Template talk:User page/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Template:User page. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Escape sequencing

I am making a change to this template, which involves replacing the url with this code: [http://%65%6E%2E%77%69%6B%69%70%65%64%69%61%2E%6F%72%67/%77%69%6B%69/{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAMEE}} http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{NAMESPACE}}:{{PAGENAMEE}}]

The reason for encoding the url in the first instance is that when people duplicate our content they often change every instance of 'wikipedia' to their own website. Here, the way the link appears will change, however the web page will still link to your wikipedia user page. Here is the rendered code: talk:User_page/Archive_1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template talk:User_page/Archive_1

--Alterego 05:54, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

works well! --Alterego 05:58, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it is not working that well for me-- When I follow the link created by the template, it redirects to the main page; maybe my browser is choking on it? I'm using Firefox 1.0.4 on Windows... --bleh fu talk fu June 28, 2005 15:07 (UTC)

It's the software upgrades. Should return to normal in a matter of time. « alerante ✆ ✉ » 28 June 2005 18:18 (UTC)

Hi Bleh, another reason is that when PAGENAME is used, spaces in page names are not translated so only the first word ends up in the URL, and the non-existent result is redirected to the main page. The solution is to use PAGENAMEE instead which translates spaces to underscores (see Help:Variable). This feature is a bit misunderstood so the template has been changed back and forth many times, leading to occasional problems with composite-name users (such as you and me). As of this writing it should work correctly. BTW Bleh I see you live in Montreal, so do I; I hope the heat is not bothering you too much these days. :) Lawrence Lavigne June 28, 2005 22:52 (UTC)

Gah... still not working. http://%65%6e%2e%77%69%6b%69%70%65%64%69%61%2e%6f%72%67/%77%69%6B%69/User:Lawrence_Lavigne, http://%65%6e%2e%77%69%6b%69%70%65%64%69%61%2e%6f%72%67/%77%69%6B%69/User:Bleh_fu still brings me back to the main page. Gah! Do these links work for other people? And BTW, at 42 degrees with humidex, I simply cannot function. I hate it :/ --bleh fu talk fu June 29, 2005 01:34 (UTC)

Let's wait until 1.5 comes out of beta before making any changes --Alterego June 29, 2005 02:53 (UTC)

I added HTML entities for the link text. « alerante ✆ ✉ » 21:18, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I tried it, it works, but it invalidates my cookies since the URL and the cookie domain don't match I'm not logged in. I say we should stick with the variable version. it makes the code more portable to other wikis. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:23, 2005 September 10 (UTC)

Greetings ! I don't agree with any of this at all. There should be no necessity of doing those things if we could, instead, just agree on a policy with wikipedia content mirrors. For example it would be much better if we could add a flag to the text so that no replacing on the text should be done:

 __WIKIPEDIA_ORIGINAL_CONTENT__
 This is a Wikipedia user page, etc, etc, etc.

--Hdante 17:30, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

But a large majority of forks and mirrors make only a minimal effort to comply with the GFDL, if any effort at all. æle ✆ 21:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Table-less template?

Perhaps we should use a table-less template, like the one I've prepared at my own user page. It renders slightly differently in every geek's "favourite" web browser :P (but still looks pretty good). – TTD Bark! (pawprints) 01:43, 2005 Apr 12 (UTC)

Fork

There is a fork of this page at Template:Userpage2 in which the table has 100% width and is not centered and the Wikimedia logo is on the right side. —Lowellian (talk) 02:34, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

I replaced this template with your fork...no need for that. It should go up on templates for deletion --Alterego June 29, 2005 02:54 (UTC)

I only made the fork because I was trying to be considerate of other users who may not have preferred my changes. —Lowellian (talk) 02:58, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

100%

I added 100% to the width so that this template stretches across the page. Cheers! --Analogdemon (talk) 19:29, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

I reverted this because it absolutely doesn't work with some people's user pages (look at mine and you might see why). If you want to make an alternate template, that's fine by me, but a change like that breaks a number of peoples user pages. Sarge Baldy 01:58, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

blanks

Why are there blanks ({{blank}}) on the template? They are really annoying. Thelb4 20:27, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

To keep forks from replacing Wikipedia with their own project name. « alerante ✆ ✉ » 21:58, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

It's broken in my browser, it shows a rectangle. Would a nowiki tag work instead? -- Norvy (talk) 07:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

If {{blank}} wasn't protected, I'd change it back to nothing. --SPUI (talk) 21:59, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

More escape sequencing

I have changed all instances of "Wikipedia" in this template to using hexadecimal ASCII character codes, with an added comment section inside, in an effort to stop external sites messing with this template when they import user pages. - Mark 08:04, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

I changed the fixed-width hexadecimal entites to decimal entities. Entities don't need those leading zeroes, and decimal entities are more widely supported by browsers. Some older browsers don't understand hex entities despite the fact that Unicode codepoints are usually represented in hex. Comes out a few bytes smaller, too.

