Template talk:AIV

Current Issues

 * The template has major errors when displaying complex, fancy signatures. It is currently being worked on at the moment.
 * Fixed by me, however, the fix requires the template to be substituted, which it should be anyway. Change: You no longer need to put the four tildes with your comment, signature will be added automatically (diff).  -- FastLizard4  (Talk•Index•Sign) 20:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Revamp
It's an interesting idea, but as currently implemented it doesn't seem useful to me (no offense). If we're going for something like this, I'd highly recommend following long-standing examples like RFPP or CUU. Common elements for these include:


 * Transcluded, saving text on the page while editing
 * Short names are easier to remember and type; I've redirected both AIV and aiv here
 * Signature omitted from template, in part for ease of transclusion, in part to allow for additional comments
 * Switch statements allow a shorthand input to expand to a helpful message

Example mock-up at User:Luna Santin/sandbox/X1 (permalink). Feel free to tinker. Code looks like this:

I was looking to add something to the effect of "Not ready for a block yet, will monitor," but couldn't figure a good name to call it by.

Beyond that, any comments, suggestions, or in particular any objections to replacing the current template with something akin to this code? In particular, we need a list of regularly repeated messages (I've realized something about shared IPs might be good, say). – Luna Santin  (talk) 21:25, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Went ahead and made this happen, will update documentation in a moment. – Luna Santin  (talk) 23:24, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

While I did quit monitoring WP:AIV some time ago 'cause of the attitute to biting that is widely diffused among the administrator who patrols it, I must say that this approach looks too bureaucratic. What's the problem with the current one? If it ain't b0rken...  Snowolf How can I help? 04:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have to admit I'll probably keep typing out my responses; if some people want to use a template, though, I'd rather give them one that's up to the task. – Luna Santin  (talk) 09:58, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Templates make people's trigger easier, I fear :(  Snowolf How can I help? 15:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * In regards to this one: Page protected {[AIV|p}}, maybe we should add "consider using WP:RFPP in future, or words to that effect. I like the current template. Additionally, the template maybe should be lengthened to say "AIV is for obvious vandalism only, or words to that effect.  Steve Crossin   (talk to me)  05:51, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Impact on AIV HElperbots
So, if something is tagged with a template that would indicate that the report is declined (Stale, for example), then do the AIV Helperbots know to remove such reports? I think it would be ideal for the bots to remove such reports after a given time (5 minutes?), which would both permit admins and the reporting user to see the result of the report, and would reduce the edit conflicts generated when someone attempts to remove such reports manually. Thoughts? UltraExactZZ Claims~ Evidence 04:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Send this idea through to Krellis, who is the bot developer of this amazing bot, and he should be able to integrate it somewhere :) &mdash; E  talk aussie 12:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yeh that would be a good idea. but i think the problem would be people don't actually always say the same thing. I could say "half an hour" or "10 mins" or "15 minutes" Maybe if we set a set was e.g. in minutes to add these times in. Then add this to the template so that it automatically says minutes and then the bot will only have to look for the number in the template.  ·Add§hore·  T alk /C ont 08:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Page protected as well as page deleted?
There's a |d option in the current template to note that the page that's the target of vandalism has been deleted. How about the same option for protection? I've fielded a few requests where the expedient thing to do, rather than block IPs repeatedly, was to protect a page. However, the IP would still warrant being watched. Would that be a useful option for this template to have? —C.Fred (talk) 04:12, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

u
As of tonight, the switch contained two matches for "u"; I've edited the template so that directs users to WP:UAA rather than WP:AN3. Obviously having duplicate matches is problematic, and UAA appeared to be the preferred target based on the template's documentation. If the particular fix I applied is problematic, or if a better solution is available, let me know. – Luna Santin  (talk) 08:30, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I take responsibility for that. When I added the 3rr bit, I copy/pasted the code for uaa and, apparently, left the u in the switch by mistake. I’m just surprised that it took almost 3 1/2 months to spot. Sorry for the trouble and thanks for catching it! — Travis talk  12:24, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Ahh. Thanks for clearing that up -- I was thinking I might have an angry mob demanding I give back their u shortcut. :) Easy enough mistake to make. I caught it by random chance, when giving somebody a hard time for (unintentionally) referring an iffy username to AN3. – Luna Santin  (talk) 17:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

SSP/SPI
SSP and RFCU have been merged into WP:SPI. I wouldn't know the first thing about changing this template to reflect that, but this, Template:AIV/doc and MediaWiki:Editnotice-4-Administrator intervention against vandalism all need to be changed. Cross posting this to Wikipedia talk:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Protonk (talk) 01:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Expanded abbreviations would be nice
This is a useful template indeed, but I'm sick of doing this:


 * 1) Look at a report on AN/I
 * 2) Decide it's an edit war
 * 3) Remember that one of those very useful templates points the reporter to the edit warring noticeboard
 * 4) Realise I've forgotten which one it is (again)
 * 5) Open the "Adminstrator instructions" list of templates
 * 6) Click on each WP:FOOGLYBOO in the links that say "This noticeboard is for persistent vandals and spammers only. Consider taking this report to WP:FOOGLYBOO " until I find the one for edit warring (WP:ANEW, I think).

Could the template in some way mention the full name of the applicable FOOGLYBOO? For instance rather than "Consider taking this report to WP:UAA " have " WP:Usernames for administrator attention " or if this is too verbose reword the messages in toto to read (as applicable)

"This appears to be an edit war rather than persistent vandalism and/or spamming". Please consider taking this report to WP:ANEW"?

I'd be bold and do it myself but firstly I don't know if that would choke Helperbot and secondly the last time I edited a template I suspect it caused the failure of Bear Stearns - templates scare me. Tonywalton Talk 23:14, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Spelling error
I would correct this myself ordinarily but this seems like a fairly complicated template and I don't want to mess with it,  states to "Re-report if this user resumes vandalising." I believe "vandalizing" is spelt with a "z" not an "s". Someone fix please? Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 22:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * BrE vs. AmE... (vandalising) –xenotalk 22:31, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * You know, I wasn't actually aware that there was an alternate spelling for "vandalizing", learn something new everyday I guess... Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 22:33, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

False Positives
I've posted a proposal for an additional parameter to this template. The proposal is here. Any and all comments are welcome. Thanks, UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 20:08, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

EDIT REQUEST
hi, i want on the page, the "link=" text should be removed so there will be a link to the image name instead of checking the wikitext all times, example:  has no link to the image name, while  has a link to the image name. please can an editor remove the  text in the images? 46.227.72.88 (talk) 09:28, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: That is not part ot this template, but part of the parent template and changing it there will break many template and non-template uses across the project. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:39, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Should we add a canned response for rangeblocked IPs?
I am not an administrator so I will elect not to include this for now, but would it be possible to include a canned response in the  parameter to indicate that a rangeblock has been applied? Tentatively, I was hoping it would be included with File:Pictogram voting Novote.png, like it is for when a relevant page is protected, to indicate the alternative action has been taken. Jalen D. Folf  (talk)  02:04, 22 September 2019 (UTC)