|
|
| (115 intermediate revisions by 20 users not shown) |
| Line 19: |
Line 19: |
| *[[Special:NewPages]] | | *[[Special:NewPages]] |
|
| |
|
| ==stub notice bug== | | ==How will the CRW approach April Fool's day?== |
|
| |
|
| I tried submitting my deletion req for [[FakePortal]] but get hit with "Stub notices can NOT be removed by users with normal privileges". Tried removing the unused infoboxes in [[WhatsApp]], [[GoGuardian]], [[Asus]] and [[Roblox]], and the same dice. w h y? [[User:SinexTitan|SinexTitan]] ([[User talk:SinexTitan|talk]]) 19:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC) | | Hi, April Fool's day is next month and I don't want to initiate a discussion too late, so how would we approach it? My idea is 1) no jokes in articles, no exceptions and 2) clearly mark all jokes when they occur (I've made [[Template:April fools]] for this purpose). [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 19:57, 2 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| :I'll check this out now [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 18:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC) | | :If my science textbook in school gave me a QR code that ends up rickrolling me I think I'll spend longer than 1 day being distracted about it... lol |
| ::This seems to be a regular issue with the abuse filter [[Consumer_Rights_Wiki_talk:Bugs#How_do_you_edit_beginning_of_an_article_with_StubNotice?|which absolutely has been talked about before]]. It's very annoying and in my opinion we need some sort of edit request system or a new group given to users to bypass the filter, but for now I'll just check the abuse log and apply the edit manually myself. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 18:28, 13 January 2026 (UTC) | | :In my opinion they should be contained within user pages and other types of pages the common person never visits, like having it as an extra link under Wiki policy or something. It would be really bad if someone in power happens to see it the one day they get told to visit a page on the wiki. Just my two cents... but then again I'm pretty biased against the day anyway [[User:Raster|Raster]] ([[User talk:Raster|talk]]) 06:56, 3 March 2026 (UTC) |
| :The issue is when edits are made in-line with a stub notice, as (iirc) the filter checks for edits to the same line as the change [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 00:50, 20 January 2026 (UTC) | | ::I don't even think we should have it under a link on Wiki policy, just silently add it with thr correct template the correct people internally will see it via recent changes. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 07:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC) |
| ::the notice* [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 00:50, 20 January 2026 (UTC) | | :Honestly, I don't think we will be doing one this year. [[User:JamesTDG|JamesTDG]] ([[User talk:JamesTDG|talk]]) 07:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC) |
| :::hey can this please be fixed? it's really damn annoying. removal of redundant infoboxes on [[Deep Cycle Systems]] and [[Allstate]] are triggering it [[User:SinexTitan|SinexTitan]] ([[User talk:SinexTitan|talk]]) 14:39, 25 January 2026 (UTC) | | ::Was there one last year? I don't think there was. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 07:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC) |
| ::::I can remove these now. It would be cool if a usergroup would dodge the filter. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 15:01, 25 January 2026 (UTC) | | :::There definitely wasn't. [[User:JamesTDG|JamesTDG]] ([[User talk:JamesTDG|talk]]) 08:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC) |
| | ::::I've deleted the template. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 16:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC) |
| | :::::Might be worth undeleting it... Louis came up with an idea for an April Fools, based on that Norwegian enshittification video from the other day. Basic concept is to enshittify the wiki (maybe just the main page, and with an off button, of course) for a day. I fully agree with no jokes in articles - that's just a pain to keep track of and undo, and could damage credibility if done without good taste. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 10:33, 4 March 2026 (UTC) |
| | ::::::I have had my ideas, but I'll keep them secret for now. I'll undelete it. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 15:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC) |
| | ::::::we could prob use the trollface as the wiki logo at least [[User:JamesTDG|JamesTDG]] ([[User talk:JamesTDG|talk]]) 04:21, 5 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| ==Idea for a new section==
| |
|
| |
|
| An "Important" / "Must-Reads" / "Starter Pack" / "Essential Reading" section showing the most important articles to view for someone new to the Consumer Rights scene, or just someone unknowing.
| | ==Appeal Request== |
|
| |
|
| Furthermore, the ability to rate an article. Perhaps as a way to show which matters are trending, because of many people having said problem with said device/service. Could be a "Saved me!", "Worked", "Didn't work", where "Saved me!" can only be used maybe once a day, to show which issues a not just trending, but very crucial. These ratings could help place relevant articles at the top of a second section within "Important"/Whatever.