— J’raxis (T) 17:30, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Userpage_mini

I've created a {{Userpage mini}} template to complement this one. It's designed to be smaller and less prominent, so people who want the notice—but don't want it standing out so much—can have it. See its talk page. — J’raxis (T) 17:39, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

WikiVote

I know it has been stated that we should try not to vete on everything in Wikipedia, and probaby this is not the most appropriate page to ask, however:

I did not find a substitute page in which I could raise the question. If you indicate me the right page, I will move the thread there]
I think it would be a nice ide to vote for the "Best User Page". I do not wish for wikipedia to become a low level community were we concentrate on many things other than the article, but:
- That is a problem that can be solved through intelligent presence of the administrators.
- We should consider the fact that Wikipedia is not merely about the article, it is a community first of all.
- A vote of this type is innocuous, in my humble opinion.

Federico Pistono 18:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Nervermind, I created an article. Wikipedia:Votes_for_best_User_page Federico Pistono ✆ ✍ 16:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki links

ko:Template talk:사용자 ko:Template talk:사용자

Use of copyrighted image

This template uses Image:Wikimedia.png. According to the image page, that image is copyrighted. Doesn't that mean we're not allowed to use it on user pages? --Angr (tɔk) 11:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

It's owned by the Wikimedia Foundation, but I'm not sure if that makes it less of a problem. æle ✆ 20:34, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

substitute?

Shouldn't we be substituting these pages in just in case the mirror site do not have the templates working properly? -- WB 03:57, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You may if you wish; I have no real opinion either way. æle ✆ 10:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

What is the point of this template?

Why do we have this template? I have seen it on a number of webpages but don't quite see its point.--Max Talk (add) • Contributions 00:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Perfect example: User:Vufors. — ₀₉₁₈^BRIAN • 2006-01-22 20:41
WP:FORKS. æle ✆ 21:20, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I understand it a bit better now, but why is it only used on userpages? Why is it used as an optional thing?--Max Talk (add) • Contributions 08:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Certain forks copy user pages as well as the actual content, and many contributors were displeased with the fact that this made them appear to be users on those projects. This template is used to let people know that someone has an account only on Wikipedia, complete with hacks to keep forks from changing the word "Wikipedia" through automatic scripts. æle ✆ 14:10, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

template name

Shouldn't this be User page (2 words) instead of Userpage to conform with WP:UP? Westfall 04:24, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

It's easier to type. æle ✆ 21:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Deleting of Userpages

User:Gmaxwell has vandalized my page, by deleting it and redirecting it to talk. I have repaired the damage, but wondering if anyone else has had their userpages vandalized by Gmaxwell?

MSTCrow 01:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure how this is related to the template...? --Anna512 (talk) 12:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Usertalkpage

In case anyone else thinks it us useful, rather than subst:ing and hacking this template about, as I have seen people doing, I thought it was worth creating a separate template for user talk pages (above). -- ALoan (Talk) 14:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Cool, I like it. heqs 16:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

We can change the message with {{#if:}} and namespace checks on this template as well, can't we? æle ✆ 2006-05-01t20:01z

Looks like someone recreated the deleted Template:Talkpage. heqs 15:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

That was me. I prefer that over some other ones I've seen. --Brazucs (_TALK | ^CONTRIBS) 13:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Template:Unencycpage

I'm not sure if this would be good or not, but I attempted to generalize this template and Template:Usertalkpage into one template (autofilling in the namespace using some magic words. I think it would be good for labeling unencyclopedic wikipedian/wikipedia-culture oriented pages. Let me know what you think --Charli e^{( @CIRL | talk | email )} 04:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Ooh, neat. We could merge all of the user (talk) templates into this. æle ✆ 2006-05-30t14:01z

This is not an encyclopedia article

Shouldn't that be changed to "This is not an encyclopedic article"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brazucs (talk • contribs) 09:36, June 1, 2006

No. In wiki-speak, "encyclopedic" means "worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia". Ashibaka tock 00:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Add this please

[[tr:Kullanıcı sayfası]] --Cat out 15:43, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Ruud 17:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Use SVG logo

Image:Wikimedia-logo.svg

I don't see any reason not to — Mobius 06:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Irish language WP

