Template talk:User

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Discussion[edit]

Is there some template that has in addition to the current info, also has edit time? i.e. the equivalent of {{user|Sundar}} ~~~~~ -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 11:46, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)


This template includes a Carriage Return which causes formatting problems when it's used in the middle of text; e.g. "** {{User|Foo}} is doing bad stuff." results in a line break before the text, making it unindented. I propose to remove the CR - and I hope this won't screw up too many places that assume it's there. Or should we just make another template, almost identical to {User}, but without the CR? Noel (talk) 18:36, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Example (talk · contribs) Looks fine to me. I believe this template never had a CR. --cesarb 00:31, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, something changed, because my example didn't use to work - it was screwing up WP:AN/3RR all the time. But you're right, it works now. Hallelujah! Noel (talk) 22:45, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Shortening?[edit]

Would anyone object to shortening this? i.e. like: Example (t · c) — comments? Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 21:21, 23 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the current long form, since it's more self-explanatory. --cesarb 15:48, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I also prefer the current form because it's self-explanatory to new users who might not know what it all means. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:52, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can see how it would be confusing to new users. No problem, I withdraw my suggestion. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 20:10, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I agree the general use has good reasons to have the long form. For those that specifically want a more compact form, I created Template:User-c. Example (t c) Thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 21:15, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Edit count[edit]

It would appear the only way to fix the edit count link would be to ask Kate to modify her edit counter to convert _ into spaces, then everything would work. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-08-15 23:40

It doesn't work for people with spaces in their names, nor for IP addresses. I suggest removing it until the tool is fixed. Jayjg (talk) 23:54, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed and done. It wasn't backwards compatible and broke in a really bad and unintuitive way. Jarvik 00:21, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked Kate to modify the tool. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:22, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
Alternatively, a new interwiki link could be created (this would automatically convert spaces into underscores). I have added this to the interwiki table, when a developer next updates the interwiki matrix it can be used via normal wiki markup, e.g. [[EditCount:Username]]. Talrias (t | e | c) 04:12, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Current revision affects a lot of names negatively. Check out Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress/Willy_on_Wheels#Accounts for a list of examples. AdamRock 18:48, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
Changing ALL the spaces into underscores would fix this problem, but there's a long list and the template worked with just the (talk * contribs) for the spaces just fine before. Maybe make a Template:User2 that adds the count for people who want it? AdamRock 18:55, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

Contribs?[edit]

I once had it pointed out to me for a very good reason that normally a user does not need to see another user's contribs. The only cases it would need to be used is for Rfa's, Rfc's, vandalism, etc. See this for the archived discussion. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 02:15, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO this template is not really useful (especially if edit count link is fixed and re-established) for sigs. In any other instance where one wanted to refer to a user or group/list of users (like the reasons specificed, or in a project page's list of contributors, or other lists (list of admins, list of banned IPs, etc)) then it is quite useful. One can get a general idea of a user's activity and areas of general interest with just a click or two.
Also, there are other instances when one finds a link to other users' contributions. When comparing two versions of a page's history, the users' name/link has "(Talk | contribs)" following it. And watch lists show anonymous IPs as links to their contributions. But I do agree it is not needed in a sig.
Perhaps something like Template:Sig with just a link to the user's front and talk page along with the date would be appropriate, with a note on this page to use that template instead of {{User|user}} for sigs. I withdraw that last suggestion. This (or any) template should not be used for sigs. To quote Radiant! here"You aren't actually supposed to use templates for signatures in the first place (it's a server load issue).". This is also repeated in Special:Preferences. Splarka 00:01, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
There's no template server load issue if you use subst: with your templates. Does anybody know if a template can be configured to automatically subst: itself? I used the template for this signature, but used subst so that it'll automatically copy the template code into this talk page. This is what I typed: {{subst:user|Aaron McDaid}} ~~~~~ .
Also, does anybody think it'd be cool if there was a special user subpage which would automatically included when any user is editing? It would be similar to the Insert: buttons listed below the 'Save page' button, but each user could edit it to whatever they found useful including, but not limited to, custom sigs. Aaron McDaid (talk • contribs) 01:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed my mind. All we need to do is get users to make their own monobook.js (assuming you're on the default skin). This allows each user to customize his/her sig completely by changing the behaviour of the sig button. I've only just discovered that functionality. That code does need improving though, for those who generally don't use the buttons. --Aaron McDaid (talk - contribs) 16:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new template - User3[edit]

Hello, everyone!

