant signatures (either now or later), then please tell them that, too. Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
- If you want to know whether your signature (or any individual user) is okay, please try out User:AntiCompositeNumber's tool at https://tools.wmflabs.org/signatures/ There's also a link to some stats and invalid signatures. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Update
The mw:New requirements for user signatures process starts this Monday, 6 July 2020. At this stage, the only change is: You won't be able to change your sig to an invalid one.
- Wikipedia:Signatures#Treat as wiki markup might need to be updated to say that the software won't let you save the page if you tick this box when you shouldn't be. The most common error is someone putting no wikitext into Special:Preferences, and then ticking the box to say that the non-wikitext should be treated as wikitext.
- Solution #1: Just untick the box that says "Treat the above as wiki markup".
- Solution #2: Leave it ticked, and put some wikitext in the custom sig box, so that it has some wikitext to interpret.
- In Wikipedia:Signatures#Guidelines and policies, the software change will take a step towards enforcing the rule that "A customised signature should provide an easily-identified link to your talk page." In practice, will accept a link to your user page, your user talk page, and/or your contributions, but a minimum of one link to your page/talk/contribs at this wiki will be required. (You can have links to other wikis, but there must be one link to your account that points to this wiki.) This will affect maybe 75 accounts (about one in 2,000 active editors).
- In the category of "distracting, confusing, or otherwise unsuitable" signatures, most sigs that cause Special:LintErrors will be invalid. There aren't very many of these – about 150 accounts or one in 1,000 active editors.
- Some things banned by WP:SIGFORGE will be impossible to save in prefs now.
If you want to know whether your own custom sig is okay, then you can check https://signatures.toolforge.org/check To be clear, these rules will come into force if you try to change your sig. If your sig isn't compliant now, then of course you should correct it, but it will keep working for the next few months. Overall, about 99% of active editors will be unaffected.
If you have questions, or if you need help figuring out why the sig you want doesn't work, then please ping me. Thanks, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 00:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
Signature advocating a political cause
I think including a political cause in a signature is breaking WP:SOAPBOX part of the Wikipedia guidelines. Therefore, I think we should include a provision to not make signature political and extend WP:SOAPBOX to signatures too or broaden the definition to not include political soapboxing on any part of Wikipedia. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:05, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Template:~~~~
@Redrose64: Concerning this edit, when I save {{subst:~~~~}}
in my sandbox, it works as documented. Did you encounter something different? --Bsherr (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- But subst: wasn't mentioned. When I use the template as it was directed, this is what happens: Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
which is a violation of WP:SIG#NT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:15, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- I created this template after testing in my sandbox, and everything works correctly when it is substituted. CrazyBoy826 18:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Also, I created the documentation around 5 mins after the template, so you might have visited the page within that time. I changed the page to show the subst. CrazyBoy826 18:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Concerning WP:SIG#NT, this is substituted, so after you save your edit it's exactly the same as using regular four tildes. CrazyBoy826 18:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: ping CrazyBoy826 18:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Your edit says nothing about subst: and the template, when used as directed in that edit, produces the effect that I demonstrated above. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:24, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- I shall now subst it, to demonstrate another problem. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Also, I created the documentation around 5 mins after the template, so you might have visited the page within that time. I changed the page to show the subst. CrazyBoy826 18:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: To me,
or use {{~~~~}}
didn't mean literally code it that way, but use it consistent with its documentation, which prescribes substitution (for example, at Wikipedia:Vandalism#Blanking, illegitimate, which uses {{uw-test1}} or {{uw-delete1}} even though they require substitution). But using Template:Tlxs might be an improvement, to the extent that it doesn't require the user to take the extra step of looking at the template. Are you still seeing issues from the template when substituted? I've looked just now but it seems to be working correctly. --Bsherr (talk) 20:14, 16 May 2020 (UTC)- Not when substd, the extra newline has now gone. But can we be certain that users will always subst? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: How are we certain that users will always subst the user warnings? Is there a way to add it to the bot substitution list? CrazyBoy826 21:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- There are two approaches. The first is to use Template:Require subst, which generates a warning message if the template is not substituted. The second is to identify the template for automatic substitution by bots, by following the instructions at Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted (it involves adding a template to the template documentation page). --Bsherr (talk) 01:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: How are we certain that users will always subst the user warnings? Is there a way to add it to the bot substitution list? CrazyBoy826 21:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- Not when substd, the extra newline has now gone. But can we be certain that users will always subst? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 21:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
- I created this template after testing in my sandbox, and everything works correctly when it is substituted. CrazyBoy826 18:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
... Pls Read.
So.. If I do, four tidels it sould "sign"? What should It sign and where will it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hamuyi (talk • contribs) 18:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hamuyi, it will sign your signature. Use ~~~~ which will produce Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC), which I had customized.
No headline
Hamuyi (talk) 18:24, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hamuyi, there you go. But please use WP:SANDBOX next time. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Hello!
But if I do my signature it'll say "(talk) at the end so i copied this """"Hamuyi (Aye)""" and left that as my signature —Preceding undated comment added 18:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Unclosed tag danger
Warn that unclosed tags can ruin all text beyond your signature. Even that written by other people. For the rest of the page. T255232. Jidanni (talk) 17:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- Why? Badly-formed HTML is not a problem that is confined to signatures. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:32, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Saving a new signature with an unclosed tag will not be allowed (by the Wikimedia software) starting in a few weeks, according to WMF developers. See this VPT discussion for information and links. – Jonesey95 (talk) 20:55, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Newly discovered signature bug!!
