Template talk:User in region

Options #9 and #10
I would like to add options #9 and #10 to this template by inserting the following lines: and changing the final lines to: Yours aye, Buaidh  05:09, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:13, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Buaidh, 27 August 2011
I would like to add option #RIL to this template by inserting the following line:

Yours aye, Buaidh  22:19, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Not exactly sure where to put this. Can you make the change in the sandbox and I'll then copy over. -- WOSlinker (talk) 20:14, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Request disabled. Please reactivate when code is in sandbox. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:12, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from, 7 October 2011
I would like to add option #RIX to this template by inserting the following line:



Please see the Template:Uir/sandbox. Thanks.

Buaidh 20:20, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Can I ask ... what is the purpose of integrating these RIX, RIL, RWP options into this template? They are not related to where the user is from, so do not seem to fit within the purpose of this template. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:24, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Request disabled for now due to lack of response. Apart from the question above I would be interested in rewriting this template more efficiently. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
 * RIX, ROL, and RWP are metatemplate options that use Template:Uir to generate a linkbox to the index of region-related articles, the outline of the region, and the regional WikiProject.
 * Template:Uir is the latest of many generations of regional userbox templates. The efficiency of this template can certainly be improved, although its functionality is the result of extended discussions.   Buaidh  16:00, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

The 'edit protected' says, an editor unfamiliar with the subject matter could complete the requested edit immediately - which does not apply here; it's a bit too technical. So, I've placed a request on Village_pump_(technical) - and I'll check back here too; but I tn'd the request, here, for now - while it is done.  Chzz  ► 03:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 1 June 2015
I would like to alter options 55 and 56 to enlarge the default display size of the demonym to 10 points. This code has been tested in the sandbox and is shown below:
 * 55=This user is proud to be
 * 56=This user is

Yours aye, Buaidh  18:36, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Padlock-bronze-open.svg Not done: The page's protection level and/or your user rights have changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — Mr. Stradivarius  ♪ talk ♪ 01:55, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Image too small in mobile browser
Hello. I am not sure what the problem is, but the image in the template appears very small and impossible to see in mobile browsers. This is in contrast with all the other templates in my user page that appear fine. I am not sure how to fix this, but help would be appreciated as this template is used in so many pages. --Ita140188 (talk) 03:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 18 July 2018
Option 55's line should be re-balanced as in :-

|55=This user is proud to be

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 11:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
 * , what do you mean by "rebalanced"? What imbalance is it exhibiting? You seem to be replacing HTML character entities with their Unicode/ASCII equivalents, but they were probably escaped for a reason. Have you applied this change to the Template:Uir/sandbox and tested it in Template:Uir/testcases?  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  12:07, 22 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you letting me know about the testcases, it seems amongst other than option 55, causes the parser to become confused, and see a missing tag (most likely a B due to implied handling. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 12:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 21 October 2018
Replace the first line with. This edit allows for the use of right. When it is set to a value besides no, false, n, 0 etc it calls userbox-r instead of userbox, allowing for the image to be on the right side of the userbox instead of the left side. – BrandonXLF   (t@lk)  19:34, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I created test cases at Template:Uir/testcases – BrandonXLF   (t@lk)  20:49, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * none of your testcases seem to be using the new parameter you are suggesting adding. Can you please write some? -- Zack mann  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:09, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I added them here Template:Uir/testcases. – BrandonXLF   (t@lk)  22:16, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Just for future reference... Test cases do not need to cover every single permutation... Just the basics. You could probably do without 95% of those cases. -- Zack mann  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:18, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Zack mann  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 22:19, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Please document this new option on the /doc page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 04:26, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 12 October 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Jerm (talk) 17:36, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Template:Uir → Template:User in region – The fact that it was considered necessary to add to the documentation page is clear evidence that the name fails to adequately describe the functionality of the template in violation of WP:TPN * Pppery * it has begun...  15:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Support. An improvement over "Uir" which is meaningless. --Gonnym (talk) 23:23, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom and per Gonnym. "Uir" which is indeed meaningless to anyone except the template's creator. -- Brown HairedGirl  (talk) • (contribs) 01:48, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Support as per Gonnym. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:44, 14 October 2020 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Template-protected edit request on 21 August 2023
Fix the "This user loves" section of this template.

