Template talk:User-multi/Archive 1

Assuming this catches on, how's about reimplementing whatever user link templates remain after the current clearout so that they call this? I assume that was what it was designed for, but just wanted to check. Even better, that allows for trivial substitution in future should even more of the current forks be found surplus to requirements. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) - talk 10:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I would assume we would do that. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:28, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work creating this template! Strangely I made a remark to User:Frietjes that we should have a template like this, not knowing you had already created one. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the substitutable code from this template. Apart from making the wikicode extremely messy, there is absolutely no need to substitute templates like this. The only templates which should be substituted are user talk messages. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The wikicode is not really especially messy. Although I see your point: I don't see a reason why substitution should be necessary. My line of thinking here is, "why not?" — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can answer the "why not?" but I will also, in turn, ask "why???". Substituting a template onto a page unnecessarily puts several kB of code on the page instead of a clean template call. This makes the wikicode harder to read which may turn off new editors from trying to edit a page. Another reason is that after substitution, it will be set in stone and will not benefit from future improvements and fixes to the template. So now I'll ask why you want the template to be substitutable when you agree there is no benefit to subsituting it. In my mind we should be actively discouraging people from substituting templates unnecessarily. Cheers — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:10, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I've removed the subst stuff again. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:22, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS After your changes, there is an error in the display of the template (see Template:User-SecurePoll). — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:11, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine to me. What problem are you seeing? — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Frietjes did something to that template which has fixed it. However the default example user was added automatically in my version and that's not happening now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:40, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's the "if empty" logic. The logic for {{#if:{{{user|}}}|{{{user}}}|Example}} is different from {{{user|Example}}}. I really don't care either way, but they behave differently. Frietjes (talk) 15:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If we are going to use this as a meta-template, we should probably ease off on the parser functions. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:27, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really mind either. I did it that way because it's slightly easier not to have to pass the default Example from every template that uses this one. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:23, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a start converting the usern templates over. Perhaps others could add to this list when they are ready to deploy? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:39, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:User0  Done
• Template:User2  Done
• Template:User3  Done
• Template:User4  Done
• Template:User-SecurePoll  Done
• Template:User23  Done
• Template:Bureaucrat  Done

I redirected the core template's talk page to here. This material was present:

— This, that, and the other (talk) 03:06, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was experimenting with a template parameter to provide a slightly different display on the template page. However it didn't work too well as Frietjes discovered because it was doing it on all the examples on the documentation as well. So perhaps a better approach would be to call

{{User-multi<noinclude>/template</noinclude>
...

which would then call a subtemplate /template on the template page. Then we could display

• an information box drawing attention to this meta-template.
• example usage using our old friend User:Example (and we could then get rid of this from all the other code)
• automatically produced custom documentation

This is an approach I've used before on other meta-templates, e.g. Template:Asbox/templatepage and it has worked well.

Do people think this is a good idea or not worth it? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:46, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is all now fully implemented. Adding the parameter |doc=yes to the template call, produces automatic documentation. (Be sure to remove duplicate stuff on the /doc page at the same time.) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that all these templates use the parameter User, with an uppercase U. So it seems to make sense that we should do the same on this template. For now, I will ensure that either case is recognised by this template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:28, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some users sign their posts with a slightly username (or at least a somewhat different appearance). For instance, on this page there's User:MSGJ or "Martin" as the user apparently prefers to sign posts (MSGJ is also listed). I propose a label parameter that would allow a label to be put in. Now, I don't normally sign my posts as Bart, but I'll use myself as an example here. The first two lines of the template are currently:

<span id="{{{user|{{{User}}}}}}">[[:{{{Project|}}}:User:{{{user|
{{{User}}}}}}|{{{user|{{{User}}}}}}]] {{#if:{{{sup|}}}

Example: [[User:Banaticus|Banaticus]] or Banaticus

They should be changed to the following:

<span id="{{{user|{{{User}}}}}}">[[:{{{Project|}}}:User:{{{user|{{{User}}}}}}|
{{#if:{{{label|}}}|{{{label}}}|{{{user|{{{User}}} }}} }}]] {{#if:{{{sup|}}}

Example: [[User:Banaticus|Bart]] or Bart
Noting in passing that the extra spaces I added to the closing braces at the end of the word User in the second line "User}}} }}} }}]]" don't have any effect, they just make the template more readable (and prevent the server from accidentally closing the #if too soon by making the first six closing braces explicit parameter braces, or a set of three).