Can someone add this, please? [[ga:Teimpléad:Userpage]] [1] - Thanks! - Alison ^✍ 10:46, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Done :-) --Commander Keane 06:42, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! :) - Alison ^✍ 07:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia logo

I think it would be a good idea that we include the Wikipedia logo as well as the Wikimedia logo in the template. It would make it easier for other people to identify the user page as a Wikipedia user page because the Wikipedia logo is there. Without it, some people might get confused because the visual link between Wikipedia and Wikimedia isn't there. I've done this on my user page. Harryboyles 08:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Interwiki link

Interwikilink to [[de:Vorlage:Wikimedia-Benutzer]] would be nice.--Plaicy 22:38, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Done. Kusma (討論) 07:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

This template

Shouldn't this template be redesigned? --Meno25 15:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

removal of the logo

from http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_visual_identity_guidelines :

Logo usage

The colored Wikimedia logo should always be used on a white or very light gray background (max. 15% black), never on a colored background.
The logo should not be turned around or distorted

"This styleguide is official policy of the Foundation.--Jimbo Wales 21:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)"

-- Drini 03:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

So, are the options 1) no image, 2) new image, 3) change box's background color to a shade of gray? I'm in favor of white background with a stronger border - Davandron | Talk 17:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I suppose white or a VERY lyght gray background would work. -- Drini 23:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I suggest a white background. --AAA! ^{(AAAA • AAAAAAAA)} 08:17, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I suppose a white background. --hashikure(talk) 02:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Edit request: Border Color

The border color is pink. Pink? Could we change the color to something a little less baby girls room. I don't care, something neutral. As long as it's not pink. Veracious Rey talk ↔ contribs 04:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't quite fulfill your request; instead, I've added a few parameters to the template. You'll be able to change (a) the border color, (b) the border width, and (c) the background color. I didn't change any of the defaults, but hopefully the ability to customize it will keep people happier. Examples:

{{Userpage
  |border-c= 
  |border-s= 
  |background=
}}

As an example, {{Userpage|border-c=#000000|background=#fffff}} will give you a white background, black border, and will keep the current default of a 1-pixel wide border. You can keep the template code on multiple lines, as above, or on one line, as in this example.

If you need any help beyond that, let me know. Luna Santin 21:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

The bit about mirror sites

I don't understand the part of the template that reads, "If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site." If I copy the page and put it on my own personal website, and someone else finds it there, that doesn't make my website a mirror site. Perhaps the wording of the sentence doesn't convey the intended message. —Largo Plazo 16:38, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Then don't copy the template...? æ ² ✆ 2007‑01‑13t18:55z

I'm sorry, did you mean to imply that if a template doesn't make sense or is unclear or contains a falsehood, the solution is not to fix the template but to advise people not to use it any more? I don't see the merits of your suggestion. —Largo Plazo 19:32, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

This is the best I can think to do, under the circumstances. If you want a bigger change, I suggest the village pump or admin noticeboard. Luna Santin 00:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

If you manually copy the page and put it on your Web site, you don't need to copy {{userpage}} along with it. (Automatically scraping its contents is a different matter.) æ ² ✆ 2007‑01‑15t20:21z

It isn't a question of that. It's a question of the words as somebody reads them. I can copy that page, like any page, for a mirror site. I can copy that page, like any page, to put on a site that isn't a Wikipedia mirror. In both cases, the whole purpose is to tell the reader that he's reading the page on a mirror site—but maybe he is, and maybe he isn't. I really don't see the point of the message at all. —Largo Plazo 20:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

If the page is copied verbatim, that's by definition a mirror of that page. It doesn't mean that the other site mirrors or forks all of Wikipedia. æ ² ✆ 2007‑01‑16t14:32z

The words in the template were "You are viewing a mirror site". That was the whole reason I brought this up. If, on the other hand, the template had said only, "You are viewing a mirror page," there still wouldn't be any point to it because, as you note, it would be a mirror page by definition. It would be like putting a note on every page on one's website reading, "This is a web page." René Magritte would enjoy it, but it wouldn't serve any substantive purpose. —Largo Plazo 15:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The point is so someone can easily tell you're a member of Wikipedia, not Fact-Monster or whatever the mirror of the day is. Superm401 - Talk 09:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

That's a pretty inventive explanation considering that's not what the template message says. And it still doesn't alter the fact that what it does say can as easily be untrue as true. —Largo Plazo 12:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, that's exactly the message that this template is intended to communicate: that user pages may be copied by forks and mirrors of Wikipedia, and that the users whose pages have been copied may not necessarily contribute to the fork or mirror. æ ² ✆ 2007‑01‑17t18:52z

