Template talk:Blanked IP talk

Template is deliberately hard coded

Hi Thingofme, I noticed you are working on changes at Template:Blanked IP talk/sandbox. Note that this template was deliberately hard coded to use as few links as possible per discussion here, since one of the aims of the bot task is to reduce Special:WhatLinksHere clutter. I don't really care about adding a clock icon, but strongly oppose using {{tmbox}} since it makes this template invisible in mobile. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 04:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Thank you but I want to merge this with {{OW}} as they serve the same purpose. Thingofme (talk) 04:59, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Originally I wanted to use {{OW}} for the task. However when worshopping the bot task, some users suggested that a new template with more specific wording be created for this purpose, which is how this template came to be. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 06:34, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Some people already blanked ancient IP talk page by {{OW}} also. Thingofme (talk) 11:05, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

If you plan to merge these, it is better to start a TFD soon. This template will see quite a lot of transclusion in the coming weeks. Merging after they have millions of transclusions will add a lot of things to the job queue. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 11:34, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

It may retains as a redirect into the other page. Maybe so all the old and new transclusions still work as intended. Thingofme (talk) 13:18, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Redirecting it still adds to job queue. Fewer the transclusions a template has, lesser will be the number of items added to job queue if decision is to merge. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 14:25, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

But we need only 1 edit: redirecting the template-->this is ok. Also although this is "blanked" people can add new warnings into the IP. Thingofme (talk) 14:47, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

See mw:Manual:Job queue. It may be one edit for us, mediawiki goes to every page transcluding this template and updates it to display the redirected template. OW uses 7 other templates and modules. Currently Blanked IP talk is at 125k transclusions, redirecting now adds 850k items to job queue. If you wait till the bot task is completes, it easily add more than 14 million items to job queue. At the end it will create 7 million entries in templatelinks and pagelinks database. It is precisely to avoid this that Blanked IP talk is hardcoded.

It was decided when workshoppping the bot task that a separate template is better than OW (bot removes everything not just warnings), this template is what RFC found consessus for. The template's wording does not clash when new warnings are added, it just signifies that the page was blanked at some point. ಮಲ್ನಾಡಾಚ್ ಕೊಂಕ್ಣೊ (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

OK, I understand that Blanked IP talk only applies to stale IP address and OW maybe can apply for other kinds of address like static ones, maybe... Thingofme (talk) 15:29, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Wording change suggestion

Hello all- Today is the first time I've encountered this template message. I have a suggestion for a wording change:
Current: Unregistered editors using this IP address received messages on this talk page years ago...
Suggested: Unregistered editors using this IP address have received messages on this talk page in years past... Eric ^talk 19:04, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

I prefer the suggested wording as well. Three things to note:

1. This is not visible by default in mobile (you have to tap "Read as wiki page")
2. All of these, to my knowledge, were placed in a single run by blocked User:MalnadachBot (task 13)
3. It used to be worse

We could make this even more succinct: See page history for messages over five years old.

Folly Mox (talk) 07:34, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Categorisation

Should this template sort its pages into a maintenance category, e.g: Category:Blanked IP talk pages? I would be in favour of such a change, but I wanted to hear other editors’ views first. Best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 12:32, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

What maintenance task would be suitable for pages in this proposed category? If we're just tracking the pages, looking at the transclusions of this template seems like it should be sufficient. I'm neutral on this at first reading. Folly Mox (talk) 12:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@Folly Mox: I was wanting to find transclusions of this template in the User namespace. Since leaving this message, though, I remembered about the ‘what links here’ tool (which for some reason did not occur to me earlier) - I withdraw my proposal with a  Self-trout :) ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 13:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)