| | Hello! The article [[Advertising overload]] is marked as incomplete and as relying on AI/LLMs. I believe I've addressed the original intent of both of these, though the bottom section ([[Advertising overload#Notable Examples]]) is still a stub. I think the AI status notice should be removed, and the Incomplete notice should be replaced with a Stub notice. |
|
| |
|
| These two sections would give users a place to scroll and skim through, to see if there are any matters relevant for them, like a random product they own, that they didn't know had a Consumer Rights issue.
| | Cheers! [[User:Scholar Silas|Scholar Silas]] ([[User talk:Scholar Silas|talk]]) 05:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| | :{{Done}} including '''completely removing both notices''', not marking it as a stub. The article overall is very long, and if a section is all to complain about on a very long article, then it's definitely not a stub. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 16:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| Additionally; the ability to give pledges to article writers/editors. I'm not fully sure how it would work at the moment, but it would give people a way to support editors that produce important relevant articles. Perhaps the site could take a small cut, which both contributes to funding the server costs or the "legal fund" that Rossman mentioned, but also gives people a bigger incentive to pledge to editors, knowing that some of it goes to supporting the website and its users. [[User:Sebandar|Sebandar]] ([[User talk:Sebandar|talk]]) 19:57, 23 January 2026 (UTC)
| | ==Who gets superconfirmed first?== |
|
| |
|
| :I would appreciate a pane with "must-reads" on the main page that highlights the articles with the widest spread effects and only includes well-written articles. Putting some articles in the same industry, like articles on Apple and Google's app store restrictions, would be especially effective, because it's nearly guaranteed that one of these applies to the reader. If you want to make a draft of this somewhere I would be down to help work on it.
| | Hello, starting this discussion since the new superconfirmed usergroup has been added and we need to figure out who to give it to first. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 22:07, 13 March 2026 (UTC) |
| :I like the article rating idea. I don't know how difficult it would be to add interactive content like this to the wiki, but it sounds like a good way to receive feedback. The only official way to receive feedback currently is on the talk pages but those are all pretty dead. Some prioritization on pageviews or feedback would be nice.
| |
| :On pledges, Wikipedia actually has something like this, it has a [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:Reward_board|reward board]] where users are offered barnstars or real money to improve articles, but it's not used very much. Most users seem to be offering up prizes only for the fun of doing so, not because it's particularly effective. If the content is relevant and/or interesting, someone probably is already working on it. I don't personally think this site needs an economy but if it were to be implemented, I think we should plug donations to FULU or other affiliated foundations on the main page and then have those foundations offer microgrants for editors. [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 16:02, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
|
| ==Form pages==
| | :Just tested it on [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsAlt]]; why can't it undelete pages? [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 22:14, 13 March 2026 (UTC) |
| | ::I shall fix! [[User:JakeL|JakeL]] ([[User talk:JakeL|talk]]) 00:02, 15 March 2026 (UTC) |
| | :::Also @[[User:JakeL|JakeL]] is semiprotection mow allowing superconfirmed users only as well as admins and not just normal confirmed users? [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 06:23, 15 March 2026 (UTC) |
| | ::::Yes, autoconfirmed users no longer have the semiprotected permission. This was an intentional change requested by Keith [[User:JakeL|JakeL]] ([[User talk:JakeL|talk]]) 16:11, 15 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| I made a change to [[Form:Company]] following Discord suggestion #181. I was going to add this to [[Form:Product]] and [[Form:ProductLine]] but these pages are protected.