If the actual username is still desired, perhaps instead the label should be shown in a set of parentheses like this:

<span id="{{{user|{{{User}}}}}}">[[:{{{Project|}}}:User:{{{user|{{{User}}}}}}|
{{#if:{{{label|}}}|{{{user|{{{User}}} }}} ({{{label}}})|{{{user|{{{User}}} }}} }}]] {{#if:{{{sup|}}}

Example: [[User:Banaticus|Banaticus (Bart)]] or Banaticus (Bart)

So, what do you all think? Banaticus (talk) 19:35, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully this template is not being used to generate signatures since templates aren't allowed in signatures. Is there a particular situation where this would be necessary? Frietjes (talk) 22:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, potentially everywhere it's used, since some people are better known by their apparent username, rather than their actual username. For instance, a mild example would be User:Libertarianrule who signs his posts as "Libertarians Will Rule". Then there are those pages where a table of these templates is used to provide easy "view user pages", "view user talk page", "view contributions" links, and the users aren't used to their Wikipedia usernames and prefer using their real life names, such as the Wikipedia Education Program when pages for those classes are created on Wikipedia. I know I've seen other usernames like this in the past, where the apparent username didn't quite match up with the actual username (where the name that people most associate with an account is not the actual name of that account), but I don't recall any others off the top of my head. I know it does exist, though, and some provision should be made for it. Banaticus (talk) 02:42, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Template talk:Admin#{{sysop}}. To merge {{sysop}} into {{admin}} seems sensible to me; but to do this, {{admin}} needs to provide all the functionality presently given by {{sysop}}. The only item that is missing from {{admin}} is a link to the admin's RFA nom page, which also seems useful to me. Since {{admin}} is built around {{user-multi}}, which doesn't presently have that function, it would require either a mod to {{User-multi/core}} to add one function, or a new subtemplate here (I'm not really sure why we have two different systems for obtaining the same links). This new function or subtemplate could potentially need two parameters: the username of the admin, and the name of the nom page because several admins don't pass at the first attempt. We don't presently have an equivalent parameter for such use. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The /core page is not used now; that was an earlier form of this template. Could the correct RfA page be obtained in most cases by using a sequence of ifexist tests? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:19, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't work in all cases; although most candidates use the name "[username] 2", I have seen variations such as "[username] 2nd", "[username] (2nd)", etc. It might be useful to put in a link to [[Special:PrefixIndex/Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/[username]]], but even that would not necessarily find the right page if the admin in question has changed their username. Still, doing it this way might be better than nothing. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ^{♪ talk ♪} 06:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I created the {{sysop}} template back in 2007 during my early days on Wikipedia, but I am proposing the change now since checking for tranclusions show that it's not being used as much I had hoped. I've voted on may RFAs over the course of my editing career and I hope this will make it helpful for those who would like to find out how the editor in question became a sysop.

One of my other templates I created {{ipsock}} did get used (and protected). So I am hoping this one becomes useful to sysops as well. –BuickCenturyDriver 09:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A link to the nomination page would be useful. But it would be a hassle to have to type in this parameter every time the template is used. So I propose that this information could be held centrally somewhere. For users whose successful RfA is not of the form Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/USERNAME, a subtemplate somewhere would hold the title of the correct page. This would be quite a lot of work though and perhaps not worthwhile. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:43, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We could get most of the work done automatically if we wrote a script to cross-check Special:ListUsers/sysop with Category:Successful requests for adminship - even more so if we checked for the usual permutations of 2, 2nd, (2nd), etc. The rest of the work could be done by hand and probably wouldn't be too much of a chore. I'm a bit more concerned about keeping the list up-to-date, as that would probably require a bot to keep track of sysopings and de-sysopings. Scripts and bots aren't my forte, though, so this is just a suggestion. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ^{♪ talk ♪} 02:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I've added the subtemplate Template:User-multi/rfa using the Special:PrefixIndex method I described above. I have nothing against upgrading this to a more elegant solution in the future, however. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:24, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • PrefixIndex seems to be the way to go for now. better than a simple search, but still returns a list of RfAs. the only caveat is when a user changes names, but at least it should still return the most recent. Frietjes (talk) 16:42, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was messing around with some user templates and wanted to add a link to the user edit counter. I created the following sub-template page which does exactly that:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:User-multi/editct

Could you please add this to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:User-multi so that editct shows up as a new parameter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Little green rosetta (talk • contribs)