I've made a new template, {{user3}}, that shows user logs. Note that the input name is case-sensitive. Enjoy! --Ixfd64 14:50, 2005 September 6 (UTC)

Wasn't it originally...[edit]

[[User:{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]] instead of just [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]]? —  $PЯINGrαgђ  Always loyal! 05:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please add the interwiki link[edit]

Some who has the permission to edit this template page add this interwiki link

[[te:Template:సభ్యుడు]]

__Mpradeep 15:56, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change See Also Section[edit]

Change to: {{Signatures}} a template would help make adding different user signatures to the list easier. AMK152 20:22, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Also, Other User Signatures[edit]

In addition to this one, other user signatures include:

Template Example
{{User}} Example (talk · contribs)
{{User0}} Example (talk)
{{User2}} Example (talk · contribs · count)
{{User3}} Example (talk · contribs · logs)
{{User4}} Example (talk · contribs · email)
{{User5}} Example (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
{{User6}} Example (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log)
{{User7}} Example (talk · contribs · count · logs · email)
{{User8}} Example (talk · contribs · central auth · count · email)
{{User10}} Example (talk · contribs · count · logs)
{{user-c}} Example (t c)
{{Userlinks-abbr}} (u t c m l )
{{userblock}} Example (talk · contribs · block log)
{{userlinks}} Example (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
{{Admin}} Example (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)
{{Admin-abbr}} Example (t · c · b · p · d · m · r)
{{unsigned}} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Example (talk • contribs)
{{unsigned2}} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Example (talk • contribs) 18:45, December 6, 2006
{{unsigned3}} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Example (talk • contribs) 18:45, December 6, 2006
{{undated}} — Preceding undated comment added 18:45, December 6, 2006
{{unsignedIP}} —Preceding unsigned comment added by Example (talk)

Note that Usernames with spaces should generally be typed with an underscore: _

--Turbinator 20:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki[edit]

Please add [[sv:Mall:Användarnamn]]. Also, see above request for [[te:Template:సభ్యుడు]]. /skagedal... 18:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cheers! :) Luna Santin 21:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Compensating for redirect from Template:Vip[edit]

The template code currently reads "[[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])", which evaluates with my username as "JeffGent (talk • contribs)". However, Template:Vip was redirected to this template by Radiant! at 07:22 on 27 May 2005 (UTC) after a short discussion documented at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Deleted/May 2005#Template:Vip, breaking the existing functionality because Template:Vip used the syntax "user" for the user name, rather than this template's syntax "1" for the user name, causing a display of the ugly "[[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])" when used with the syntax "user" for the user name. I suggest compensating for that change by substituting "{{#if:{{{user|}}}|{{{user}}}}}{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{{1}}}}}" for everywhere that "{{{1}}}" appears, resulting in code that reads "[[User:{{#if:{{{user|}}}|{{{user}}}}}{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{{1}}}}}|{{#if:{{{user|}}}|{{{user}}}}}{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{{1}}}}}]] ([[User talk:{{#if:{{{user|}}}|{{{user}}}}}{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{{1}}}}}|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/{{#if:{{{user|}}}|{{{user}}}}}{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{{1}}}}}|contribs]])", which evaluates with my username as "JeffGent (talk • contribs)" whether I use the syntax "user" for the user name or this template's syntax "1" for the user name. Working sample code is at User:JeffGent/testvip and documented in its talk page.

As an alternative, as mentioned in that short discussion by Phil, a bot should have been implemented fix all the usages of the "user" syntax, but the usage of that syntax could have survived in new edits (despite the redirect).

  — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 15:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


There's an easier alternative to the parser functions, where the server slips in other values when a variable is undefined (these can be strings or variables, in this case they're variables): 

[[User:{{{user|{{{1}}}}}}|{{{user|{{{1}}}}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{user|{{{1}}}}}}|talk]] <small>•</small> [[Special:Contributions/{{{user|{{{1}}}}}}|contribs]])

I'm also somewhat tempted to just have {{vip}} read: 

{{user|1={{{user}}}}}

And, of course, the bot option. Wouldn't be too hard, I count only 504 transclusions of {{vip}}. Might be better than complicating this template. Thoughts? – Luna Santin (talk) 21:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, the bot option would be cleaner in the long run. Please feel free to implement it, as I can't. Thanks!   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 07:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

font change[edit]

This is probably a stupid question, but I noticed the font the username is rendered in when using {{user}} and {{userlinks}} changed recenty, while some of the other, similar templates are still the same, like {{IPvandal}}. Does anyone know why that happened? Natalie 00:52, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Polish interwiki[edit]

Please add Polish interwiki: [[pl:Szablon:Użytkownik]] Hołek ҉ 11:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC) {{editprotected}}[reply]

done. CMummert · talk 12:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link[edit]

I woud create a section "See also" and add Wikipedia:Userboxes.

Template documentation[edit]

{{editprotected}} This template should have documentation consistent with {{Interwiki doc page pattern}} and {{Sample}}.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The documentation is now in the unprotected page Template:User/doc. Please feel free to edit it. CMummert · talk 14:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reducing code output[edit]

I don't suppose anyone could add a subst=subst parameter onto this (and all related, e.g. {{vandal}}) to reduce the output code when subst'd? It does look awful at the moment, see this: Vanderdecken (talk • contribs • count) —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 17:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<small> parenthesis?[edit]

Having just read a couple of pages containing this and some of its variants ({{Signatures}} – a misnomer...?), I'm wondering if anyone else reckons the parenthesis following the user name in these templates might be made a little less conspicuous, e.g. via <small>...?  Regards, David Kernow (talk) 07:06, 29 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

interwiki[edit]

{{editprotected}} Please add es:Plantilla:U. --✉ Hello World! 11:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

checkY Done. (You could have made this change yourself by editing {{User/doc}}.) --ais523 16:45, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me for being blunt, but[edit]

What the **** is with all these templates? I'm sure these could be cut in half (with the other half being redirects to the remaining ones) with some thought. Anyone have any ideas on which ones can go? What are each one of these used for? --Random832 23:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that there's a relatively clear division of usage between those of these that are used as people's sigs, and those that are used to "call people out" - when naming them as a party to a dispute, etc. Can anyone offer any guidance? --Random832 23:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dot sizes[edit]

Are the dots of various user templates supposed to be of different sizes, or is this a mistake? Digwuren 11:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The templates were made by different people, at different times, and the current state of them is a mess IMO. —Random832 17:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

accommodate links to sister projects[edit]

{{editprotected}} Rather than create yet another user template, I coded an option for links to sister projects with an additional "project=" parameter. This could be added to the template without any disruption to existing uses.

[[:{{{2|{{{Project|en}}}}}}:User:{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}]]&nbsp;([[:{{{2|{{{Project|en}}}}}}:User talk:{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|talk]]&nbsp;'''·''' [[:{{{2|{{{Project|en}}}}}}:Special:Contributions/{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|contribs]])

For example, {{User|Psantora}} still produces: Psantora (talk · contribs), but {{User|Psantora|m}} would produce: Psantora (talk · contribs). This would work for all Wikimedia projects like commons and news, but also language links to Wikipedia user pages in other languages.

 ~ PaulC/T+ 19:57, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We already have {{sistervandal}}. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 01:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How is that in any way like {{user}}? I just want the user page, talk page, and contributions for a sister project/language. ~ PaulC/T+ 03:55, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to this, but I want to discuss on the village pump whether we should go through and substitute this template where is has already been used. Once that conversation is done I'll make the edit if nobody objects. — Carl (CBM · talk) 19:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{{editprotected}} After looking over the code again, I think there might be room for an improvement, but I'm not sure if I'm using the correct magic word. Currently the default link when the parameter isn't used includes the "en" language code. To make this code more versatile and easily ported, would it make sense to use {{CONTENTLANGUAGE}} (en) instead of the hardcoded "en"?

