Template talk:Editnotices/Page/Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/Current consensus

Template-protected edit request on 22 March 2020
Please add the following edit notice to this page mirroring the one at Template:Editnotices/Page/Talk:Donald Trump/Current consensus. (It's perhaps a little extreme, but it gets the job done and will be seen only by a small group of EC editors and I'm too lazy to redesign it.) For further context, see Talk:2019–20_coronavirus_pandemic.

Sdkb (talk) 18:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅  P.I. Ellsworth   ed.  put'r there 19:35, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 4 May 2020
Please change this editnotice to Talk:COVID-19 pandemic/Current consensus given the page move. — &thinsp; J 947  [cont] 03:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 03:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 3 October 2020
this warning is far too extreme, remove. --Investigatory (talk) 14:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC) Investigatory (talk) 14:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Definitely not attracting editors....but perhaps fix color and reword to be friendly. This is a problem with the approach some have....more interested in tell others what not to do over encouraging editing.-- Moxy 🍁 15:09, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The editnotice here was copied from Template:Editnotices/Page/Talk:Donald Trump/Current consensus I believe, which has the same issue.ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree with the above. This message is far too intimidating and jarring. I suggest it's toned down or removed. Arcturus (talk) 17:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * If you or anyone else wants to redesign this notice and turn it into a template (say, Current consensus editnotice), feel free. I agree that it's probably a little too extreme, but on the other hand, it's very low on my list of priorities. A "friendly" notice that "encourages editing" is exactly the wrong approach here, since no one should be editing the list unless they are sufficiently experienced and the consensus is sufficiently clear that an "intimidating" editnotice won't scare them. Remember that there was debate about whether non-admins should even be allowed to edit the list. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 19:43, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
 * ❌ The correct venue for saying "this edit notice shouldn't exist at all" is TfD, not an edit request. To be clear, I'm not objecting to someone else suggesting a toned-down wording, but no specific wording has been suggested, and thus there is nothing for a template editor to do right now. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:09, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

I suggest the following text for the banner;

'Attention.'

''Please review current established consensus before editing this template. Changes against the established consensus without prior discussion are likely to be quicky reverted.''

Also, get rid of the yellow (suggest pale orange instead), reduce the font size and get rid of the warning exclamation mark. As it stands, the banner is jarring, intimidating, threatening and unnecessary. It flies in the face of Jimbo's "you can edit this right now" statement. Arcturus (talk) 16:56, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * The biggest problem we've had with the banner so far (including in the most recent edit) is editors not adhering to the rule that the numbers are permanent. If you're going to redesign, that's the most important thing to add.
 * I still don't quite get the invokation of the "anyone can edit" ethos: that applies to plenty of areas on Wikipedia, but not all (e.g. Main page), and current consensus lists are absolutely not one of them. They are appropriately restricted, since they need to be stable and reflect the judgement of consensus by experienced Wikipedians in contentious areas. We don't invite brand new editors to close discussions, and this is a step even above that. It should be an intimidating page to edit. And honestly, the quality of the editing patterns here make me somewhat regret petitioning for lowering the protection level from admin to EC. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 17:58, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's try it.-- Moxy 🍁 21:13, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Redacting myself being overly harsh; original is in edit history. As pointed out above, we should be making the changes at Current consensus editnotice, since we want to fix the notice for the other pages with current consensus lists, too. If there are no objections, I will replace the notice here with a transclusion of Current consensus editnotice, where I've made a few further edits to note the permanent number rule. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 23:35, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I know the existence of an editnotice isn't necessarily the promotion of a concept, but I'm wary of creating a template for it and encouraging further usage of this idea. It may work well at COVID, but at Donald Trump it has created one of the biggest messes of a large scale article on Wikipedia, with 50 "current consensuses" (and multiple broader than the discussion they 'represent', or backed by 1-2 reply 'discussions'). It's egregiously misused. Perhaps it is not the sole reason the article is such bad shape, but it certainly does not help. The concept shouldn't be encouraged further imo, except in the most extreme cases 'necessary'. In any case, the content of the template is a big improvement. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:59, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That's interesting; I wasn't aware that there was opposition to the idea of current consensus lists. It's somewhat hard to have a counterfactual, since we've never had to deal with a topic quite like Donald Trump before, and it's possible that it'd be in even worse shape without the list. I don't see having an editnotice template really encouraging the creation of additional current consensus lists, but if you want to bring up the idea of the lists in a broader forum, I'll come with an open mind to the idea that they may be counterproductive. For now, though, we should go with the present reality that they exist. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 02:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a good idea...support change.-- Moxy 🍁 00:54, 5 October 2020 (UTC)