What does that have to do with the truth value of the statement "You are [probably] viewing a mirror site"? Without the "probably", it's a sentence that may be true but that may just as well be false, so it's of no value. With the probably—well, I'd be inclined to stick {{fact}} after it regarding the use of the word "probably". —Largo Plazo 20:44, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

You can't cover every single possible use of a Wikipedia user page. Most copies are made by mirrors that use copies of Wikipedia's database, and this is what the template is intended to cover. Not all people who read mirrors are aware that their content is copied from another source. æ ² ✆ 2007‑01‑18t15:03z

The bottom line is to draw the user's attention to the fact that if the page being looked at isn't on the Wikipedia site at the URL shown, it's a copy and the user may not be a user of the site being looked at. This is all covered by the message excluding the second sentence. The second sentence adds nothing of value. What it does add is a reference to the concept of "mirror sites", but it may or may not be correct about that, and in any event the only thing that matters is whether the page the person is looking at is or isn't on the Wikipedia site, and whether it's part of an entire mirror site or just a single page that someone copied simply doesn't matter, and you haven't claimed at any point that it does matter. So why all this resistance to the proposal to just get rid of this one sentence that contributes nothing of value to the message and is unreliable to boot? —Largo Plazo 15:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

← The statement "Be aware that the page may be outdated and the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself" would have little context without the explanation in the second sentence. Readers of a mirror would probably wonder why the page is "outdated", especially if they believe that the mirror is the original source. æ ² ✆ 2007‑01‑19t22:02z

This whole discussion is ridiculous. The contents of this template show up in three situations:

On Wikipedia. An annoying but necessary eyesore.
On a mirror site. The whole point of the template.
On some random site that insists it's not a mirror, but still mechanically copies the page wholesale. This is either a mirror or a case of "don't do that then".

I see no consensus for a significant change for the template, nor even for the "probably" that Luna put in. Unless someone - anyone - else comes forward with a new argument Real Soon Now, I'm removing that "probably". —Cryptic 23:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

request

{{editprotected}} Please remove style="white-space: nowrap" on external link. It is annoying me not wrapping template. --hashikure(talk) 18:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it's there for a reason. Not done for now, is there someone who knows why it was put in there? Proto::► 15:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Username with non-Latin characters is very long string in utf-8 encoding (for example, my username 端くれの錬金術師 is %E7%AB%AF%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%81%AE%E9%8C%AC%E9%87%91%E8%A1%93%E5%B8%AB in utf-8 enconding). So, Template:Username with white-space: nowrap; gets very very wide with non-Latin username.

Try decreasing the width of your browser and compare two templates below.

example 1: with white-space: nowrap;

This is a Wikipedia user page.

This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%E7%AB%AF%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%81%AE%E9%8C%AC%E9%87%91%E8%A1%93%E5%B8%AB.

example 2: without white-space: nowrap;

This is a Wikipedia user page.

This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user this page belongs to may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%E7%AB%AF%E3%81%8F%E3%82%8C%E3%81%AE%E9%8C%AC%E9%87%91%E8%A1%93%E5%B8%AB.

--hashikure(talk) 04:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Neither wraps. Turning off the "nowrap" style doesn't change the fact that the url is still all one word. --Random832 14:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Opps! I mistaked. I withdraw this request. --hashikure(talk) 11:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

This template is uncategorized

~~This section is simply to give me somewhere to drop the uncat category in (Category:Wikipedia uncategorized templates).--ais523 11:30, 1 March 2007 (U T C)~~

I discovered which category this should be in; would an admin please noinclude this into Category:User namespace templates for me? --ais523 11:33, 1 March 2007 (U T C)

Done. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Small question

Why does the template link to the page it's put on? If you're already there, it seems a bit odd to have a user page link to itself. Kennard2 03:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

...Oh, right, it might have something to do with these things being shown on non-Wiki pages. Somehow. I'm not quite clear on that yet.
Can someone clear things up for me? Kennard2 03:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki

Add ru:Шаблон:userpage --Александрит 18:55, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Padding bug

{{editprotected}}

There seems to be a bug in this template. The first two lines of source are as follows:

{| id="userpage" align="center" style="text-align:center; border: {{{border-s|1}}}px solid {{{border-c|#ffc9c9}}}; background-color:{{{background|#FFFFF3}}}"

|- padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em;"