This would produce:

[[:{{{2|{{{Project|{{subst:CONTENTLANGUAGE}}}}}}}}:User:{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}]]&nbsp;([[:{{{2|{{{Project|{{subst:CONTENTLANGUAGE}}}}}}}}:User talk:{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|talk]]&nbsp;'''·''' [[:{{{2|{{{Project|{{subst:CONTENTLANGUAGE}}}}}}}}:Special:Contributions/{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|contribs]])

(Alternatively, {{usernewtest}} can be moved/merged with {{user}} as that has the above code as well as the edit history behind some additions that were made. ~ PaulT+/C 07:41, 14 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Is this an improvement or does it make things more complicated? Also, discussion on the village pump seems to have died out... any chance of making this change anytime soon? ~ PaulC/T+ 18:02, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What specific change is desired? (Full code would help) Gimmetrow 02:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[[:{{{2|{{{Project|en}}}}}}:User:{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}]] ([[:{{{2|{{{Project|en}}}}}}:User talk:{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|talk]] '''·''' [[:{{{2|{{{Project|en}}}}}}:Special:Contributions/{{{1|{{{User|Example}}}}}}|contribs]]) (note: non-breaking spaces are used)
Taken from {{usernewtest}}, which, as noted above, could be moved/merged with this template to save the edit history behind the development of this code. ~ PaulT+/C 03:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Merging newusertest[edit]

Responding to the editprotected request again: I am going to merge {{usernewtest}} here unless there are additional concerns. It looks like the people who have been discussing it here seem to agree on it. — Carl (CBM · talk) 14:09, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Carl, wherever the "test" template is used should probably be converted over to {{user}} once the merge is done also. ~ PaulT+/C 17:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I moved the test template to {{Template:User/Sandbox}} and copied the code to the main template. I'm working on cleaning up backlinks, but will finish soon. — Carl (CBM · talk) 12:51, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Altering template-user to allow for Interwiki.[edit]

Note: Template:Usernewtest is deleted and the suggested code has been added to Template:User/Sandbox and Template:User. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 16:29, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some users on English wiki are mostly active on other wikis, such that the regular Template:User tag may be inappropriate. Furthermore, there are some rare cases where it's appropriate to have an interwikied Template:User instead of a regular one. For instance, I'm cleaning up the bot status page. On the page, there are many people who own bots on English Wikipedia, but only have accounts on foreign language wikis. For the table there, it's a lot easier for templates (and for bots reading such templates) if it's a standard template, with a simple second parameter to make Template:User transwikied.

An example of the proposed code to be added is at Template:Usernewtest. Every line of code there is carefully commented, so that it's easy to follow even for non-programmers.

Here's how it works. Say you have a user named Flacus with an account on English wiki and an account on German wiki.

  • The standard way of doing it is:

{{User|Flacus}}
This generates a link to his English wiki account, talkpage, and contribs list:
{{Usernewtest|Flacus}}

  • A silly and redundant way of doing this would be:

{{User|Flacus|en}}
This generates:
Flacus (talk · contribs)

  • However, let's say Flacus has no account on English wiki, or his account on German wiki is more active. Someone could write:

{{User|Flacus|de}}
This generates the interwiki user template:
Flacus (talk · contribs)

This works for all of the interwiki codes.

It should not pose a problem for any of the existing instances of Template:User because it only changes the output if there is a second parameter added. There shouldn't be, in any current instances of this template, since there is currently only one parameter.

The only possible exception where it might pose a problem is if someone created a custom template which somehow directly substituted the code from Template:User and tried to add a second parameter themselves. But that would be rather weird. I don't even know if it's possible under the current syntax and I don't know of any templates that use it. If there is some obscure custom template out there doing this, we could always just revert it back until they address the compatibility issues. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 07:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, very useful. I like it.
That's it, I'm done. Next comment, please. Waltham, The Duke of 12:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This template is intended to be substituted cleanly. All I can say about including ParserFunctions is: ew. Having another template would be great, though, e.g. Template:User-iw. GracenotesT § 18:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I proposed code to do exactly this in the section above without using ParserFunctions. I'm still waiting on Carl to implement the change. ~ PaulT+/C 22:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Psantora, it's absurd that anyone would stand in the way of this. Gracenotes: Most templates use the parser in one form or another, include the existing Template:User.