Hi there. Your new template is working fine, for example {{user-multi|user=Example|editct}} produces User-multi error: "editct" is not a valid link code (help).. You might like to add this to the documentation? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to the hard work of User:Mr. Stradivarius, this template has been switched to Lua, so the interesting stuff now occurs at Module:UserLinks. It's a bit sad, in a way... I was quite happy about this little implementation that I started a couple of years ago and that was extended and improved by MSGJ. But I suppose the new implementation is for the better. — This, that and the other (talk) 11:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have to admit that the old version was pretty elegant. I actually used the code as the main model when writing {{find sources multi}}. But there is just so much more you can do with Lua, and it's so much faster - it would be a shame not to port all the meta-templates over to it, really. By the way, if anyone has any bug reports or feature requests for Module:UserLinks, please let me know and I'll see what I can do. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 08:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can we add a code for a link to a contributors uploads?

Currently I am using {{usernameexpand}} and would like to merge what that template does back into a more widely used one. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Yes, this should do it. Could an admin please make the required modification to Module:UserLinks, whose talk page redirects here? — This, that and the other (talk) 07:26, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Done. Thanks for the fix. I also fixed the API link for other projects while I was at it. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 10:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In response to a TfD on {{Usernameexpand}} it was stated that user-multi isn't yet a drop in replacement, because it can't do 'display' names , vs usersnames. It would be appreciated if this could be looked in to. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone care to transwiki so there is a copy at Commons? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:03, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

@Mr. Stradivarius:

Important to responding admin: The module talk page was redirected here and this isn't a request to update the Template:User-multi but a request to update Module:UserLinks. Please ignore the links on the boiler-plate edit protected template.

This sandbox edit replaces "edit summaries" (code es) links. Here is diff. Testcase was implemented in sandbox for [[Template:User-multi]]diff here. The result of having the user-multi template sandbox use the userlinks module sandbox gave left/right comparisons of the existing testcases located here. Anything with and 'es' code has old on the left, proposed on the right. Example, go to {{user-multi|demo=yes|t|c|ct|m|l|bl|bls|bu |ca|dc|e|es|del|lu|sul|tl |efl|pr|rl|ren|rfa|user=Mr. Stradivarius}} and check the link for "edit summaries" and it will have the existing version (tparis) on the left and the proposed "Module:UserLinks" sandbox version on the right. I didn't have to update the testcase to do this, but I did it by updating the User-multi/sandbox. This appears to be the intent in the testcase page and I didn't want to remove a bunch of testcases. Let me know if this is not clear. --DHeyward (talk) 01:55, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the fix! To specify a page other than the immediate talk subject page, you can just add it as a positional parameter to the {{edit protected}} template. This also updates all the links to the page, so it's handy for checking the sandbox and the test cases page. And you have the right idea about the test cases - I wrote them with this kind of scenario in mind, so hopefully it saved you a bit of work. :) — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 02:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it did save time once I figured it out and didn't have to write a module implementation as part of the testcase (I pinged you since you had all the test cases and it seemed what you wanted and I wanted to make sure). I was going to just write the function in the module area but that would have been a few sandboxes and riskier than using the full implementation as it appears in WP. The only thing that didn't make sense was Template:User-multi/sandbox didn't point to the Module:UserLinks/sandbox space originally. I made that change and left it so the template sandbox uses the module sandbox. If there's a reason not to do that, let me know but I couldn't think of a good reason that it shouldn't. I figured a sandbox edit shouldn't break anything. --DHeyward (talk) 02:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you were also right to point the template sandbox to Module:UserLinks/sandbox rather than Module:UserLinks. The reason I hadn't done that before is because I was writing the module from scratch; I was testing the module against the old wikicode template, rather than testing the module sandbox against the module. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 04:02, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good! I get it and didn't break it. --DHeyward (talk) 04:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting feature: to update the documentation, I had to edit and save without changes to transclude the proper linkfor the 'es' code. I'm not sure where that edit showed up but it fixed [1]. It doesn't seem to be in my edit history so maybe it is a cache issue. --DHeyward (talk) 04:50, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's a null edit, which will update the links table of that page. That can't be done just by purging. If you don't do a null edit, you have to wait for the job queue to update the page instead. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 05:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "no credit edit?" Hard to reach the minimum with those. --DHeyward (talk) 06:20, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