The padding declaration here is lost; it should be up within the style on the first line. I see that there is scope for parameters to adjust the border and the background. I would like to adjust the margin as well. Here is what I propose for the first two lines:

{| id="userpage" align="center" style="text-align:center; border: {{{border-s|1}}}px solid {{{border-c|#ffc9c9}}}; background-color:{{{background|#FFFFF3}}}; padding:1em;padding-top:0.5em; margin: {{{margin-style|0}}};"

|-

I have written and tested my own version of this template; it can be found at User:Duae Quartunciae/T/userpage. I am currently using it on my own user page, at Duae Quartunciae, using the margin option to give a 10% width on the horizontal margin, and 3em on the bottom. —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 05:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 18:15, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Another take on escaping Wikipedia

Rather than use  and HTML/SGML/XML/XHTML/whatever entities to obfuscate the word Wikipedia, would using http://en.{{Concat|w|i|k|i|p|e|d|i|a}}.org/ and {{Concat|W|i|k|i|p|e|d|i|a}} work? They produce http://en.wikipedia.org/ and Wikipedia, respectively, which is the desired output, and would not be picked up in a simple string search. This seems to be a cleaner approach. Or at least easier to read. — Bigwyrm _{watch me}^{wake me} 23:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

More variables?

I'd like to see this template be more customizable. To that end, I have created User:MikeVitale/UserPageTemplates to give an idea (and code, if you edit the page to get at it) for my suggestions. I have added the following variables:

align
border-style
font-color
padding
padding-top
font-size

I believe that I have done this correctly, but my Wiki-understanding leaves something to be desired. This is a cut-and-paste hack-job. Feel free to change variable names that I have produced, if you even deem this worthy of inclusion. --Mike Vitale 21:32, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Portuguese Wikipedia

Can somebody add pt:Predefinição:Página de usuário to the page to lead to the Portuguese Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuyler91093 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Portuguese interwiki

Please, could someone add the Portuguese interwiki ([[pt:Predefinição:Página de usuário]])? Thanks! The Ogre (talk) 06:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Russian interwiki

[[ru:Шаблон:Userbox]] please. --BeautifulFlying (talk) 22:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Template:Userpage2 redux

I've rescued it from a redirect (updating all the transclusions first, of course) and made it into a smaller version that matches similar templates such as {{User committed identity}}. Just FYI. –xeno (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Useless comments

{{editprotected}} Several useless comments are present in the template code (Highlighted in red):

{| id="userpage" style="margin:auto; width:{{{width|}}}; text-align:center; border:{{{border-s|1}}}px solid {{{border-c|#ffc9c9}}}; background-color:{{{background|#FFFFF3}}}; padding:1em; padding-top:0.5em; margin:{{{margin-style|0}}};" {{#ifeq:{{{logo|}}}|yes| {{!}} [[Image:Wikipedia-logo-en.png|60px|Wikipedia]] }} | style="font-size:85%;" | '''This is a Wikipedia [[Wikipedia:User_page|user page]].''' This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}]. |}<noinclude> {{pp-template|small=yes}} {{documentation}} </noinclude>

Something to look into. Graham (talk, contrib, SIGN HERE!!!) 02:58, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

They are there for a reason....Read above at #More escape sequencing find out why... –xeno (talk) 03:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Add configurable width

{{editprotected}} Please change the first line from:

{| id="userpage" align="center"

to:

{| id="userpage" width={{{width|100%}}} align="center"

This will enable users to specify the width of the box. → AA ^(talk) — 21:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride 00:08, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

This change needs work; the code currently is; (CSS in a style attrib)

width:{{{width|}}};

and is typically resulting in

width:;

in the emitted pages where this is used wo/passing a width. This is invalid CSS.

nb: diff; there was some 'issue' with the 100% — Internet Explorer?

Can we please have this?

width:{{{width|auto}}};

Option b) would be to omit the whole shebang if the user invokes this sans-args.

Cheers, Jack Merridew 08:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:42, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Design feedback

Why is this template text centered? I don't know of any other centered text templates. Centered text is harder to read. Also, it's one very long line of text. Does anyone want to take a stab at making this template a little nicer? Gigs (talk) 19:07, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Improved version

I've created an improved version in the sandbox. For comparison, see Template:Userpage/testcases. Updates:

font-size of 88% rather than 85%, for better cross-browser rendering (see e.g. MediaWiki talk:Common.css/Archive 10);
table-less layout—this really didn't need a table;
rounded corners if wanted;
MediaWiki logo if wanted;
no more silly masking of "Wikipedia".