What is the point of having another template? We have a redundant amount of user templates as it is and it would be more intuitive to integrate features into a single template than to have one long messy list of different templates. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 01:12, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most templates use ParserFunctions, right, but most are not intended to be substituted. GracenotesT § 02:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can see from the source code, neither {{user}} nor my above code have ParserFunctions, just parameters and parameter defaults. I agree that we should try and condense the crazy number of user templates into a smaller number of templates with different options. ~ PaulT+/C 02:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Zenwhat's proposed version uses ParserFunctions, and your version uses the un-substituted {{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}. Trying to reduce the number of user templates into a smaller number than currently exists is a great goal, but I'd prefer if we kept this one simple, so that it can have reasonably readable output (e.g., [[User:Gracenotes|Gracenotes]] ([[User talk:Gracenotes|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Gracenotes|contribs]])) when substituted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gracenotes (talk • contribs)

Question: When you're objecting to parser functions, is there actually some kind of legitimate criticism here, or is it just "hating" (aka being a hater, drinking the haterade, etc..). What I mean is, what is actually bad about using parser functions? If it works, it works. Am I right?

I wish every template was appropriately commented and that the syntax was somehow standard, like having every new line, beginning with | (or some other character) actually being the beginning of every new line, so that I could look at actual "lines of code," and not something like {{{234234}}}{}}{234}}{[{}}2}}}}{}|}}{}{}{{|||||{}{}2342}}{{}{ That is horrible. From what I've heard, wiki code is horrible, period.

Still, despite my hating, if somebody puts forth a good idea in wiki code which works, it should get done, I think. What do you think? ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 07:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I object to ParserFunctions because they would make the source code of substitutions of {{user}} unreadable. GracenotesT § 16:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above code, when substed looks like this: [[en:User:Gracenotes|Gracenotes]] ([[en:User talk:Gracenotes|talk]] '''·''' [[en:Special:Contributions/Gracenotes|contribs]]), hardly unreadable... ~ PaulT+/C 03:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That is very much a readable output, but not the output that would have resulted from the code at the time I saw it. Now try transcluding the same code. This paradox—the inability to design a template with ParserFunctions that can be both transcluded and substituted—is a problem, in many ways. WP:UW gets around this kludgily with a "subst" parameter, but solving bugzilla:4484 (or even bugzilla:2003) would fix it. When that happens, Zenwhat's idea can certainly be implemented. GracenotesT § 16:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, never mind. That problem would be fixed if you hard-code "en", rather than use {{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}. Again, I am fine with the change so long as it can be transcluded and substituted cleanly, and hardcoding "en" (as you mentioned ahove) would be a great way to do this. GracenotesT § 16:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What problem? ~ PaulT+/C 16:30, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just copy/pasted my code into Zenwhat's test template. Lets see how it transcludes...
I've also added an {{editprotected}} tag to my above code so the change can be made... ~ PaulT+/C 16:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looks perfectly fine to me: ::*normal: {{Usernewtest|Psantora}} subst: [[en:User:Psantora|Psantora]] ([[en:User talk:Psantora|talk]] '''·''' [[en:Special:Contributions/Psantora|contribs]]) ::*m: <nowiki>{{Usernewtest|Psantora|m}} subst: Psantora (talk · contribs)</nowiki> (note, this is code from the section above, not Zenwhat's code which includes parser functions. I'm going to revert my change to his template so this thread makes sense in the future... though I assume after the change goes through, this template will be deleted.) ~ PaulT+/C 16:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That code is fine, because an IP substituted {{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}, essentially hardcoding "en" when you copied the template code to Template:Usernewtest. Otherwise, substituting would yield [[{{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}:User:Psantora|Psantora]] ([[{{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}:User talk:Psantora|talk]] '''·''' [[{{CONTENTLANGUAGE}}:Special:Contributions/Psantora|contribs]]. So I support the hardcoded version; I didn't notice when it was changed. (Is this confusing to you? I'm a bit confused myself :|) GracenotesT § 17:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that IP was me... I didn't realize until after I had made the edit. When I thought up using CONTENTLANGUAGE instead of "en" I wanted it to translate directly into en when subst'ed, I didn't realize immediately that magic words work similar to templates in that they need to be subst'ed themselves until you pointed that out. That said, can we make the change now with the subst'ed magic word? ~ PaulT+/C 17:46, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly. I'm fine with copying the contents of Template:Usernewtest to Template:User. If another language Wikipedia wants to use it, it's not too difficult to replace "en" with the local ISO language code, I hope. Thanks for your cooperation and suggestions! GracenotesT § 17:54, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see now... it seems I made the whole discussion a whole lot more complicated than it needed to be with CONTENTLANGUAGE... should have just left it with en like I originally coded. ~ PaulT+/C 18:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My idea is a blatantly good idea. However, it's being stifled because of a minority blocking consensus, a major problem on Wikipedia, period.

