Template talk:Compromised account

This template was considered for deletion on 2007 December 9. The result of the discussion was "keep".

TfD nomination of Template:Compromised account

Template:Compromised account has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Maser ^(Talk!) 06:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Skull & crossbones

How about using the regular Stop icon instead of the Skull and crossbones? —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-10 23:22Z

I would have to agree, skull and crossbones is a bit much, and the regular stop icon is stock iconography. --Iamunknown 00:28, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oof. We see the stop icon everywhere! How about Image:Frettchen in blanket.jpg, erm I mean, Image:Nuvola apps kgpg.png or Image:Contact-new.svg. Gracenotes^T § 00:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Frettchen in blanket would be hilarious! But, for the sake of iconography, I still support a stop sign. --Iamunknown 00:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although, {{sockpuppet}} does not use the stop icon, and nor does {{blockedsock}}. I would personally suggest Image:Nuvola apps kgpg.png. Gracenotes^T § 01:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I kinda like the skull and crossbones, but if it has to change I think Image:Nuvola apps kgpg.png makes it clear what the template's message is... WjBscribe 02:22, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I chose it because it was the icon used in {{Malware-stub}}, indicating that the computer may have been hit by malware like a keylogger when I designed the template. Jesse Viviano 02:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good point (I saw it was used in that stub as well). But compromised accounts often aren't malware-compromised; it could be other vectors of computer insecurity such as wire sniffing, or non-technical compromises such as shoulder surfing or finding a slip of paper with the password on it. Also that icon isn't universally recognized as representing malware. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-03-11 02:44Z

←deindent Quarl, you said it much better than I. We need a more recognizable image on the template and a more standard iconography. Gracenotes, I agree that Image:Stop hand.svg because annoying because it is so often used. I appreciate that you pointed out {{sockpuppet}} and {{blockedsock}}. Note that the latter redirects to {{Blockedsockpuppet}} which uses Image:Nuvola apps important.svg. Both Template:Blockedsock and this template are posted onto user pages of indefinitely blocked users. Taking that cue, I've replaced Image:Malware logo.png with Image:Nuvola apps important.svg. If anyone thinks that this change makes this template and Template:Blockedsock too alike, feel free to change it. As for myself, I feel that it should be either this image or the stop-sign image, as both are (as far as I know) the only two images used on templates indicating that a user has been either indefinitely blocked or banned. --Iamunknown 03:59, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"We need a more recognizable image on the template and a more standard iconography" ... why? It would be best to use an icon that gets the point across the quickest, wouldn't it? Gracenotes^T § 11:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would indeed be best to use an icon that gets the point across the quickest: I happen to think that the recognizable image and standard iconography convey the gravity of the situation most quickly. --Iamunknown 02:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(On the road again.... To WP:LAME...) it’s not sensible to convey the gravity of the situation in a split second, is it? I would prefer accuracy to angry mastadons. Gracenotes^T § 12:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you intend to revert me and then if I happen to revert and then we get angry and start reverting but don't know if we are reverting each other or ourselves...then yes, WP:LAME. Right now it's just much ado about nothing / I'm-not-sure-how-we-can-reach-consensus-on-what-appears-mostly-to-be-(link break) a-matter-of-opinion-on-whether-or-not-one-image-conveys-a-message-better-than-another-image. --Iamunknown 18:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know. We'll have my icon every other second, and yours for the rest :) I can do that with ParserFunctions, if you want :) Gracenotes^T § 14:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't support that, it would absolutely hilarious! :D --Iamunknown 19:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hm.... well, my image works on IE, where as yours appears funny. point++ (I doubt that we can get anything more out of this conversation...) I know! Let's start an RFC. I think that it's more important to convey the content that the significance through an image, whereas the significance can be easily extracted from the text... etc. Gracenotes^T § 20:00, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, that's a bit more serious. Two questions and an aside:

Which version of IE? I have IE7 and it appears fine in there; I know, however, that there is better support in IE7 for pngs, transparency, etc. Do other images on Wikipedia look funny in IE?
As a brief rehash of the above conversation (since it has been a long one -- I'm not entirely sure I agree or disagree with you now), what format for the template do you support?
An aside: I have thus far managed to stay out of an RFC. Hopefully that remains the status quo for a while.

--Iamunknown 20:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm joking about the RFC, believe me. IE6 is what I refer to, but that's only because it's an svg; the image I'd favor just happens to be a png. I would only suggest changing [[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|45px]] to [[Image:Nuvola apps kgpg.png|45px]]. I am very sorry if you felt threatened or anything. At this point, though, it's been a long conversation (sort of), so perhaps sinking into apathy about it and not caring about the the wrong version would be best. Gracenotes^T § 20:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At 50px

I created a derivative image that's based off Image:Nuvola apps kgpg.png & Image:Nuvola apps important.png. What do you think of it? --AAA! (AAAA) 07:28, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like that image, AAA!. I think the addition of the warning sign would be good. --Agamemnon2 08:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Neat! Gracenotes^T § 23:37, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instructions

Shouldn't we include instructions for the hapless user, something that will explain to them how to get their account back as well as other useful recommendations? Rklawton (talk) 18:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The legitimate user needs to create a new account, and then edit the template's optional parameter to link the old account to the new account. Jesse Viviano (talk) 17:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about accounts that have public/private verification? Rklawton (talk) 01:04, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If that is done, the original account can be reclaimed. I did not think about that. Jesse Viviano (talk) 03:11, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add a global locking parameter to this template

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Like the sock puppet templates, would you please add a global locking notice, so that it'll look like this?

This account has been locked across all Wikimedia projects because it has, or may have been compromised.
Please refer to contributions for evidence. If you are the legitimate owner of the account, you should contact ca

wikimedia.org for assistance.
(see: block log • contributions • page moves)

Compromised account

2607:FB90:5E83:CC74:9459:7AB9:47AE:C9C0 (talk) 05:20, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, option added. However, not the default since many editors are only blocked locally. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:11, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]