Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention

{{editprotected}} Please display the new parameter here. See Dripping Flame's edits. Thanks, :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 14:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks. Amalthea 14:18, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please add this instruction from Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over? "Note to admins: Indefinitely blocked users, names that do not appear to pose a real concern per policy, or stale concerns should be removed from Category:Wikipedian usernames editors have expressed concern over so that only active concerns are listed. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 17:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure there's a need for that. A bot will remove the cat from an indef'd account's talk page and the others aren't really a UAA/admin issue. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested edit

{{editprotected}}Per a discussion on WT:UAA, can someone add the following text to the very bottom of this notice without a bullet point; "Please note that anyone may edit under their real name; do not report these usernames here unless you have very good reason to believe that the user is an impersonator". The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ronhjones ^(Talk) 00:28, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a ton!! The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 00:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} Further to the above request by Blade, please alter the wording to match that now seen in the almost identical notice at the top of WP:UAA. Blade appears to agree with this alteration, as well. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done that one. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You also accidentally took out the "l" in "please". Cheers, :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 19:55, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that and let Mitchell know on his talk page (in a manner of speaking); it seems you spotted it before me, however. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 20:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Transclusion of the table

{{editprotected}} So that the table showing documentation for Template:UAA doesn't require constant synchronisation when the template is modified, I have moved the table from the documentation to Template:UAA/doc/table, and transcluded it into the template's documentation. Please replace the table of parameters on this edit notice with a transclusion of Template:UAA/doc/table as well. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 00:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is that wise? That would effectively allow non-admins to indirectly edit the editnotice unless it were protected, or is that the point? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:29, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe so. This would ease the process of synchronisation that Giftiger addresses above. And if protection is necessary, we can add it to the table as well. :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 19:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's fairly unlikely to cause a problem; your run-of-the-mill vandal is unlikely to actually be able to locate the transcluded subpage, and vandalising the edit notice isn't really any more disruptive than vandalising WP:UAA itself, and will likely be noticed and rolled back just as quickly. If you feel semi- or full-protection is warranted on Template:UAA/doc/table as a high-visibility target I have no objections, but it can always be applied later if it turns out the ability to indirectly edit it is too much of a temptation for vandals. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 19:55, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I note that Template:UAA itself is semi-protected as a highly visible template, perhaps semi-protection of the table will be appropriate for the same reason. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 19:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK,

Done. I've semi-protected the transcluded page, so hopefully there won't be a problem. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

{{editrequested}}

Copyedit: Please change "Do not report a username unless it is: 1. Clearly inappropriate and a blatant violation of the username policy, and 2. Has made recent edits"
to
"Do not report a username unless it:

is clearly inappropriate and a blatant violation of the username policy, and
has made recent edits (within the last 2–3 weeks at the outside). Accounts that haven't edited in 3 weeks or more should not be reported."

Thanks in advance. Hey Mid (contribs) 20:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It took me a moment to figure out what you meant to change here Heymid; in case the responding admin doesn't notice straight away, I believe the only change to make here is remove the word "is" before the colon, and insert it before "clearly" so that both points make grammatical sense when following the heading statement. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 20:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also bypassing a redirect in the wiki-link for "username policy", from WP:U to Wikipedia:Username policy. Hey Mid (contribs) 21:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done, though there's no reason to bypass the redirect so I didn't change that. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WikiProject Japan! 22:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I just copied the whole text from here into the editnotice, but it seems you beat me to it by a few seconds! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request - II

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

Would someone like to delete the extra word from "reported to the the most appropriate noticeboard"? -- John of Reading (talk) 16:22, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've have removed the {{editprotected}} template as this page is not protected. Avenue X at Cicero (talk) 04:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is - see the first sentence at Wikipedia:Editnotice. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:05, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

..at the outside?...

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

Please edit "at the outside" to read "at the latest". Osarius Talk 19:32, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. I don't see why that would be any clearer (one might also plausibly want "at least" or something) – please establish consensus before we change anything. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 12:18, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Summarily

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

The correct spelling of the word 'sumarrily' is 'summarily'.--Laun chba ller 14:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes,

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 16:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 12 May 2016

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

Include that naming yourself after entirely fictional persons is OK, since some people got this wrong. Laber□^T 06:23, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Done But comment: Many folks report to UAA via Twinkle, so they never actually see this editnotice. I'll come clean and say that I never really knew about this editnotice. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 06:38, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I think semi-protection would also suffice. --Laber□^T 07:11, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]