{{Unblock}} includes quite a few user links which are missing from this module/template. Any objections to adding them, so this module can be deployed into the unblock template? John Vandenberg ^(chat) 10:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We should add them, yes. I'd prefer that we do that at the same time as rewriting the module so that we can upgrade everything in one go. (See my comment in the section below.) — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:41, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I liked MediaWiki:UserLinks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) so much I copied it for MediaWiki:PageLinks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and {{Page-multi}}. I havent copied all the complexity, as it was my first Lua coding and I wanted to get it working easily. Ideally, UserLinks extends PageLinks, and the two shouldnt have conflicting linktype codes. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:24, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, actually you chose quite a bad module to base your first Lua module on - I've been meaning to rework this one to limit the use of globally-scoped variables, and to make the calculation of the link data more efficient. At the moment it's looking quite spaghettified, and I've been feeling a little embarrassed about it. (Although I suppose it does do the job.) Seeing as it does much the same thing as PageLinks, it would probably be a good idea to split their shared functionality out into a new module so that we aren't duplicating code. Perhaps Module:Link list or something similar. I shall have a think about that. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 13:33, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to write PageLinks the way it should be written; I'll watch and learn ;-). My next trick was going to be rewrite PageLinks to extend Module:Page, return it's object with additional hooks added to it. PageLinks should be the base 'class' for all of these, as modules like UserLinks provide more contextual semantics and additional options, but every User is a Page. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 14:38, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

as requested at Template talk:User2, change

local function makeCountLink()
    return '[//tools.wmflabs.org/xtools/pcount/index.php?name=' .. u.usernameHtml
        .. '&lang=' .. u.toolLang
        .. '&wiki=' .. u.projectLong
        .. ' count]'
end

to

local function makeCountLink()
    return '[//tools.wmflabs.org/supercount/index.php?user=' .. u.usernameHtml
        .. '&project=' .. u.toolLang .. '.' .. u.projectLong
        .. ' count]'
end

Frietjes (talk) 16:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

note, an updated version is in Module:UserLinks/sandbox2, with a demonstration, here

count link in Jimbo Wales (talk · contribs · count) vs. Jimbo Wales (talk · contribs · count)

Frietjes (talk) 16:28, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for the fix! — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 02:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am coming from Wikipedia:SIGCLEAN#Signature_cleanup and a related TfD, in which we are trying to find a way to substitute a signature after the fact. We're testing variants of {{User}} that are more subst-friendly, and may eventually merge one into that template. Since this is a signature, WP:SIGLEN may have some weight in the matter, and there are some span tags being generated from this template that signatures don't usually use. The sandbox for {{toolbar}} now has an option to remove the span providing the plainlinks class. That option could be passed through here from {{User}}, which does not need that class. If anyone has any comments regarding this possible change, please reply.

Also, we were wondering about the function of the span enclosing the output of this template. It does not seem to apply any styling or have any attributes. (It seems to have been used to apply an id in the past, as other templates did. That was removed in Special:Diff/484515210, but the span tag was left. Originally, there was no span tag.) It doesn't take up much room, and I am not very concerned about it, but thought I'd ask.

Thank you. —PC-XT+ 07:54, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually been meaning to rewrite this module for a while, as the code is quite spaghettified. This is a good excuse to finally do it, so I will try and work up some code in the next day or so and report my progress back here. Just passing through the parameter to Module:Toolbar and removing the span tags wouldn't be difficult, but it would probably be better if we applied all the changes to the main module at once. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 12:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It does make sense to do it all at once. —PC-XT+ 22:00, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's all up live now - all that remains to do is to update the documentation, and convert the other user templates to use safesubst. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:05, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks great! Thank you for doing all of that, it was a big job! —PC-XT+ 07:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please replace:

	function linkFunctions.c(snippets)
		-- Contributions
		return makeWikilink(
			snippets.interwiki,
			-1,
			'Contributions/' .. snippets.username,
			message('display-contributions')
		)
	end

with

	function linkFunctions.c(snippets)
		-- Contributions
		return makeWikilink(
			snippets.interwiki,
			-1,
			'Contribs/' .. snippets.username,
			message('display-contributions')
		)
	end

so that we can save five characters when this template is used in section headers (which ends up in edit summaries). — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 15:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 06:26, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please can we have a whois link, for use with IP addresses? It would allow me to convert quite a few templates to use this module. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.robtex.com/ip/{{{1}}}.html#whois

has been suggested on Template talk:IPvandal. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:07, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another candidates to be added:

• https://www.robtex.com/rbls/{{{1}}}.html

— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:21, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: Now added with the link code "whois". — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 12:32, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, what's the rbls link? Give me a link code, a display value, and a short description and I'll add it for you. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 12:37, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