| | ==add "Quasi-Wanted" Special page== |
|
| |
|
| So, I am requesting an edit to those two pages to replace "(supported file types = PNG|JPG)" with "(supported file types = JPG, PNG, SVG)" to represent the fact that SVGs are allowed, and also to admin-protect [[Form:Company]] since that's an important page. [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 13:13, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
| | There are Wikipedia articles linked from many different CRW articles. It'd be nice to see which topics are candidates for a dedicated article on CRW. I say "topics", just-in-case a future update adds support for non-WP "pseudo-internal" links (because WP links are shown as "internal" even though they aren't) |
|
| |
|
| ==“Summaries” of articles==
| | Apologies in advance if this is not a place for feature-requests [[User:Rudxain|Rudxain]] ([[User talk:Rudxain|talk]]) 06:23, 15 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| I'd like to propose an idea that I think would help people read articles in a rush. Add a box at the top of all long pages (e.g. [[YouTube]], or all that aren't stubs or marked as incomplete) that summarises the article (the incidents the company has been involved in, what it does, etc) in a couple of sentences. Let me know what you think. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 15:17, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
| | ==Appeal request for Wikipedia article== |
|
| |
|
| :What makes this different from a lead paragraph? Would you replace the lead paragraph entirely with this template or would it be a complementary resource with links to related company/product/theme articles? You could link to categories/other articles there. I think categories on wikis in general are overlooked by most readers and putting them at the top sounds interesting. [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 16:07, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
| | I've been testing out the browser plugin for the last few days and noticed it popped up on Wikipedia. After reading [[Wikipedia#cite note-15]] I wanted to challenge whether this article belongs on Consumer Rights Wiki, as I don't think it fits with the [[Mission statement]] or [[Consumer Rights Wiki:Inclusion guidelines]] at time of writing. |
|
| |
|
| ==InfoboxCompany to CargoCompany cleanup part 2==
| | Aside from mentioning that Wikipedia is big and influential (not necessarily a bad thing), there are two incidents listed. The first one relates to individual editors. The only citation for this mentions "Wikipedia has taken action against what it described as the “co-ordinated group” of fraudsters by blocking 381 accounts.". |
|
| |
|
| The companies have all been moved over now, the only [https://consumerrights.wiki/w/Special:WhatLinksHere?target=Template%3AInfoboxCompany&namespace=&limit=50 places that InfoboxCompany exist in] are in some documentation out of main namespace and on these pages where they were placed on the same line as a notice: | | The second one is similar, it refers to behaviour of editors - the first citation mentions "Wikipedias in all languages, including English, are open to edits by any volunteers", and also mentions that "one of the ... admins at Scots Wikipedia, has called for native speakers to contribute as the community seeks to save the project.". |
| [[AirAsia]], [[Deep Cycle Systems]], [[Allstate]], [[Happiest Baby]], [[Verisk Analytics, Inc.]], [[DAZN]], [[Federal Communications Commission]], [[Anova Culinary]], [[Sig Sauer]], [[RepairShopr]]
| |
|
| |
|
| Converting InfoboxProductLine and finding more pages without infoboxes or cargo... sometime. [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 15:44, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
| | In both cases I think this is a reasonable response from Wikipedia, they stepped in to address the issues by blocking abusive users, acknowledged the inaccuracies and called for people to help fix them. Wikipedia is free, it's hosted by a non-profit organisation and the editors are not working for Wikipedia, they are independent users of the platform. I don't think it's fair to blame them for user-generated content, and in my opinion it hurts the cause when we include articles like this alongside articles highlighting genuinely abusive business practices. [[User:DiffChar|DiffChar]] ([[User talk:DiffChar|talk]]) 23:04, 17 March 2026 (UTC) |
|
| |
|
| :Still need these removed if anyone has 5 minutes: | | :When this came up, I was very concerned but decided to leave it alone. Considering someone else thinks the exact same way as me, i think it's honestly a good idea atp for me to add a deletion request template (which anyone can do, by the way!) and refer back here. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 16:14, 18 March 2026 (UTC) |
| :[[AirAsia]], [[Allstate]], [[Happiest Baby]], [[Verisk Analytics, Inc.]], [[DAZN]], [[Federal Communications Commission]] [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 19:51, 29 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::{{Done}}. Sorry for taking so long. It'd be nice if there was a usergroup that could dodge all the edit filters. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 20:07, 7 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==Color scheme==
| |
| | |
| The main Sitenotice text is nearly the same color as the link inside of it, making it hard to distinguish where the link is if you haven't clicked the link yet. A larger contrast would be nice, since the notice is going to be up for another 25 days or so. https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Sitenotice&action=edit
| |
| | |
| This also applies to most of the main page, blue/muddy purple on blue doesn't look the best, but that's a larger undertaking. If the main page is up for redesign it would be nice to take the color contrast into consideration. [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 16:15, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :I've simply made it black and white, although I don't think it is entirely fixed it. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 17:39, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::Please can nobody amend the theme or any elements currently, I am restyling the website. [[User:JakeL|JakeL]] ([[User talk:JakeL|talk]]) 17:41, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::Oh, sorry. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 17:57, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::Looks great, and has nice contrast! [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 18:56, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::::Thank you! Still somewhat of a work in progress, but definitely a significant improvement over the previous version. [[User:JakeL|JakeL]] ([[User talk:JakeL|talk]]) 18:59, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::::Yeah, I like it too! As an idea, make the borders rounded like the original one. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 07:52, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::::::No worries, all done! [[User:JakeL|JakeL]] ([[User talk:JakeL|talk]]) 19:09, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::::::Wow, this looks amazing now. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 07:30, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==Template troubles==
| |
| | |
| So, a lot of the articles with [[Template:Incomplete]] and cargo templates that display a box (any but IncidentCargo) have big foreheads right now (see a list of articles with Incomplete [https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Incomplete&limit=100 here]). I did some testing, the Incomplete template itself doesn't have a trailing newline, and none of the cargos have a preceding newline. A <nowiki><p><br></nowiki><nowiki></p></nowiki> is being added by the parser when the two are put together, and only when they are not on the same line. I've also seen this in the wild with [[Template:SloppyAI]] and with [[Template:Welcome]] on new user talk pages. Welcome should be a simple edit fix since it's not combined with other templates, but it seems that anytime templates are combined, they must be put on the same line or they will introduce an unintended newline. You can see an instance of Incomplete and SloppyAI together causing problems on [[Samsung TVs]].
