Template talk:Copyvio
From Biocrawler, the free encyclopedia.
| Contents |
Re-wording and automation
I've re-worked the current template. Why? It conveyed all of the essential information, but in a reader-unfriendly format. The same information is presented in a better format here: User:Feco/Templates/copyvioDRAFT.
The current, live template also confuses editors who flag articles as copyvios... the current text makes it seem that the pages are automatically added to WP:CP. This is not the case! I added a notice at the top of my draft template to make it clear that copyvios must be manually added to WP:CP.
In a perfect world, there would be a mechanism that automatically adds new copyvios to the WP:CP. I don't know if that's possible, but I tried to design my tempate to capture the necessary data that could be auto-added to WP:CP.
Also, I'm not sure about some of the date-stamp functionality if/when this template is transferred from my user space to the template space. Someone with more knowledge of wiki coding might need to tweak/add/delete to correct any mistakes I've made.
Please take a look at User:Feco/Templates/copyvioDRAFT and tell me what you think. Feco 01:34, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks Feco. I've seen instances where editors posting copyvio material have pulled off the copyvio notice without even reading it. The instructions are much clearer now, for all parties. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:57, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
- Feco, I think your new template is fine. Some suggestions...
- Reduce the numbers of words wherever possible to help clarity. It should be noted that the can be removed from the second to last bullet, for example.
- Is there a way to make the this temporary subpage link more inviting? I'm thinking positioning and possibly text style --Duk 18:48, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Revisions made per users' suggestions. Can someone with knowledge of wiki automation review to verify that the arguments (url, text, comment) and functions (using subst function to get "static" dates) will work? Feco 19:19, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Another suggestion, place a note on Biocrawler talk:Copyright problems soliciting comments--Duk 20:05, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Spam vandalism?
This template is great, but it doesn't address the problem of people who just use copyvio as a form of spam vandalism. If we use this template, we'll still be creating a link to their page, which will still help these vandals increase their pagerank. Can we modify this template somehow so that it doesn't actually create a link to the offending url? - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:32, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)
- The page get's deleted in a week or so. (Assuming it is vandalism) so I don't think this is a major issue. JesseW 07:37, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Actually, it is a significant issue. With the correct timing, that week-long window makes for quite effective Googebombing. However, being able to do things such as {{copyvio|url=ISBN 00000000000}} is quite useful. The easy way to neuter advertising hyperlinks, which doesn't involve modifying this template, is given at User:Uncle G/Biocrawler triage. Uncle G 15:53, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
Format
I've made some changes to this... OvenFresh☺ 21:18, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Sorry but I made other changes. violet/riga (t) 11:52, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
What do you guys think of this?
Vague | Rant 09:22, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
- I quite like the strength of it, but don't really like the border. This is mainly because when signing it the signature appears outside of the border and doesn't quite look right. violet/riga (t) 11:52, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I like that quite a bit. Although maybe with a #f8fcff background. OvenFresh☺ 22:27, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- How about now? Same link, but I've fiddled with it a little. Kind of ugly markup, but the Wiki is smart enough to close the table if I leave off the end. So you can sign it, and it will sit inside the border, and then it will close. The only thing is, I believe that Category:Possible copyright violations will appear within the border, which may bother some. - Vague | Rant 11:49, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)
- Looks good to me. violet/riga (t) 11:51, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- I like it! —OvenFresh☺ 02:05, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
History link broken
On articles with two-word titles, the "history link" link doesn't work, because a space goes in the URL. Everything before that space becomes the link target, and everything after it goes in the text. Is there a way to fix this? Right now the link is not only ugly but nonfunctional. —Etaoin 01:32, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Table Closed
I've closed the table for the copyvio template because it distorts several pages. There is the option to make a another {{{1}}} thing so you could type {{copyvio|url=something|~~~~}} but a lot of people would not like that, so we could create a new signature template for copyvios with that included. For example: User:Oven Fresh/copyvio which when used would look like User:Oven Fresh/copyvio/Temp. —OvenFresh☺ 18:25, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Well, I've made it. Template:cvs. So... {{cvs|url=example.com|~~~~}} ! —OvenFresh☺ 18:37, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Having the table closed, of course, makes the signature appear outside the border, which could also be considered as "distorting" pages. What pages are you referring to? Since this template is always used the same way ( {{copyvio|url=...}} ~~~~ ), all pages should look the same, shouldn't they? Brianjd 06:47, 2004 Dec 29 (UTC)
- Tutorial pages and partial copyright violation pages are effected. The template:cvs table closes, but it has a {{{2}}} near the end, in which your signature can be placed. So <nowiki> {{cvs|http://google.com/whatever/|~~~~}} would close the table and keep your signature within the table. —OvenFresh☺ 17:00, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Bad color choice?
Is it me or are the (linked) words "copyright infringement" at the top of the template all but unreadable, being dark blue on a black background? (This is true for me in IE 5.5 & 6.0, as well as Netscape 4.79 & 6.2.) - dcljr 23:54, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- There was a workaround placed there but it wasn't working. I've changed it slightly now and think it's better. violet/riga (t) 00:03, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Prominent link to /Temp page
171.64.66.154's edit of 22:52, 15 Feb 2005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Copyvio&diff=10320589&oldid=10303345), summarised as "reorganize, since people keep putting comments on the temp page", has completely de-emphasised the link to the /Temp page. Has anyone else found it to be true that people were putting comments on /Temp pages? I don't recall a big problem with that, and I was looking at a lot of week-old copyvios, but then maybe RC patrol was deleting them all. I'd rather have the big link (Rewrite article at: [[{{PAGENAME}}/Temp]]) back, myself. --rbrwr± 22:23, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Changing wording of notice
Can we change the wording of the notice to remind whomever flags something copyvio that they must manually post a link on WP:CP? I have found many, many users who flag things copyvio, but assume the squiggle-bracket function automatically posts the article to WP:CP. The current text of the notice even states that the article is "now posted to" WP:CP. Feco 21:29, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Square brackets bug-1951
There is no way of "escaping" square brackets in a URL. You have to replace "[" by "%5B" and "]" by "%5D". This has been recorded as bug 1951 (http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1951) in the bug recordng system for MediaWiki. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:37, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Order of info in box
I looked thru this talk page (but didn't look for any archives) before making these changes. I rearranged things slightly and added a tiny clarification (I agree that it shouldn't be wordy, but we lost a little info that made the thing make more sense). Most important things are that one must not edit THIS article and that if you have the copyright or permission, you should let us know. Elf | Talk 17:40, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