Comments? —Ms2ger (talk) 17:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

The masking of Wikipedia is so that mirrors don't change the name to the name of their mirror, so people's userpages on the mirror versions properly indicate they may not be a member of the mirror. –xeno^talk 18:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

I still don't like that it's centered text. Gigs (talk) 17:46, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Easy enough to add an option for that. And it really should use the standard {{ombox}}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Chrome

The template seems not to display correctly in the Google Chrome browser. -Arb. (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Examples: User:Alan Liefting & User:X01. -Arb. (talk) 15:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Add Language

Could this be added: [[et:Mall:Kasutajaleht]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hluup (talk • contribs) 15:08, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Just edit the unprotected documentation section and add it to the end. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 15:12, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I can't it is semi-protected and I'm not established user in English wiki. --Hluup (talk) 15:45, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

NOINDEX

The new magic word __NOINDEX__ disables search engine indexing on a page. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-28/Technology report. It would be useful to include this as a parameter option. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 13:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Test version in Template:Userpage/sandbox and sample in Template:Userpage/testcases. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:36, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Please do implement this option. I often close MFD's of userpages and when they are drafts I normally tag them with both this and noindex, much better if I can do as one.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 23:19, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

And please make sure you add it to the documentation. Thanks.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 23:21, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

If Noindex implements visibility, how will this template handle that?--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 23:24, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

This dropped off my watchlist somehow. I'm considering that it might be better to include {{NOINDEX}} as a feature instead of an option. Thoughts? --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:42, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree, generally nothing in Userspace should be indexed. If the community decides otherwise in limited cases it can be worked around by subst the template and removing that part of the code.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 03:41, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I updated the sandbox version. NOINDEX is the default, setting index=yes enables indexing. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 11:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Done --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Disagree with implementing this functionality while there is an ongoing discussion (evenly divided) on NOINDEXing userpages in general. Seems to be forcing Noindex upon users of the template without their input. –xeno (talk) 14:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Ongoing discussion? --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 14:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:VPP#NOINDEX of all non-content_namespaces. –xeno (talk) 14:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

And I was just about to update to my previous sandbox version for opt-in instead of opt out, but you beat me to it. I must have missed the discussion on the Pump. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 15:19, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Would you mind double checking my work? A little rusty, you see. Cheers, –xeno (talk) 15:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Already did.

--—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 15:46, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

This was using {{#if:{{{noindex|}}}|{{NOINDEX}}|}} The problem with this is that #if: tests for a non-empty value, thus setting the parameter to |noindex=no or |noindex=b or anything other than an empty value results in the value being true. The instruction to set |noindex=yes implies that one can set |noindex=no, so I have changed the code to {{#ifeq:{{{noindex|}}}|yes|{{NOINDEX}}|}} but I'd appreciate a double check as I'm new to using conditionals on templates.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:12, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Hidden version

Using magic words this template could be hidden on it's wiki and appear when viewed at a mirror. I have seen this done before with red personal versions. --Clark89 (talk) 00:01, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

{{SERVERNAME}} is the trick. --Clark89 (talk) 04:44, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Recent change

There was a significant change done to this template today which I reverted. Simply put, it made my user page look pretty bad, and I didn't see any consensus for the change, so in accordance with WP:BRD I reverted it. Honestly, I see what's trying to be done, I just don't like it myself, and since this is a very widely used template I think any such change should be discussed. Should such a format be desired (obviously it is or it wouldn't have been done) then perhaps creating a new template would be better (we already have {{userpage2}} so I see no reason not to have a {{userpage3}}, etc.). --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 16:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, there is pretty much consensus to use standardized message boxes here, like {{Ombox}} for namespaces other than the article, talk, image or category space, as they're widely used for years. It might, however be, that the 80% width broke some layouts (the current one is 100%). We might either set the Ombox to 100% width or use the footer message box. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The 80% change is in fact what broke my layout, at least. I suspect that I am not the only one, though I can't say for sure. I'm not really sure standardizing this template is really necessary; it plays a radically different role than other templates such as the talk page templates, navbox, ambox, ombox, etc. Of course, this is purely my opinion and nothing more. I would love to hear any harder reasons for going one way or the other. Right now I'm basically on the fence. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I dropped a line at WP:VPM to see if more people are interested in getting involved in this discussion. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 19:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I think you'd have more success at the technical village pump. I think more people interested in this discussion, but I might be wrong. As you can see at Wikipedia:Template messages/User namespace, several other templates also use this design and a a section earlier on this page mentions some usability issues which a standardized design might solve. Furthermore, some of my changes were actually good, e.g. replacing {{NOINDEX}} with its usual coding, cleanup the code or changing the hardcoded URL to fullurl: (this makes sure one remains on the secure server if they're there).