• RBL - not really sure what it stands for but Template:IPvandal has the link.
• And Template:Proxyip6 has a "Tor" link - but it's not currently working. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: Aha, I see it stands for "realtime blacklist". I've added that one as well, with the code "rbl". — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 14:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A few more please:

• info Not working properly
• http
• RDNS
• trace Not working

— Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:27, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: I've added the two working ones. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 10:04, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As of a couple days ago, bh worked in the template. Now it gives an error. It appears to be a valid Wiki, so I'm not sure why it has been removed (or where to turn to find the edit that removed it). Thanks, ThaddeusB (talk) 14:57, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@ThaddeusB: See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 137#AutoWikiBrowser unusable due to missing lang name in sitematrix, Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser/Bugs#Unable to log in, phab:T91240 and phab:T99059. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could a code linking to the user's AfC review history also be added? The tool is here. — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 00:26, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr. Stradivarius: I just wrote Special:Diff/645550026 to wrap "deleted contributions" and "block user" links in sysop-show, since they're completely useless to non-admins. It looks rather hacky because the naïve way of doing it results in extra dots showing up for non-admins. Do you have any comments on it before it goes live? Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:30, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr. Stradivarius and Jackmcbarn: it seems that "deleted contributions" and "block user" are not hidden to non-sysops. Was this useful functionality removed at some stage? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:02, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: I checked using WikiBlame, and it seems it was never added to the main module at all. This makes sense, as Jackmcbarn has never edited the main module. While I'm five and a half years late in replying, it does sound like a good feature that we should implement. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 15:15, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes I see Jack's edit was to the sandbox. Well this would be good if you can implement. It arose as a request by Username6892 on Template talk:IPvandal. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:59, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well I read this as a very very slow consensus for a common-sense change. I'd implement it myself, but am not confident enough in my Lua knowledge. @Elli: Can you take a look? -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 12:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Tamzin: looking at it I'm not sure if people would be happy if this change was made, given there's like four participants here vs hundreds who use this template. Technically this should not be too hard though. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:11, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is it controversial? Basically every template that links to sysop-only features wraps them in sysop-show. I noticed this because at AIV, {{IPVandal}} uses this template but {{Vandal}} doesn't (for whatever reason), and thus I see the "block", etc., links on {{vandal}} with the CSS highlighting I have for sysop-show content, but see them unadorned for {{IPVandal}}. In my opinion this is just bringing this template in line with most others, and four (now five) editors commenting is enough; but if you want to leave this open for further discussion (maybe cross-post somewhere), I defer to you. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 15:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on a way to use the template without a ping to the user? 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 05:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Add |noping= preventing a wikilink to the user, using an external link.— Qwerfjkltalk 23:01, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm... @Qwerfjkl did you test your changes in the sandbox? I added no ping functionality to the sandbox version of this template. Wait did we do the exact same thing? 🤣 Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 22:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done for now: Please sort out the desired implementation. Izno (talk) 07:37, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please implement my changes in the sandbox.

Rationale: it adds the ability to not ping a user in a user link, important for stuff like AIV reporting where pinging would only feed the trolls. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 22:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per above. Please sort out implementation. --Izno (talk) 07:38, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno What do you mean? Is there more work that needs to be done on the sandbox? Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 16:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Awesome Aasim, noping doesn't seem to work - Example (talk · contribs · email)— Qwerfjkltalk 16:43, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See this in the testcases: Example (talk · contribs · email) Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 16:54, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Also see if this generates a ping for you: Qwerfjkl Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 16:57, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Awesome Aasim, oops, I forgot the /sandbox. Nevermind. — Qwerfjkltalk 17:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, the fact there were apparently two different editors with two different implementations at around the same time. If ya'll agree about what you want, feel free to enable one of the tpers. Izno (talk) 20:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Izno, I'm sorry, that was a misunderstanding by @Awesome Aasim - I made no implementation. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since there appears to be no conflict with my edit I will turn on my edit request. We are only human so misunderstandings happen. Aasim - Herrscher of Wikis ❄️ 21:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Completed. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^put'r there 16:48, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've implemented Special:Nuke for {{Vandal}} in the sandbox. If noone objects to this I intend on taking this live in a couple days. --Trialpears (talk) 19:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It was a long week but this is now  Done. --Trialpears (talk) 03:14, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

On Module:UserLinks/extra, both links to dnswatch.info and stopforumspam.com can be upgraded from HTTP to HTTPS. NM 01:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Trialpears (talk) 01:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]