Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Cases/Overview

Semi-protected edit request on 12 February 2016
If you have a user account, log in first. If you do not yet have an account, you may create one; after 4 days and 10 edits, you will be able to edit semi-protected pages.

The see. 114.215.114.25 (talk) 13:49, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ❌. What exactly do you want? Please, be more specific.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:37, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Suggested format change
The current layout requires a signifcant amount of screen width to avoid wrapping to two lines per entry (and taking up twice the height). This could be improved somewhat with a couple of minor changes:
 * Abbreviate the "Last ..." headers somewhat so they don't force the column to be wider than the typical data. Use multi-row header to better show relationship of timestamps to users.
 * Change the  suffix on the three timestamps to.
 * Abbreviate the rendered Status values (e.g., "More info req. (CU)" → "Info?/CU") from.

In this typical case, in my environment, this results in a table that doesn't wrap above 1040px width, compared with the existing 1430px, a significant 390px reduction.

becomes:

Potential issue: do people have tools that they use to post-process this table that depend on the Status values and timestamp formats (though I'll note that the backup version of the table from DQ has different formats as well). I'm not an admin, but an occasional user of the page. —[ Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 22:27, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I like this a lot. My one comment is that while I know what "Z" means, I'm not sure most people do.  "UTC" is probably more well known.  Maybe make the Z be a wikilink to Zulu time?  Or, at least include an explanatory note under the table.  -- RoySmith (talk) 03:09, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * That's even better. Put a note at the bottom "all times in UTC", or in the headers, and then remove the Zs altogether. —[ Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 08:37, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Like this, which is down to 1000px (vs. the original 1430px): — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlanM1 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 29 November 2019 (UTC)


 * It looks like an improvement to me, but the main challenge would be to change the behavior of, the bot that updates the table, so we would have to get on board, and unfortunately it looks like he has become relatively inactive as of late. Mz7 (talk) 02:08, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Understood. Any comment on the abbreviation of the Status column values and other format changes possibly affecting other gadgets that might rely on the values/formats? —[ Alan M 1 (talk) ]— 04:08, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't mind the changes, but please use rowspan="2" for the first three column headers.
 * {|class="wikitable sortable" width="100%"

! rowspan="2" | Investigation !! rowspan="2" | Status !! rowspan="2" | Time filed (UTC) !! colspan="2" | Last user edit !! colspan="2" | Last clerk/CU edit ! User !! Time (UTC) !! User !! Time (UTC)


 * }
 * —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 05:55, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * You could bum a few more pixels:
 * {|class="wikitable sortable" width="100%"

! rowspan="2" | Investigation !! rowspan="2" | Status !! rowspan="2" | Filed at (UTC) !! colspan="2" | Last user edit !! colspan="2" | Last clerk/CU edit ! User !! Time (UTC) !! User !! Time (UTC)


 * }
 * -- RoySmith (talk) 13:58, 1 December 2019 (UTC)


 * I've removed the trailing "UTC" from the timestamps and moved the table header into the template SPIstatusheader so you should be able to adapt it to your liking. Cheers, Amalthea  21:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me and a welcome improvement if the current table is problematic for some users. For me on a 1600x900 display I have never seen it wrap, but I can see how it would for users on smaller screens. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No further comment, so I've put the last version from above live in the header template. Feel free to tweak it there directly! Amalthea  08:53, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I know it's kind of late for more suggestions, but I'm wondering if we'd do better to eliminate the absolute timestamps entirely and go to relative times. So, instead of "2019-12-01 19:42", just "3d20h" for "3 days, 20 hours ago".  Or, even 3+20.  Takes up a lot less space, still easy to sort, and quickly shows people what they probably want to know even faster than absolute times.  You could even shove the full absolute timestamp into some hidden field that gives you a mouseover.  -- RoySmith (talk) 15:37, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I for one like to be able to copy&paste and search for timestamps, but if desired you can modify the entry template and use something like time ago in there. Amalthea  15:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)