I have discovered a new signature bug. The Rambling Man's signature had four exclamation points in a row, which worked fine except in certain templates. See the The Rambling Man's Resolved comments line in
- Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Old Wykehamists/archive1 before I fixed it
- Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Old Wykehamists/archive1 after I fixed it
My fix was to change two non-consecutive exclamation points (!) to !. The Rambling Man has updated his signature, but I wonder if there are any other signatures out there that have consecutive exclamation points that should be changed, and I wonder if the project page should say something about this odd problem. —Anomalocaris (talk) 10:33, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Anomalocaris: It would fit in section 4.2.1. because it's the same issue. Having said that, how frequent is the problem? (I couldn't find any examples in a search, but that was probably me). ——Serial # 10:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- It's not a signature bug, and it's not really surprising when you consider that
{{collapse top}}
makes a table. In a table row, you may put more than one cell on each line; and the second and subsequent cells are each introduced by means of a double pipe (for a normal data cell) or a double exclamation mark (for a header cell). So the markup in question, being placed within a table cell, is merely instructing the parser to terminate that cell and start another. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 16:53, 19 June 2020 (UTC)- Redrose64: When I said "signature bug", I didn't mean that the signature-processing software had a bug, I meant I found another example of problematic signature markup, just like unescaped equals or pipes. —Anomalocaris (talk) 17:50, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
- It's not a signature bug, and it's not really surprising when you consider that
Inconsistent link guidelines
In WP:Signatures#Guidelines_and_policies it says "A customised signature should provide an easily-identified link to your talk page. You are encouraged to also provide a link to your user page." In WP:Signatures#Links it says "Signatures must include at least one direct internal link to your user page, user talk page, or contributions page." Which of these is right? Dan Bloch (talk) 06:27, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- I assume the "must" supersedes the "should". That is, I interpret the combination as "your signature must link to at least one of your user page/user talk/contribs; if you're going to choose precisely one, it should be your talk page; if two, your user page and user talk page." I feel like the two quotes can be used together without contradictions. Enterprisey (talk!) 08:06, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Danbloch and @Enterprisey: Starting some time on Monday, the requirement for at least one local link is going to be a "must" that's enforced by MediaWiki software for custom sigs, so I'd recommend looking at the #Links language.
- By "direct", MediaWiki will be requiring a link to a local user page/talk page/contribs page. A link to your user page at a different Wikipedia won't work. A link from a prior username that redirects to your current username will also not work. (I'm not sure whether a link to w:en:User:Whatamidoing (WMF) [which is a link to my local user page, but via an interwiki/interlanguage link] would be accepted as a "local" link.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 01:38, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
"[P]opular browsers may drop support for [<font> tags] at some point."
I {{cn}} tagged this statement, found in Wikipedia:Signatures § Font tags, seemingly written when HTML5 was still something new to get excited about and not old hat. Well, now that it's normal, HTML4 is still here, with no plans to ever be dropped.
So, it looked like:
<font>...</font>
tags were deprecated in HTML4 and are entirely obsolete in HTML5. This means that the popular browsers may drop support for them at some point.[citation needed]
— revision 968417825
In my WP:ES I wrote:
(→Font tags: support will never be dropped as people will always want to read web pages from 90's on wayback machine, and many other old pages. such desire will only grow as more 90's - 00's kids mature and get their required rose tinted glasses prescriptions.)
— revision 968417825
Jonesey95 reverted me, writing:
This is what deprecation literally means. Discuss on talk page.
— revision 968455606
So here I am. @Jonesey95: I did not dispute that <font>...</font>
is deprecated, I dispute that any popular browser is ever going to break it. Drop vs deprecate. There's really no policy implication to the line. I'm not saying we ought to start using <font>...</font>
everywhere (again), but I think we're spreading false information about the web platform. <font>...</font>
is guaranteed to outlive me, and I'd say very likely to still be working in Google Chrome 9000 when Barron Trump is running what remains of the United States. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 14:50, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- Wikipedia serves HTML 5, the spec of which lists
font
among the non-conforming features, of which it sayselements in the following list are entirely obsolete, and must not be used by authors
. Whilst browsers may indeed to continue to support HTML 4.01 (or indeed HTML 3.2) for a good while yet, if the browser is served a webpage that is stated to be HTML5 (by using the<!DOCTYPE html>
declaration, and not another), it can apply strict HTML5 processing to that webpage, which may mean that the browser ignores the<font>...</font>
tags and outputs the enclosed text without any difference from the surrounding content. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:51, 19 July 2020 (UTC)- @Redrose64: In that case, I think that the sentence should be edited to
This means that the popular browsers may drop support for them when used in HTML5 documents at some point.
(new words in bold) for accuracy. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 16:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC)- Psiĥedelisto, you tell an enchanting story, but the HTML5 documentation is clear. Opinions about politics, browser support, and life expectancies are delightful, but a talk page or essay is a more appropriate venue for them than this project page. Thank you for bringing the discussion to this talk page instead of edit-warring; your civility in this matter is like a cool breeze on a hot summer day. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:32, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Jonesey95: Right...the HTML5 documentation is clear...so it's not a problem to make clear that when we say
drop support
, we mean, in HTML5 documents and not HTML4 documents or all HTML documents, right? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 18:36, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Jonesey95: Right...the HTML5 documentation is clear...so it's not a problem to make clear that when we say
- Psiĥedelisto, you tell an enchanting story, but the HTML5 documentation is clear. Opinions about politics, browser support, and life expectancies are delightful, but a talk page or essay is a more appropriate venue for them than this project page. Thank you for bringing the discussion to this talk page instead of edit-warring; your civility in this matter is like a cool breeze on a hot summer day. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:32, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Redrose64: In that case, I think that the sentence should be edited to
music
I'm Sky prince nts from Delta State am happy to be here