| |
| | |
| Many Wikipedia pages have several templates next to each other without this problem, for example see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2025%E2%80%932026_Iranian_protests&oldid=1334922628 2025-2026 Iranian protests]. So the problem is solvable in MediaWiki, but I don't know how much work is required to do so. According to [[:Category:Todo]], over 700 articles have these banners, which is the majority of the wiki.
| |
| | |
| If other people think it's important too, I can work on this, but I don't know how to compare this wiki's configuration against stuff in the MediaWiki documentation. [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 13:35, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :Oh yeah, some junk from my experimenting that we should delete once the problem is resolved: [[User:Bythmusters/templatetesting]], [[Qwerty]] [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 13:37, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::Do you mean the top has more height than the rest of the box? I'm not entirely sure what you are talking about. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 16:42, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::Also, the Wiki's main config can be seen at [[MediaWiki:Common.css]] and [[MediaWiki:Common.js]], where all the css and js that you see the moment you load a page is at. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 17:34, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::So, let's compare these two versions:
| |
| :::https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=User:Bythmusters/templatetesting&oldid=35089
| |
| :::https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=User:Bythmusters/templatetesting&oldid=35091
| |
| :::There is an additional newline between the bottom of the template and the beginning of the article text. The only difference in the source text is:
| |
| :::<nowiki>"{\{Incomplete}}{\{ProductLineCargo"</nowiki>
| |
| :::vs:
| |
| :::<nowiki>"{\{Incomplete}}</nowiki>
| |
| :::{\{ProductLineCargo"
| |
| :::In the second one, there's a newline to separate the templates, as it's more natural to read in the source editor this way. Wikipedia articles do not render this newline, but CRW does. That is my issue, it takes up a lot of space on the screen.
| |
| :::Thanks for the links, I read through the Common.css and Common.js of this wiki and Wikipedia but I didn't see anything relevant. I think it's in the parser, where the mediawiki text gets converted into html but I don't know enough about this stuff to be sure. [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 18:53, 26 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::::Ah, okay. Reread your previous post and now feel like an idiot for not understanding. I don't know how to fix that if it's the parser. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 07:33, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::::Yeah idk it's probably not worth the trouble to fix. I like learning about mediawiki but not that much [[User:Bythmusters|Bythmusters]] ([[User talk:Bythmusters|talk]]) 15:55, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==Feedback on changes to sidebar appearance and arrangement==
| |
| | |
| *I suggest renaming the "Tools" section for the web browser addon to something else to differentiate it from the wiki tools. I also recommend moving it to the way bottom, at least until it's ready for prime time, since it makes wiki editors have to scroll further to reach the wiki tools than previously.
| |
| | |
| *An option to hide the mini-list of recent changes and restore the single line "Recent Changes" for the original minimalist design.
| |
| **<strike>As an addendum: The font size of said mini-list is not consistent with the font size used both throughout the sidebar and the wiki itself, making it stand out like a sore thumb.</strike>
| |
| | |
| *An option to hide the community section for those of us that refuse to ever use [[Discord]]. I'd rather have a native choice available instead of resorting to a browser addon to remove it.
