Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 28 days are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

Being discussed here Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:39, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is per Template:Ambox documentation. Orange is used for major article issues. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:55, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

True, every other major issue template uses an orange color. However, the UDP template is a special case as the UDP template is visible (to my knowledge, all other templates only show up when you access 'page issues') when viewing Wikipedia from a mobile device. Having a bold red coloration, I feel, is a stark warning for potential undisclosed paid editors. I see no reason to change it to orange.--SamHolt6 (talk) 21:04, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We also want readers to notice this. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:32, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We use red for deletion notices only. This is not a deletion notice; therefore keeping it red is inconsistent. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no comments then I propose to change it back to orange — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:10, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MSGJ: This has been red for a long time and has been discussed previoulsy so there should be a consensus to change it to orange which currently, I do not see. Regarding We use red for deletion notices only see e.g. {{Copypaste}}. Red is equally suitable here, given that the context is potentially legally dubious per laws on covert advertising. SmartSE (talk) 12:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This template boldly now marks pages as NOINDEX (i.e. excluded from search engine indices if it was created less than 90 days prior to the tag being placed) per this discussion. It's not too late to have your say at that link. MER-C 19:29, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Late support for the archived suggestion. This can be archived now as well. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:46, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've undone this bold edit. No-indexing article-space content should not be done without a clear consensus in a widely-announced, centralised RfC. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:31, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing: Which policy/guideline says that? SmartSE (talk) 17:30, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ITYM "which policy says we can hide article-space content from search engines" - to which the answer is "none that I know of". I'm sure you'll tell me if I've missed one. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:48, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus in the linked discussion was to do so. You've unilaterally overturned that, seemingly just because you don't like it. SmartSE (talk) 23:21, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm sure you'll tell me if I've missed one." None, then. See also WP:LOCALCONSENSUS. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. A lot of things with this template are way above status quo for accepted policy. --QEDK (後 ☕ 桜) 14:21, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Would like to know how to remove "paid contributor template" from wikipedia pages. Please guide — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumargau (talk • contribs) 03:28, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The documentation of {{COI}} includes (emphasis in original):

Like the other neutrality-related tags, if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start this discussion, then any editor is justified in removing the tag without warning. Be careful not to violate the policy against WP:OUTING users who have not publicly self-disclosed their identities on the English Wikipedia.

I propose to add the same to the documentation of this template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:55, 9 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No objections, so done. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:26, 28 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• This needs to be discussed first by more than one editor. It is very hard to start a discussion without outing an editor so this is not a reasonable stipulation in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 19:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]