Template talk:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19 pandemic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
<
Template talk:Editnotices
WikiProject iconCOVID-19 Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19 articles
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please rename this template because rename the article

Please rename this template from Template:Editnotices/Page/2019–20 Wuhan coronavirus outbreak to Template:Editnotices/Page/2019–20 coronavirus outbreak because there was a consensus to move the main article yesterday. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.69.53.66 (talk) 12:45, 19 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 25 January 2020

Add 

{{British English editnotice|form=editnotice}}

Artoria2e5 🌉 06:51, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done S.A. Julio (talk) 10:10, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on

Talk:2019–20 coronavirus pandemic which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:36, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Template-protected edit request on 13 March 2020

Fix grammar: change "back up" to "supported". —Kenyon (t·c) 19:26, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Cabayi (talk) 07:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 14 March 2020

"All information added to this article must be back up by a reliable source" should be "All information added to this article must be backed up by a reliable source". brad. (talk) 04:35, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: I went with "supported" from the previous request, which cleans up the problem you spotted. Cabayi (talk) 07:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 17 March 2020

Please update the edit notice to the following. This includes three changes: using bolding more judiciously to provide better emphasis, adding a plea to use edit summaries, and a minor formatting tweak to make the header bigger.

The new version


Sdkb (talk) 04:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 18 March 2020

Please change the image to File:Ambox warning yellow.svg to encourage more editors to read the notice. Many things it advises are not being followed. Sdkb (talk) 19:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To editor
ed. put'r there 03:44, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Template-protected edit request on 21 March 2020

It's clear that many editors are still not reading the edit notice. To help encourage them to do so, I've streamlined it to make it quicker to read while keeping the most important points. I removed the line on media copyright (the article isn't getting flooded with unlicensed images; we can handle that ad-hoc if it happens) and added a line asking to check the talk page for prior consensuses (lots of changes are being made disregarding ongoing/settled talk page discussions). Please implement the new version below:

The new version

Sdkb (talk) 06:31, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To editor
ed. put'r there 11:01, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
@Paine Ellsworth: I intentionally removed the full British English edit notice and wrapped it into the main edit notice. I think editors are more likely to read the main edit notice anyways (since it's the one with the caution triangle), and I don't want anything separating that notice from the editing environment. Normally I'd be fine with using the full {{British English editnotice}}, but since there are so many notices for this page, many of which are more important, I think only a concise mention is warranted. That said, if you disagree, feel free to only implement the portion you find uncontroversial and we can discuss the remainder. Sdkb (talk) 16:37, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To editor
ed. put'r there 18:18, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
@Moxy: I see you just removed the notice about current consensus. If that sticks, I'd at least like to see the first bullet point here (the predecessor to that notice) restored. Sdkb (talk) 03:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Nor sure what your saying....un clear as was the notice. What consensus is it referring to? and what part are you referring to?.--Moxy 🍁 04:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@
this list of current consensuses. It's smaller than I'd like it to be right now but will grow over time—please be cautious about jumping in here, as there's some history. I was referring to the first bullet point in the version you'll see just above if you expand the collapsed "new version" content. Sdkb (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
Restoring of version above can be done. Having an overload of info that most wont read or click is not good and will deters even more from reading and editing. We have no need to repeat info like "repeat offenses will result in administrative action" with its own box. When we say with Arbitration Committee attribution " allows administrators to impose sanctions, such as topic bans and blocks, against individual editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour".. especially when the info has inks that go to nowhere....or are to normal talks about article progress in a fast moving article. Thees are normally for wide community outcomes (usually involving many talks before a resolution is found) or to inform on general protocols and sanctions. They generally dont serve the same function as a talk page banners/notices or talk archive consensus boxes. Friendly policy link and back link to talk like above is fine "Many elements of this article reflect prior consensus. Please check the talk page before". We want to encourage participation not build virtual walls.--Moxy 🍁 06:15, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mobile-friendliness

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T201595

Template-protected edit request on 25 March 2020

Please add and change more detail information in bullet 3 in order to make spelling more consistent from:

To

  • Please use past tense and British English in this article. In other words, spellings such as colour should not be changed to American English spellings such as color, with the exception of proper names. 36.77.93.25 (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done.
ed. put'r there 20:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply
]
ed. put'r there 07:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Template-protected edit request on 9 April 2020

It's weird, even though most of the article is mainly written in British English, it actually uses -ize instead of -ise. That means that it's written in British English with Oxford spelling. 172.58.99.194 (talk) 03:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 12 April 2020

Hey, would you please change from "British English" to "British English Oxford Spelling"?? 2601:2C6:4B80:4E70:6D65:BC96:D921:EE92 (talk) 04:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: "
ed. put'r there 07:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19#General edit notice proposal

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject COVID-19#General edit notice proposal. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There's also a relevant pump discussion that should've been shared here that was recently archived at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)/Archive 167#Proposal to improve the COVID19 GS editnotice. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:26, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bolding

@Fences and windows: This edit made everything bold rather than just the parts we want to highlight, which makes the notice much less readable. Could we please fix that? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was fixing an error message. User:RexxS may know how to fix the bolding. Fences&Windows 22:33, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, nobody has imposed any page-specific sanctions on this article. So we don't actually need the {{gs/editnotice}} template. I've therefore removed it as unnecessary, and restored the normal {{editnotice}} template. It means an admin can't apply discretionary sanctions for breaches of the four issues mentioned, but I doubt that it's necessary here (and of course any admin can always take the usual admin actions without reference to discretionary sanctions). If you do need a page-specific sanction, please let me know and I'll try to craft something acceptable (but it will show up all in bold in the editnotice then). Probably best discussed at Talk:COVID-19 pandemic as a first port of call. HTH --RexxS (talk) 23:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. We don't have anyone e.g. obsessively trying to move the page away from British English, so I don't think we need to hang a particularly threatening
sword over editors for that. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply
]

Trimmed

Per phab:T201595 I've streamlined the wording some more. Enterprisey (talk!) 05:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Editnotices/Page/COVID-19_pandemic&oldid=1062390495"