I'm retiring from Wikipedia, so you can do whatever you want with my code. Use it, ignore it, I don't care. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 06:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like the majority consensus still hasn't explained how it would maintain the invariant standard of allowing both transclusion and substitution with the new code. Although consensus is the nominal rationale for actual changes, logic is the basic unit of discussion, and a unit one can't skip. GracenotesT § 16:06, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why Zenwhat is getting so upset over this. This is a protected template that is used on a very large number of pages. Getting changes right is important. I'm not even sure if Gracenotes has the ability to change the template in the first place. ~ PaulT+/C 16:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the hardcoded "en" as it was causing problems with some bots - having it blank by default (expands to [[:User:Example]]) works fine. —Random832 15:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Colons[edit]

What is the point of the colons in the code? They seem unecessary and are apparently messing up the WP:RfA analysis tools. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 00:24, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The colons are there so that people can put in a different project code (ie: EVula (talk · contribs) for my German information) (and the leading colon is important so that it's read as an actual link, rather than as a proper interwiki link that shows up on the left side). I'm testing it in my userspace, but I can't get the double colons to disappear. Strange. EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:50, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pipe separators[edit]

Hi, could someone please take a look at e.g. {{userv}}, {{usertcb}}, {{user|Example|separator=pipe}} etc. as the formatting (more specifically, the spacing) of the pipe separator does not come out the same for me as how it looks on page histories? Example: Example (talk · contribs). (Not really proficient enough at template code to edit it myself, I'm afraid.) Thanks! It Is Me Here t / c 11:59, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do the following look the same to you? The first is copied from the source code of the history page, the second is from {{usertcb}}. To me, they look exactly the same (apart from the extra word "user" obviously). — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:46, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For me, there are spaces missing. To me it looks like this:

It Is Me Here t / c 21:04, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why that would be. Perhaps it is your browser or something else. Try WP:VPT? I've disabled the request because it is not clear what needs to be done here. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:08, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS Perhaps you should report this problem to Template talk:Toolbar because this is the template which produces the separators and spacing. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:10, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a thread detailing exactly the same problem at Template talk:Toolbar, so it's not just me. But thanks for the advice; I'll go to WP:VPT. It Is Me Here t / c 22:41, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This should now be fixed - MediaWiki:Pipe-separator/en-gb has been created as a clone of MediaWiki:Pipe-separator. --Redrose64 (talk) 15:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Standalone[edit]

I would like to see the standalone version on Template:User/sandbox implemented. It was built in an responce to MZMcBride´s performance conserns on Wikipedia:Lua requests#Template:User. The sandboxed version is faster than the current one.--Snaevar (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I'd like to keep it as it is and port the backend to Module:UserLinks, which I've been working on today. Once it's in Lua it will be pretty zippy, and using the meta-template will avoid redundancy in the code and enable automatic documentation. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 13:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the template to work with Module:UserLinks, so this request probably isn't necessary any more. Feel free to reactivate the edit protected template if you want a second opinion, though. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 05:54, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

safesubst[edit]

There's a version of this template using safesubst at User:PC-XT/sandbox/Template:User. Could an editor familiar with maintaining this template please assess its suitability and, if it's okay, update this template with it. I have sufficient permissions but haven't been involved with this high-visibility template before. — Scott • talk 09:14, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine to me, but hold on a second while I put the finishing touches to Module:UserLinks/sandbox. I'm planning to update this template, Module:UserLinks and Module:Toolbar all in one go. See also the discussion on Template talk:Toolbar and Template talk:User-multi. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 09:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see PC-XT asked there about the span tags as a result of that other discussion we're having. Okay, great - thank you. — Scott • talk 10:00, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, it's now up live - substing should work now. Let me know if you spot any issues. — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 09:03, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 7 January 2016[edit]