In options that start with "This user loves", the adjectival form is incorrectly used. For example, a user template will say "This user loves the cuisine of Lithuanian" instead of the correct noun form "This user loves the cuisine of Lithuania". For more blunders, see the "User in Lithuania" template, for example.

Of course, I request that all errors of this type be corrected. Mayhair (talk) 18:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:23, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 19 October 2023
Edit as per :

"member" → "participant" per consensus at Categories for discussion/Log/2023 October 1. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 07:39, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I do not think that there is consensus to make this change, and I am skeptical that it will work as intended.


 * Addressing the second point: it looks like you are changing member to participant, which I'm guessing will break some existing transclusions.


 * Addressing the first point: I have already changed the code to use the "participants" category name, which is what was covered in the CFD. I think that changing the wording in individual userboxes to say "participant" instead of "member" will require a second, widely advertised RFC. If this template is actually broken somewhere, please link to an example page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:04, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Also,, please do not change documentation to reflect how you wish a template worked. Documentation should reflect the actual functioning of the template. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:10, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, if changing the wording in individual userboxes to say "participant" instead of "member" will require a second, widely advertised RFC then we should also revert (by  and you) on, right? Actually, those edits are the reason why I thought we had to change the wording and hence requested this similar template to be edited too. Thanks for for clarifying my doubts tho. I'm going to revert those 2 edits, let me know if there's anything wrong. Est. 2021 (talk · contribs) 01:40, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I think similar edits are needed at Template:Regional user categories/member – please would you take a look? and also check whether I got this right: – Fayenatic  L ondon 11:27, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * That template subpage has no transclusions. I have nominated its parent template, and all subpages, for deletion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:15, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't think a widely advertised RfC is necessary: Essentially the same arguments apply to userboxes as to categories, associated changes were something I forecasted at the CfD, and I haven't come across any pushback after that was closed, nor more recently when I've changed a few hundred templates in Category:WikiProject user templates (just a few Thanks notifications).Given that, I'm forecasting my intention to implement this request (with revised coding, as here; it appears to be working in the testcases) in a few days per WP:SILENT unless there are objections. If you'd like additional scrutiny, feel free to send out invites to anywhere you feel this should be advertised to. Cheers, &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 05:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Be careful, I guess. I found when implementing the RFC that there were a lot of interlocking pieces and parts. – Jonesey95 (talk) 12:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Userboxes, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb }&#125;  talk 15:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I'm inclined to share Jonesey's worries here. This isn't as simple a template as the other one.  I doubt anyone will care as long as (1) nothing breaks and (2) they don't have to do anything.  For example,   should probably be an alias of the new   parameter, rather than being removed/replaced, so that none of the existing uses have to be updated.
 * Second, although I've personally been irritated with the "members" language for years, I'm not really impressed with the argument for ~banning it. When someone asks how to become a member, we should take that as a signal that they are looking for a sense of belonging.  The answer should be "Just put your name in this membership list and get busy editing" rather than "Let's claim that social groups don't have any members".  I wonder how long it will be before someone proposes the opposite move, on the quite reasonable grounds that 90% of the so-called "participants" aren't actually participating any longer, some of them because they're dead?  Or empties the categories of editors they deem to be non-participants?  WikiProject X had solved this problem with its bot-updated lists of active participants, but it's not being maintained any longer.  This isn't a bad solution, but I wonder if it's kind of missing the point. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:13, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Regarding the technical details, my implementation is different than that Est. 2021 proposed above. It's working in the sandbox/testcases, so while nothing is ever guaranteed, I'd be surprised if there were any issues.
 * And regarding the rest, I'd be supportive of distinguishing between active and non-active participants, given that categories (like everything else outside mainspace) are designed to aid in improving the encyclopedia, and to do that they have to be accurate. I think your view is reasonable, but overall at this point it seems like largely a matter of consistency — we made the decision at the large CfD to move to "participants," and this is in essence just a bit of follow-up implementation that flows from that. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 23:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅, given no explicit objections or blocking concerns above. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 20:16, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Just for clarity, on the off chance that someone might wonder later: Sdkb has correctly, even conservatively, interpreted my comments.  I do not object to this change. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:36, 4 February 2024 (UTC)