Template talk:User wikipedia/NP Patrol

Bifurcate wikilink
It seems that my edit summary did not thoroughly explain what I was doing and why. Short version: This userbox and the RC Patrol userbox had a certain unexplained difference from eachother, so I altered them both to make them analogous by incorporating an element of each into the other one.

Long version: Before, this userbox linked to Special:Newpages and not to WP:RCP (which is also about the NP patrol, despite its name). The RC Patrol userbox, on the other hand, linked to WP:RCP and not to Special:Recentchanges. Now, both link to their respective Special-namespace page and to the Wikipedia-namespace page that explains what both patrols are.

The reason why I changed both userboxes to incorporate an element of eachother, rather than just changing one to conform to the other, is because I think that linking to the respective Special-namespace pages and linking to the Wikipedia-namespace page are both good ideas and, had I wanted to choose just one, I wouldn't have known which to choose. This middle-ground doesn't clutter up the userboxes with any additional words, so I see no harm in splitting the two-word wikilink into two one-word wikilinks (or, in the case of the RC Patrol userbox, the three-word link into one two-word and one one-word links).

If you think that the userboxes shouldn't link to the Wikipedia-namespace page for some reason, or alternatively, shouldn't link to their respective Special-namespace pages, then I hope that you will explain your reasoning for this. Otherwise, if your revert was due to a misunderstanding of what I'd done and why, then I apologize for my unclear edit summary and hope that I have now provided a clear (if somewhat verbose) explanation. If I have not, please do not hesitate to ask for further clarification. Cheers! --Icarus 06:40, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Terrible userbox image for new page patrollers
The image for User wikipedia/NP Patrol is terrible.

People who do new page patrolling aren't police officers. This grumpy cop (even worse when viewed at full size) making a "HALT!" gesture is not friendly or encouraging, which is how we should be to new editors; even if they've made a new page that isn't very good. How would you feel if, as a new user, totally unfamiliar with Wikipedia culture, you received a message from someone, and went to their user page — only to see this? Can we please, together, find a better image to represent this activity. —  Scott  •  talk  11:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't have an issue with the current icon, but if an alternative is needed, perhaps a magnifying glass icon would serve? Or something reminiscent of a detective; perhaps a Sherlock Holmes deerstalker hat? Praemonitus (talk) 23:47, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I never thought about it, but you're right, it does send the wrong message. Like, "Stop trying to make articles! I'll have to write you up for all the errors you make!" I think [[File:Edit-find-replace.svg]] would be a much better image.-- Atlantima  ~ ✿ ~ ( talk ) 15:43, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Good points. I vaguely recall a discussion about this years ago, but it obviously didn't go anywhere. I'd support a change.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  21:06, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Interesting fact, the police icon is used on Speedy Deletion Wiki: "is this all you see on wikipedia when you are writing about your favorite band?" Okay, we definitely need a better image. Will look for other alternatives when I get the chance. FallingGravity (talk) 03:19, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That's all the evidence you need right there. Good suggestion,, I'd support that. ~  Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 17:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree with you that the image is inappropriate and uninviting and ought to be changed. I'd totally support a new image. Almost anything would be better. Jason Quinn (talk) 16:52, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Sample template using the icon embedded above:

Praemonitus (talk) 23:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Since no objections have surfaced, I've made the change. Thanks all! —  Scott  •  talk  16:30, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Blanking
This template is transcluded into 1410 pages, and you just blanked it without any explanation. May I know why?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:26, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The box is deprecated. Those users are no longer new page patrolers. See WP:NPR. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:36, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is a good solution. We should either:
 * delete this template, or
 * remove it from pages that transclude it, then revert it its original state, or
 * remove it from pages that transclude it, then redirect it to.
 * Keeping it blanked like this makes no sense.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  08:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * , The old notion of New Page Patrolling no longer exists. It's been replaced by a user right. You will have to remove it manually from the 1,400 pages that transclude it if you restore it. Definitely not redirect it anywhere. To keep it would be tantamount to letting any newbie or troll putting an Admin userbox on their user page, and if that were to happen, I would retire. The technical issue is that all userboxes are designed to populate a category too. One Wikilawyer seems to think anyone should still have the right to display these userboxes whether they have the user right or not. I'm getting rather fed up with arguing and the people who are trying to re-debate two RfC that were closed with an overwhelming consensus. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:45, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't really understand what your opinion is. Do you think that the current (blanked) state is OK? Or you think the template should be deleted? By the way, I also do not follow your logic. You say that [t]o keep it would be tantamount to letting any newbie or troll putting an Admin userbox on their user page, and if that were to happen, I would retire. As I know, we do let any newbie or troll putting an Admin userbox on their user page (from the technical point of view, although it is not allowed). We do not blank the template just to prevent non-admins putting it on their talk pages.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  08:52, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * That is correct - we don't blank the Admin ubox for the very reason that such a user right exists. New Page Patroller no longer exists. It was as valuable as a userbox that says "I am a hedgehog". On the other hand, there is no cat that is populated by an 'I am a hedgehog' userbox. A category now, of fake patrollers would be misused by people thinking they are accredited New Page Reviewers. I think bothe the template and its cat should be not only blanked, but deleted. I suggest you decide for yourself and use your admin tools to do what you like with it. As I see it, you have the choice: remove them all manually - and I can tell you that would take several hours unless you can use AWB or something, or delete the cat itself - then theoretically all the non 'substituted' templates will dissappear from the user pages. At least that's what I think  happens. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:04, 13 November 2016 (UTC)


 * I removed all transclusions using AutoWikiBrowser. I also removed translusion of other similar userboxes (like Template:User wikipedia/NP Patrol2). I also tried to delete those templates, but certain users objected, so I restored them. Since this template is not trancluded anywhere any more, and since it is not going to be deleted, I restored it to its original state before you blanked it.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  17:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * , thanks, that sounds like progress. Some people who have not the same 5-year familiarity of this project may not fully understand the implicaions of needing new pages to be reviewed by competent, accredited users, and the keeping of accurate categories/lito do it myself because after all these years the developer still refuses to port it to Mac, although a very high percentage of regular Wikipedia users use the Mac platform. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 18:03, 15 November 2016 (UTC)