| |
| | |
| ''(Note: Feedback is based on using Firefox v147.0.2 and the wiki skin "Vector legacy (2010)".)'' — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 21:32, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :I’ve mentioned already that Vector legacy (2010) hasn’t been worked on yet, as most users are on Vector 2022 where these changes have been applied. The examples you listed aren’t present on the current default skin. I’d appreciate your patience while I get round to updating the legacy variant. In the meantime, I’ve resolved the issue where discussion tabs and similar tabs were hidden. [[User:JakeL|JakeL]] ([[User talk:JakeL|talk]]) 22:51, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ::Respectfully, I find your response confusing. What I bring up here is a separate matter from [[Consumer_Rights_Wiki_talk:Bugs#Page_tabs_hidden|my bug report]], and I posted ''only'' after first waiting a couple days and checked the default skin before-hand. I've struck out the one line since apparently it wasn't intentional like I had thought (and it had affected both legacy and default skins for the record), but otherwise my general feedback is unchanged.
| |
| | |
| ::I appreciate the work you do on the wiki and thank you for fixing the bugged page tabs. — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 02:22, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::I understand that the feedback here is separate from the bug report, though I’m also a little confused: the default skin does not show the duplicated Tools section that the legacy version does, so I’m not sure how it would be confused with the wiki tools. It’s also already at the very bottom on the default skin. As for the other suggestions about hiding certain areas, I can look into those, but it won’t be a short-term fix. I appreciate the feedback and the kind words! [[User:JakeL|JakeL]] ([[User talk:JakeL|talk]]) 19:14, 11 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| ==What should this image be licensed under?==
| |
| | |
| This [[:Category:Suspected copyright violations|image I archived]] for Age Verification, I selected as "without permission" since I didn't see they licensed it under CC BY 4.0 at the time - yet the site rejected both IA and archive.today, which felt like they held the copyright. How should the content be tagged? (I
| |
| | |
| On another note, if you go to the [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563217303357 site of the reference] and click "View PDF", after solving a Cloudflare "are you human" it grants access to the full pdf which has "© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)." as the footer of the first page. I wonder if that's the better way to go about archiving this reference.
| |
| | |
| Probably could have worded this better, thanks for your time. [[User:Raster|Raster]] ([[User talk:Raster|talk]]) 02:59, 2 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| :I've deleted it while we figure out copyright status of this. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 16:35, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::It seems to exist on the IA [https://web.archive.org/web/20190203021620/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563217303357 here]. [[User:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|'''''AnotherConsumerRightsPerson''''']] ([[User talk:AnotherConsumerRightsPerson|talk]]) 16:37, 3 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| :::Unfortunately that snapshot only has the Abstract. I'm not the one that added the particular source, but it (may) be sufficient enough to add as an archive link for that particular source (talking about the [[Age Verification]] article in case anyone's confused), so I've gone and done so. Thanks for your input. [[User:Raster|Raster]] ([[User talk:Raster|talk]]) 04:34, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| ::This can be safely undeleted. The copyright symbol is sometimes used for partial copyright (which Creative Commons is). A more suitable symbol would have been the "(cc)" (creative commons) symbol, but it is not a dedicated unicode character like "©". The document itself says it is Creative Commons, not "all rights reserved", so I see no reason not to undelete it. [[User:JodyBruchonFan|JodyBruchonFan]] ([[User talk:JodyBruchonFan|talk]]) 22:51, 4 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
| | |
| == Appeal Request ==
| |
| | |
| On the article regarding [[Restaurant Brands International caught training AI models using customer voices|Restaurant Brand International]], I think that the source credibility issue lacks merit and should be removed, as I don't see how it could be lacking in source credibility due to (in my opinion) additional evidence backup with images and detail breakthrough of the event that would classify it as being trustworthy? Would like some thoughts and comments around this, very confused. [[User:SquidthePlummer|SquidthePlummer]] ([[User talk:SquidthePlummer|talk]]) 23:45, 13 February 2026 (UTC)
| |
Welcome — post issues of interest to Moderators
- Post appeals to article notice templates (e.g. Incomplete, Stub, etc.)
- Post requests for moderator action here (e.g. blocks)
- Just need a mod? Post here or ping a mod with a question.
- Post any information or news relevant to the moderation team here.
- To request an article to be created, do not post here, try Article suggestions instead.
- Do not report technical issues here, please use the Bugs noticeboard instead.