This is a user page. This is not an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself. The original page is located at //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:User_page/Archive_1.

Those would be some possible Fmbox designs with 100% width. If there's some issue with it, please let me know. --The Evil IP address (talk) 18:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to them; I must say I do like the second one better. Since nobody else has stopped by, and we're in agreement, I wouldn't hold it against you if you boldly updated to your proposed version. The worst it could do is spark further discussion, in my mind. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 04:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I like the one with the logo. --Devourer09 16:40, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

I happen to like the current yellowish coloring, which it sounds like these revisions would lose. --Cybercobra (talk) 09:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Code overhaul

Okay folks, I've finally gotten round to updating this code to use {{ombox}} as it should. For historical reasons I've preserved the pink border and the 100% width, though I've elected not to override the top and bottom margins (so the template will now float slightly apart from other message boxes, like all the other ones do, rather than butting borders with them). This significantly simplifies the code, helps maintain parity with other message boxes and makes it easy to add new features in future. Please have a look at the sandbox and test cases and see whether I've missed anything. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 10:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Now synced. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 00:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

I noticed this change no longer allows this template to co-exist with other template boxes that may be aligned to the right side of a userpage. This has never been a problem before. Can this be fixed? KimChee (talk) 06:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

In accordance with BRD, I reverted the change. Like KimChee noted, I am having issues with the new version, and surely I can't be the only one. Simply put, this new version forces the user page template to be full width of the page, rather than the full width of where it fits. This breaks existing user page layouts, including my own. Simply too much was changed for me to figure out what the problem was, though. Surely you can use my user page as a test case, though. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 06:30, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

I've imported your user page layout to the testcases, and attempted a fix. Can you check and confirm? Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 17:00, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

That looks like it fixed it. It wasn't floating properly before, it is now. Surely there's a simpler test case than my user page though :) --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 17:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Almost certainly. :) My apologies for any privacy problems; feel free to correct. I just went for the expedient option. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 17:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

This looks promising. Be bold and try it out. KimChee (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

No it's not a privacy concern. I'm just a software engineer by profession and value simple test cases, not complex ones :) But it's not important here, really. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 01:10, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Re-synced. As usual, free free to revert and issue trout if I've missed something. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 13:02, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Just want to let you know that you forgot the "noindex" variable, so now lots of user pages have been indexed. Thanks an awfull lot. ^Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\^Work 18:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

|noindex=yes now works again. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:02, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Small change to wording

I have a suggestion for the wording of this template: change "the user this page belongs to" to "the user to whom this page belongs". I think that this is better wording. Dtrebbien 00:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

done. CMummert · talk 00:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually both wordings are bad. Per WP:UP#OWN: "pages in user space belong to the wider community. They are not a personal homepage, and do not belong to the user". Ian (212.87.13.73 (talk) 11:10, 10 November 2011 (UTC))

Image

{{editprotected}} This was metioned before by someone else (but I think it was never replied to). Please add a picture of Wikipedia's logo onto the template.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions)} 00:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll need specific instructions on how to process this... The best way is to create a version of this with the logo in a sandbox so we can verify that it all works. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 17:19, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

See #removal of the logo above. Mind, that was for the Wikimedia logo, not the Wikipedia one, but perhaps still relevant. —Cryptic 17:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that many of the people currently using this template would like such a large cosmetic change to be made. An optional image parameter might be good, though. --- RockMFR 18:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Although, I'm not sure we want to encourage random logos or images (non-Wikipedia or Wikipedia), so maybe instead of {{{image|}}} we use {{#ifeq:{{{logo|}}}|yes.... --MZMcBride 20:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Good idea, the optional parameter idea would be better than just adding the image.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions)} 21:01, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Done. You may now set logo=yes to see the English Wikipedia logo. Cheers. --MZMcBride 18:39, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

If you use {{user page|logo=yes}} it displays the Wikipedia logo on the left. But if you use {{user page rounded|logo=yes}} it displays the Wikimedia logo, and on the right. These are separate templates, but shouldn't they be behaving in a similar (expected) manner? Jarod (talk) 17:10, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Protocol neutral

Why do we want links to be protocol neutral rather than forcing https? ··gracefool ☺ 16:56, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

The flip to that is why would we not want to force http:

Some people don't like to go through https: - it can be slower. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:32, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

We make decisions about a lot of things that "force" users to do things a certain way, especially related to web page design, text and image display, and linking. Defaulting to https is good for them, and if they could detect that millisecond of slowness, then they are welcome to remove the s from their browser's address bar. Senator2029 leave me a message 01:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Written text