Minor request here: Could somebody edit this template's documentation to add a 'See also' section that links to {{Noping2}}? As {{Noping2}} is basically {{User}} without the "ping", the two templates are closely related, and linking to {{Noping2}} from here would probably be beneficial. TIA. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC) --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: @IJBall: The see also links belong in Template:User/doc, which is unprotected. Go ahead and add them. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 00:51, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done It looks like there is a "See also" section provided in the /doc, but it looks like it's hidden (I certainly don't see the 'See also' section when I look at the /doc on my end) by a "#ifeq:" statement which I don't understand (not a "coder" here!! ), so I'd better leave this to someone who understands this stuff. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:09, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The "See also" section in Template:User/doc is hidden at {{user}} because of the test 
{{#ifeq:{{strfind short|{{BASEPAGENAME}}|Usercheck}}|0 | |
which was added in this edit by somebody whose template edits were prolific but often baffling. --Redrose64 (talk) 08:32, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Redrose64: So, what do you think? – Should I just remove that code, then? It doesn't seem to serve any purpose to my (untrained) eye... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Before removing it, we need to understand why it's there. That doc page is transcluded six times, so some or more of those could be affected. --Redrose64 (talk) 00:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ping[edit]

The document needs to explicitly state that using it will ping the user named in it. Or at least to link to an explanation of "notification". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:10, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilink didn't work within the syntax used there, so I boldly did this. ―Mandruss ☎ 20:35, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That helps. Thank you! ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:38, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Baseball Bugs Notifying users is not a feature of this template. It is a feature of a combination of two essential components (plus some other requirements): a link to the user page of the person that you are notifying, and your signature. It matters not whether the link to the user page of the person that you are notifying is a simple link (as I used in this post) or whether it's template-generated. You will get the same result whether you use {{user}}, {{u}}, {{reply to}} or any of several other templates.
The main page for notifications is WP:Notifications. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:23, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that I've been using this template for years and was unaware (until today) that using it would ping the user named within it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:10, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I accept the above explanation and believe that Baseball Bugs had no intention of pinging me. I do not want to have any interaction with Baseball Bugs and am, in general ignoring his comments in the hope that he will leave me alone. I agonized over whether to respond this time, but I wanted it to be on record that I think the ping was caused by this template being poorly documented. Could we please fix the documentation so that it is crystal clear to the reader what will happen when they use this template? --Guy Macon (talk) 01:35, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Guy Macon: I tried to wikilink "notification" to WP:Notifications.[1] Turns out wikilinks don't work within the weird type of coding used there (great thinking there, btw). So I did this instead. Is that not adequate? Anyway, this is only one way of many that generate notifications (I never use this, preferring either {{ping}} or {{u}} depending on the situation). We would have to make this crystal clear in all the other places too. To my incomplete knowledge, this is the first time in my career that this doc has proven inadequate, even before my change. ―Mandruss ☎ 07:17, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of all the features introduced to the MediaWiki software in the last few years, the notifications system is one of the most useful. It's also one of the most misdescribed: people use the word "ping" when they think that they know what it means, when in fact it means something different.
Here is what a ping does: imagine that I know that another persons machine has the IP address 192.168.1.128, or the name "HAL", I can find out if that machine is on the network by going to a command prompt and typing 
$ ping 192.168.1.128
or 
$ ping HAL
I will then get back either a success message instantly, or a timeout message after a short delay. What this utility will not do is inform that other user that I am pinging them. They are totally unaware. Therefore, we shouldn't use the word "ping" in documentation when we really mean "notify". --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 14:21, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It may be technically incorrect to use the term "ping", but it's in common usage here. Check "Template:Reply to" ("Template:Ping" redirects to it) and see how often it's (mis-)used. And by the way, some of the comments in that template could be added to this one, to improve it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:46, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The terms "poke" or "nudge" are probably more accurate, though I would avoid "poke" as it can have negative, aggressive connotations. "Nudge" is gentler. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In the Wikipedia tradition of unlimited names for the same thing, you're free to create a redirect of {{Nudge}} to {{Reply to}}. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:17, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Not protected, of course. I'll let an interested admin do that. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:49, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Rose, the time for that discussion was before the local definition of "ping" became deeply entrenched at enwiki (I wasn't here then, so I'm not taking a share of that rap! ;). Anyway, relatively few editors ever heard of ICMP Ping, so they're unlikely to be confused by our usage of the word. Those who know of ICMP Ping are probably technical enough not to be confused, especially after they try our "ping" once and don't get any information back. I had used ICMP Ping a lot before I came to WP, and I don't recall being even a little confused.
I support improving doc for the sake of newer editors – our environment has been designed by experienced users for experienced users, and I oppose that in general – but I can't get motivated to take on these improvements myself right now. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:10, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The term "ping" originally referred to the sound of a bullet hitting something hard and bouncing of.[2] It's also used to describe the sound of a metal baseball bat hitting the ball. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:10, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of which have any relation to computer software (other than games). --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:31, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it does. (See below). In this common usage of "ping" here, if a user pings me, he's not checking my IP address, he's trying to get my attention. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:46, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The term ping (networking utility) is derived from Sonar, where the term "ping" refers to a pulse of sound - in other words, it's ultimately derived from the original definition of "ping" as I cited earlier. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:53, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request — 15 June 2018[edit]

