MediaWiki talk:Revision-info-current

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Create page[edit]

{{editprotected}}

This is current revision of this page, as edited by $2 at $1.

This MediaWiki page is the "current" version of MediaWiki:Revision-info, so I propose that the above is placed here. Something could be added pointing to the unarchived (but still current) revision of a page on which this system message appears, so long as it is not too verbose. It would also be useful if, in MediaWiki:Revision-info, "an/archived" were replaced with "a/previous"; this limitation was caused by the absence of a message like this. GracenotesT § 16:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

There's a grammar mistake in that (it's missing a "the"), but I'm not too keen on a warning box that appears for something that won't be a problem without being very explanatory (the warning box for the previous revisions was added due to people linking to them and saying 'Look, Wikipedia says (some false statement present in the vandalised version)!'. What about "This is a permanent URL for the current revision of this page, as edited by $2 at $1"? (I've looked through URL and URI to be clear on that minor distinction, and URL seems to fit better). Clicking on the top entry in the history, or on "Permanent link", are the major ways a new user is going to see this, and the message may as well be informative as to what's going on. (I've known a new user to confuse "permanent link" and "watchlist" before, so the message should help sort out that particular confusion.) --ais523 16:49, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Yep, I missed the "the", which is odd, because I recall including it the first time. I had wrote this system message strictly based on the regular revision-info message, but I like your idea. (To be frank, I'm not sure that most denizens of the internet have even heard of a URI, so it is good that URL fits here anyway.) The only problem with the use of "current" in "This is a permanent URL for the current revision of this page, as edited by $2 at $1" is that "current" will change. To get around this, a more awkward (but accurate) wording might be needed. For example:
This is a permanent <a href="/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Locator" title="Uniform Resource Locator">URL</a> for what is currently the most recent revision of <a href="/wiki/MediaWiki talk:Revision-info-current" title="MediaWiki talk:Revision-info-current">this page</a>, as edited by $2 at $1.
Is this too unclear? GracenotesT § 17:10, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
That wording's clear to me, and the sort of thing that I normally suggest but gets shot down; I suspect that anything that explains what's going on in that detail will be rejectect by somebody. I wonder if there's a more concise way to express the difference between "This link will always give you the current revision at the time you use it" and "This link gives you the current current revision, even if the page is later changed"? I suppose "This is a permanent URL for the current current revision" is unambiguous but sounds a bit silly. --ais523 17:16, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Hm... I can't think of a better wording. Hopefully a more inventive wordsmith will come along soon :) Otherwise, what's in the above notice seems good to me. GracenotesT § 18:12, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
"This URL will always bring you to this version of this page, ignoring any previous or future versions or changes." perhaps? Just brainstorming, here. – Luna Santin (talk) 09:41, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
"future versions" will become "current versions", though. Hrm. I guess the most recently suggested version is fine, so would admin fulfill the editprotected request with it? Hopefully, as people notice the site message, they'll come to this talk page and refine it. GracenotesT § 17:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
We've drifted into an argument about the meaning of words. If we summarize the ideas we want to have come across, I see:
  1. This page is the most recent revision of the article.
  2. This page's URL will always bring you to this revision, regardless of future revisions.
  3. This version of this page was edited by $2 at $1.
Assuming those 3 points, what is the simplest (and most concise) phrasing we can use that encompasses all 3? I suggest:
This is the current revision of <a href="/wiki/MediaWiki talk:Revision-info-current" title="MediaWiki talk:Revision-info-current">MediaWiki talk:Revision-info-current</a> as edited by $2 at $1. This <a href="/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Locator" title="Uniform Resource Locator">URL</a> will always bring you to this version of this page.
How's it look? Nihiltres(t.l) 18:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, that might be the way to go. If we add "As of $date," to the front end, does that make it even more clear? – Luna Santin (talk) 06:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
It would make it even more clear, but I think the Nihiltres version is clear enough. There's a date in the message anyway, and "As of today" would make the message longer for little benefit in my opinion. --ais523 16:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Nihiltres' wording - I think the 'as of' is slightly superfluous, or at least would make it slightly too long. ck lostswordTC 19:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Pending any concerns from Gracenotes (or anyone else), I think I'm ready to create the page with the contents of the example above, assuming we have consensus. Nihiltres(t.l) 14:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I'd say go for it. We've probably heckled over this long enough. :p – Luna Santin (talk) 19:41, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
It's up and running. I doublechecked that it's working (here) to be sure. Nihiltres(t.l) 01:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Yep, I happened upon the new message earlier today! I like the new wording. Although, it would be good if "permanent link" could be incorporated into the text, since that's the phrase used in the interface. e.g., "This URL is a permanent link that will always bring you to this revision of the page." (revision seems a bit more technically correct than version, at least to me.) GracenotesT § 04:31, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Good idea - I recognized the inconsistency and made a slight change to incorporate the phrase. :) Nihiltres(t.l) 13:33, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Standardised styles[edit]

A discussion to standardise the styles for boxes of this kind has been started at Template talk:Fmbox#New type?.

--David Göthberg (talk) 12:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Broken for Image Pages[edit]

{{editprotected}}

Somebody needs to slap a colon (or some other viable solution) at the beginning of the wikilink, otherwise on Image pages the image gets put in there instead of the page title. Q T C 11:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Maybe: {{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}} per this comment? Q T C 11:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Done, by Daniel. - Rjd0060 (talk) 15:39, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Actually the colon really defeats the purpose of making it a link in the first place since it's a self-link, needs the {{fullurl}} treatment. Q T C 21:51, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
Heh, I was thinking that as I checked the latest diff, and opened the edit page to update it just before reading the discussion here. I've updated the code to use fullurl, with the link contained within a plainlinks span so that it doesn't produce an ugly and misleading external link icon. This is consistent with the code I used on MediaWiki:Revision-info. {{Nihiltres|talk|log}} 19:05, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Technical note: That <span class="plainlinks"></span> is not needed, since this message box uses {{fmbox}} that already uses the plainlinks class. But it also doesn't cause any problems to use it an extra time like this.
--David Göthberg (talk) 09:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

CSS id change[edit]

This is just to explain and document why and how I am doing this change. No action needed from anyone else.

I am planning to change the CSS ids used in MediaWiki:Revision-info and MediaWiki:Revision-info-current, to be in line with how we do for other such messages. For the full details about this see MediaWiki talk:Revision-info#CSS id change.

--David Göthberg (talk) 05:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 13 June 2014[edit]

To reflect changes to the software, please replace the page with the following:

Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:05, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, tested, working. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:21, 13 June 2014 (UTC)