Template talk:Undisclosed paid

This template was considered for deletion on 19 March 2021. The result of the discussion was "keep".

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 18 February 2022

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

Change the "terms of use" link to wmf:Terms of Use#paid-contrib-disclosure, which goes directly to relevant section about paid editing. Currently one needs to go through the entire ToS to find the relevant section. SixTwoEight (talk) 14:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change icon proposal

Behold the coins:

•

• Simple yet stylized (not overly minimalist and plain), fits long-standing Wikipedia aesthetic

• Evokes money symbolism (especially "short-changing" like reference to fraud) to everyone even outside countries that use $

• Actually visible in WP:DARK.

I think this is superior, and kept procrastinating this proposal but it's bugged me enough. I hope this replaces the black dollar sign! ~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 23:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this icon would be better than the US-centric dollar sign. Schazjmd (talk) 22:20, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No opposition in (almost) a week, with the above support I've implemented the proposed change. Primefac (talk) 07:19, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I kinda prefer the old dollar sign symbol. SWinxy (talk) 22:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's literally invisible in dark mode and also assumes Everyone on Earth knows what the USD symbol means. ~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 22:50, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The dollar sign is widely-known, and it's a symbol for money, not of the US dollar. SWinxy (talk) 23:21, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's untrue, un-inclusive (in both senses of social and disability), and even arguably treads upon violating NPOV. You didn't even mention the dark mode point... It is bothersome to not just visually impaired people but everyone.

The last clause doesn't make sense. There is no international symbol for money that is neutral, because there is no international currency (besides maybe precious metals, which coins as now replace the dollar symbol in the template are often made with).

Please read WP:BIAS. ~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 00:28, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't the same be said for the pound sign though we don't need to use and country's money, the generic coin we now have seems better. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The coins are interesting, but they seem to be aesthetically off when viewed in that sort of box. I do feel like an abstract icon representing a coin with a currency sign in it (such as the old one) is better here, and the dollar is geniunely different from other currencies due to its role in international trade and its status as the global reserve currency. I don't see that sort of thing as plausibly violating WP:NPOV, which is... specifically about how we write encyclopedia content. I don't think maintenance tags fall in that scope. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 13:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

>they seem to be aesthetically off when viewed in that sort of box

It's consistent with the classic Wiki style and many other symbols... I'm sorry but I don't understand what's missing here.

>I do feel like an abstract icon representing a coin with a currency sign in it (such as the old one) is better here

The "currency sign" is the silhouettes on the obverse, which has always been a part of coinage even to Biblical times. Not that I think that's perfect, but they're still instantly recognizable as coins.

> and the dollar is geniunely different from other currencies due to its role in international trade and its status as the global reserve currency

That last part though does leak into WP:NPOV, because in news over the past year or so, that status may be changing and contested by various countries. And the bias of Wikipedia is not just Western-centric in general but Anglosphere-centric in particular (even seen in the humor of its behind-the-scenes pages), which is quintessentially $USD. The old symbol was mind-numbing, overly simplistic, biased, just....not good.

And again, nobody has said a peep about it being invisible in WP:DARK; that's an accessibility issue. Any counterproposal should be both, I believe, neutral and evocative of Wiki artstyle and spirit. --~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 01:06, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sigehelmus, WP:NPOV has nothing to do with a discussion on a icon used in a maintenance banner. $$$ ain't used just for the US dollar. Besides, people have long since moved away from coins, if you want to argue about universality. Accessibility is an issue, yes, but not remotely a challenging one to solve. SWinxy (talk) 03:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more than open to counterproposals, and this is splitting hairs a bit I'm self-aware... but to be blunt the less Wikipedia is like Corporate Memphis style in general (which most common people find dull or even distasteful, and super-minimalism in the wider scale), the better. Some ornamentation and detail actually adds to the tone of Wiki being grounded in authority and a timeless sense that makes it feel more reliable than the average site these days bending to social media format and its consequences, which the consensus of people across aisles find to be a concerning issue. Wiki should not feel even aesthetically like you're browsing Reddit, Pinterest, or some AI-generated site. And this applies even to a template symbol.

Again, this is just context and my aforementioned reasons still stand. If you want to replace the coins, let it be sleek with some depth like many classic Wiki symbols have. See e.g. SVG icon categories I forget the particular glossy artstyle atm but you know it when you see it. ~Sıgehelmus♗_(Tøk) 04:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With respect to WP:DARK, we need not make design decisions of this sort around unsupported skin types and gadgets. That we do not support unsupported gadgets/skins is not an accessibility issue. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 16:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Use in draft space

An instance of the template at Draft:TACRON-12 caused the draft to be added to Category:Paid disclosures in the wrong location. What template should be used instead for undisclosed paid drafts? –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 06:09, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was the use of {{paid}}, which belongs on user pages, that put it in that category. {{Undisclosed paid}} is fine to use in draftspace. – Joe (talk) 06:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've swapped them over. As the problem was that the user disclosed in the wrong location and with the wrong template, I also changed it from UPE to paid contrbutions. - Bilby (talk) 06:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When to remove?

Hello! MeliBio was tagged with this in 2022 after one user, not the creator, made a few edits. Said user was later banned under accusation of UPE/COI. In 2023, an experienced-seeming IP account scrubbed the article to "satisf[y] neutral point of view", and I believe they've succeeded in that completely. Can I remove the tag from the page now? Thank you in advance. Kaasterly (talk) 12:10, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A month later, I did find out from here that "maintenance templates are added and removed by volunteers". I've elected to now go remove this template on MeliBio myself. Kaasterly (talk) 23:10, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]