Add {{For|the template that only gives a link to a user's user page|Template:User link}} (or something along those lines) to the template documentation. Interqwark talk contribs 13:20, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: {{edit template-protected}} is usually not required for edits to the documentation, categories, or interlanguage links of templates using a documentation subpage. Use the 'edit' link at the top of the green "Template documentation" box to edit the documentation subpage.
Template:User/doc isn't protected. Cabayi (talk) 13:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Cabayi: Oh, sorry. There are no “edit” buttons on the template page, so I thought that the documentation couldn’t be edited in one way or another, such as being integrated in one of the templates used in the template code. Interqwark talk contribs 16:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Interqwark - it's not a variety I've ever seen before either, and since the template reply (1st paragraph of my earlier reply) didn't quite match (hence the second paragraph) I guess it really is way out of the norm. Cabayi (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The doc page is Template:User/doc, which is indeed not protected, but it is shared by five different pages. Care should be exercised that any change to the documentation is applicable to all five templates. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Redrose64 for that heads-up. I've embodied the advice in an editnotice at Template:Editnotices/Page/Template:User/doc. Regards, Cabayi (talk) 19:40, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ping not working?[edit]

In this edit, I was not notified. I also recall in a recent conversation about a month or so ago, another editor mentioned that my use of this template did not ping them either. Is anyone aware of an issue with the way notifications have been implemented in this template? Has anyone else noticed this problem? -- GoneIn60 (talk) 08:49, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GoneIn60, firstly, to ping you User:P3Y229 needed to include a signature in their edit. It was an edit to an existing already signed message – such edits do not generate notifications. You can read about requirements for a notification at Help:Notifications. Secondly, the edit you linked (Special:Diff/1097348442) does not include usage of template {{User}} (with curly braces). Instead it uses a wikilink [[User:GoneIn60|GoneIn60]] (with square brackets). This page (Template talk:User) is for discussing the template and its usage. —⁠andrybak (talk) 09:01, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks ⁠andrybak. Can't believe I overlooked that about the curly braces, and I appreciate the note about the signature (which I was not aware of). False alarm! -- GoneIn60 (talk) 09:06, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User:Andrybak, it doesn't matter whether you use a template, or a normal wikilink to a user page (as I did here): the essential feature is that the user page be linked, and Template:User generates such a link. Therefore, even though I have used no templates, my post here will have notified you. The problem with the edit originally linked is simply that it was not a new post but an edit to an existing post. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:30, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification. It wasn't my intention to imply that the two issues were connected, I should have been more clear. Redrose64 is correct – all such methods of linking can be used to trigger a notification. Third paragraph of Help:Notification describes some of them. —⁠andrybak (talk) 09:36, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:User&oldid=1147405334"