Previous discussions
|
|
1 2 3 4 5 6
|
Hi, April Fool's day is next month and I don't want to initiate a discussion too late, so how would we approach it? My idea is 1) no jokes in articles, no exceptions and 2) clearly mark all jokes when they occur (I've made Template:April fools for this purpose). AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 19:57, 2 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- If my science textbook in school gave me a QR code that ends up rickrolling me I think I'll spend longer than 1 day being distracted about it... lol
- In my opinion they should be contained within user pages and other types of pages the common person never visits, like having it as an extra link under Wiki policy or something. It would be really bad if someone in power happens to see it the one day they get told to visit a page on the wiki. Just my two cents... but then again I'm pretty biased against the day anyway Raster (talk) 06:56, 3 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- I don't even think we should have it under a link on Wiki policy, just silently add it with thr correct template the correct people internally will see it via recent changes. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 07:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- Honestly, I don't think we will be doing one this year. JamesTDG (talk) 07:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- Was there one last year? I don't think there was. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 07:36, 3 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- There definitely wasn't. JamesTDG (talk) 08:29, 3 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- I've deleted the template. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 16:10, 3 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- Might be worth undeleting it... Louis came up with an idea for an April Fools, based on that Norwegian enshittification video from the other day. Basic concept is to enshittify the wiki (maybe just the main page, and with an off button, of course) for a day. I fully agree with no jokes in articles - that's just a pain to keep track of and undo, and could damage credibility if done without good taste. Keith (talk) 10:33, 4 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- I have had my ideas, but I'll keep them secret for now. I'll undelete it. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 15:54, 4 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- we could prob use the trollface as the wiki logo at least JamesTDG (talk) 04:21, 5 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello! The article Advertising overload is marked as incomplete and as relying on AI/LLMs. I believe I've addressed the original intent of both of these, though the bottom section (Advertising overload#Notable Examples) is still a stub. I think the AI status notice should be removed, and the Incomplete notice should be replaced with a Stub notice.
Cheers! Scholar Silas (talk) 05:52, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Done including completely removing both notices, not marking it as a stub. The article overall is very long, and if a section is all to complain about on a very long article, then it's definitely not a stub. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 16:02, 12 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Hello, starting this discussion since the new superconfirmed usergroup has been added and we need to figure out who to give it to first. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 22:07, 13 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- Just tested it on User:AnotherConsumerRightsAlt; why can't it undelete pages? AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 22:14, 13 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- I shall fix! JakeL (talk) 00:02, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- Also @JakeL is semiprotection mow allowing superconfirmed users only as well as admins and not just normal confirmed users? AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 06:23, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- Yes, autoconfirmed users no longer have the semiprotected permission. This was an intentional change requested by Keith JakeL (talk) 16:11, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
There are Wikipedia articles linked from many different CRW articles. It'd be nice to see which topics are candidates for a dedicated article on CRW. I say "topics", just-in-case a future update adds support for non-WP "pseudo-internal" links (because WP links are shown as "internal" even though they aren't)
Apologies in advance if this is not a place for feature-requests Rudxain (talk) 06:23, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
I've been testing out the browser plugin for the last few days and noticed it popped up on Wikipedia. After reading Wikipedia#cite note-15 I wanted to challenge whether this article belongs on Consumer Rights Wiki, as I don't think it fits with the Mission statement or Consumer Rights Wiki:Inclusion guidelines at time of writing.
Aside from mentioning that Wikipedia is big and influential (not necessarily a bad thing), there are two incidents listed. The first one relates to individual editors. The only citation for this mentions "Wikipedia has taken action against what it described as the “co-ordinated group” of fraudsters by blocking 381 accounts.".
The second one is similar, it refers to behaviour of editors - the first citation mentions "Wikipedias in all languages, including English, are open to edits by any volunteers", and also mentions that "one of the ... admins at Scots Wikipedia, has called for native speakers to contribute as the community seeks to save the project.".
In both cases I think this is a reasonable response from Wikipedia, they stepped in to address the issues by blocking abusive users, acknowledged the inaccuracies and called for people to help fix them. Wikipedia is free, it's hosted by a non-profit organisation and the editors are not working for Wikipedia, they are independent users of the platform. I don't think it's fair to blame them for user-generated content, and in my opinion it hurts the cause when we include articles like this alongside articles highlighting genuinely abusive business practices. DiffChar (talk) 23:04, 17 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
- When this came up, I was very concerned but decided to leave it alone. Considering someone else thinks the exact same way as me, i think it's honestly a good idea atp for me to add a deletion request template (which anyone can do, by the way!) and refer back here. AnotherConsumerRightsPerson (talk) 16:14, 18 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