Any objection to this change:

NOW

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}

PROPOSED

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}

Now that we are protocol independent, forcing the http display is misleading. — xaosflux ^Talk 22:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

You still need the double slash. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:22, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not exactly sure why we are showing formatting the way we are, the // is in place right now and it is working protocol relative, however then we have a text link (presuming for copy-paste capability) that is hard coded to the http://, I'm suggesting just listing the en.wikipedia.org/.... part there. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Colour proposal

I propose for the first line the colour that is used in the German Wikipedia (style="font-size: 95%; height: 27px; padding-left: 10px; background-color: #069; color: #fff"|).--Sae1962 (talk) 09:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

suggestion: use code from User:Jimbo Wales page

User:Jimbo Wales' page has a nice "This is a Wikipedia user page." box at the top. It has a better color scheme (in my opinion), as well as a logo. Plus, he's the founder, so it has that going for it. Can we use that code instead of the code here? See also discussion here. - Paul2520 (talk) 09:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

border radius

doesnt work.

according to here:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10666573/border-radius-of-table-is-not-working

you need to set "border-collapse" to initial or inherit because the border collapse setting of the omnibox makes sure that it wont appear as rounded.

Regards, M y 1 22:01, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

Glitched background color

Hi! I tried to change the background color for this template, multiple times, on my user page. However, every time I did, it wound up being F8F9FA.

I actually want it to be F8FCFF, but can't get it to be that color. It didn't even change color when I made the background color FF0000, which should have made it bright red.

If anyone knows how to fix this glitch, get the background color to be customizable, or both, please let me know.

Thanks!

Noah Kastin (talk) 13:23, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

The border is not the correct thickness, either. I tried to give it a thickness of 2, and it is currently displaying a thickness of 1. Noah Kastin (talk) 13:46, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

@Noah Kastin: Both problems are because your colour values are not valid. Long answer: see CSS Color Module Level 3 for information on valid values. Short answer: instead of a3b1bf and f8fcff, use #a3b1bf and #f8fcff. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice, Redrose64! I just did what you suggested to my Template:User page box on my user page, and I think it worked! Thanks again! Noah Kastin (talk) 19:19, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Image...

Hello:

I'm a user at Spanish Wikipedia, and our template has the logo; I think it looks better, what do you think about it?

Fundación Wikimedia

Esto es una página de usuario de Wikipedia

Si accede a esta página desde un sitio web diferente al de Wikipedia puede que esté en un sitio espejo o uno que reutiliza contenidos. En ese caso, tenga en cuenta que es posible que la versión de la página que está contemplando no esté actualizada y que su autor/a probablemente no comparte las opiniones vertidas en dicho sitio. La versión original de esta página se encuentra en http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template talk:User_page/Archive_1

Cheers, Cobalttempest * Let's talk

That is a good idea! | ¡Eso es una buena idea! | Jamesjpk (talk) 16:49, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I like this, too. Maybe don't include the text, since it becomes too small to read, but the globe would be nice. - Sdkb (talk) 20:50, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Wording - WP:UP#OWN

This was brought up under #Small change to wording, by an IP in 2011. It wasn't addressed. "the user to whom this page belongs" is clearly against policy. Rather, I propose something along the lines of "about whom this page is". ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 23:14, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

@Bellezzasolo: Agreed. For alternate wording, how about "whom this page is about"? - Sdkb (talk) 20:49, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

@Sdkb:

Done This seems so long ago! ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 20:59, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

@Bellezzasolo: Thanks! There are some other suggestions on this talk page (see below) that you might also want to look into. - Sdkb (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Minor edit request

For the link to mirror site, let's just directly link to the page mirror site, rather than linking to mirror site in the article for websites. There are a few other minor changes to this template that the next template editor to look at it might want to implement (see conversations above, particularly about WP:OWN and adding an image). - Sdkb (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

I also came here for this reason, and while the above is a good suggestion, I would propose Wikipedia:Wikipedia clones as an alternative, since it is only specifically Wikipedia mirrors/clones which would generate the text on external sites. Surely either is better than the current link which refers to high-traffic mirrors rather than the sites which parasite the data from here. Crowsus (talk) 20:53, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Grammar correction

Drop the word "itself", as in "... affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia itself", as it constitutes the improper use of a reflexive pronoun. The sentence makes perfect sense without it. — Quicksilver (Hydrargyrum)^{T @} 22:22, 14 February 2019 (UTC)