Template talk:Nopage
I've been doing a little research into the DISPLAYTITLE tag, and possibly we either don't have MediaWiki 1.7, or someone with deep level access needs to activate it, possibly with "$wgAllowDisplayTitle." ThunderkatzHo! 10:24, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
- Interesting. We had it before, on RW 2.0, I remember using it (definitely post-1.0). We must have lost it when Linus upgraded MW. Should one of us ask Trent (who seems to be very active lately) to type what you said in some magic window somewhere? ħuman
14:47, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
- Wossit do?
ContribsTalk 15:01, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
- It replaces the displayed title of a page with specified text. You used to use it on your user page, didn't you? I know I did... ħuman 15:07, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
- It would be especially cool for this template, since we can then make the title read "Editing (pagename)", with any luck. ħuman 15:08, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
- You're right. Don't it work now? I'd forgotten all about it - ('twasn't I who put it on my page, some kind soul did it to me!) ContribsTalk 15:19, 7 June 2008 (EDT)
- Trent made it work again, yay! ħuman 17:44, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- Still needs to be left-aligned. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing nothing, I would unquestionably choose the latter. 17:47, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- I dunno, I like centered. Although, what it really needs is for the "boxes" to be dynamically sized to fill the screen width, with the other stuff where it belongs (mostly left aligned). I just don't want to do all that work to make it look almost just right (there are also some things from people's prefs we can't do, like I have the javascript edit bar turned off, and people can customize how many rows are in the edit box...). ħuman 18:14, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- Is there a way we can make it link directly to editing something? Or maybe a fake "you've been blocked so you can't edit this" message? Those are fun. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing nothing, I would unquestionably choose the latter. 18:17, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- I think those would both be harder to fake well. The editing one would end up with the "wrong" title; and the block message usually has the "source" to look at, we'd have to fake that. Although, the block idea is a good one, even if not executed perfectly. Tell you what, let's work that up in a sandbox and see if we can put the two versions in choose/option tags? ħuman 18:33, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- What does a block message look like here, anyway? Is it somewhere in the Mediawiki namespace? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing nothing, I would unquestionably choose the latter. 18:40, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- Try editing in the next five minutes and you'll see ;) And, yes, it's at MW, lemme go transclude it to here. ħuman 20:05, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- Try editing in the next five minutes and you'll see ;) And, yes, it's at MW, lemme go transclude it to here. ħuman
- What does a block message look like here, anyway? Is it somewhere in the Mediawiki namespace? <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing nothing, I would unquestionably choose the latter. 18:40, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- I think those would both be harder to fake well. The editing one would end up with the "wrong" title; and the block message usually has the "source" to look at, we'd have to fake that. Although, the block idea is a good one, even if not executed perfectly. Tell you what, let's work that up in a sandbox and see if we can put the two versions in choose/option tags? ħuman
- Is there a way we can make it link directly to editing something? Or maybe a fake "you've been blocked so you can't edit this" message? Those are fun. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing nothing, I would unquestionably choose the latter. 18:17, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- I dunno, I like centered. Although, what it really needs is for the "boxes" to be dynamically sized to fill the screen width, with the other stuff where it belongs (mostly left aligned). I just don't want to do all that work to make it look almost just right (there are also some things from people's prefs we can't do, like I have the javascript edit bar turned off, and people can customize how many rows are in the edit box...). ħuman
- Still needs to be left-aligned. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing nothing, I would unquestionably choose the latter. 17:47, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- Trent made it work again, yay! ħuman
- You're right. Don't it work now? I'd forgotten all about it - ('twasn't I who put it on my page, some kind soul did it to me!)
- It replaces the displayed title of a page with specified text. You used to use it on your user page, didn't you? I know I did... ħuman
- Wossit do?
|
You've been blocked.
The intended blockee is $7, the intended IP is $3, and the block ID is #$5. The person who gave the block is $1, who gave the reason "$2". The block started at $8 and will end at $6. You may contact $1 or one of the moderators to discuss the block. You can also use the "email this user" function if a valid email address is registered in Special:Preferences and if you have not been blocked from using it. Alternately, you may edit your user talk page if you have not blocked from using it. |
And I think it appears centered. The gibberish $ things are obviously arguments stored that describe the block. ħuman 20:07, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- It doesn't appear centered. We could probably just replace those arguments, or rephrase the text so they aren't needed. <font=""; face="Comic Sans MS">Jellyfish!If I had to choose between the continued possibility of nothing happening and of doing nothing, I would unquestionably choose the latter. 20:11, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
- Here is the source, edited a bit already as you suggest:
You were blocked by YOMAMA. The reason given for your block is FUCK OFF AND DIE. We don't care apologize for any inconvenience caused.
Your block time has been calculated using either RationalWiki's fibonacci sequence blocking policy or some random number of digits of pi, taking into account the nature of your transgression.
If you believe the block was too long or unjustified, then please try contacting SOMEONE WHO CARES or another administrator.
You cannot use the "email this user" feature unless a valid email address is specified in your account preferences.
Further attempts at editing may result in Andrew Schlafly, Esquire reporting you to teh FBI!!!I didn't really put much thought into my replacements for the arguments ;) I also added a lame joke because of recent WIGOCP history. ħuman 20:59, 8 June 2008 (EDT)
I absolutely will not remind everyone that this was my idea. That would be petty... 
Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 01:25, 5 September 2008 (EDT)