Template talk:Old IP warnings top

Formatting problem

There seems to be a formatting problem when warning messages are embedded in a table: empty lines are no longer seen as beginnings of a new paragraph, and the indentation is messed up as well. See the example below. One problem appears to be that Mediawiki inserts removes lots of html code inside the table, but not inside the plain text, although I'm not sure that that is what causes the undesired rendering. I've not been able to figure out how to prevent this from happening. It happens with huggle warnings, but not with standard user warnings such as {{uw-vandal1}} because the latter doesn't try to left-float the icon. Han-Kwang (t) 16:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Example original warnings

Hi, the recent edit you made to the Foo article has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. — Some Editor, some time (UTC)

Hi, the recent edit you made to the Foo article has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. — Some Editor, some time (UTC)

Hey! please stop it! Thanks, Other Editor.

Example after embedding in table

This shared IP address has received multiple warnings for inappropriate edits. Since different users may be using this IP address, many of these warnings may be stale. Click [show] at far right to see all previous warnings and/or blocks.
The following is a record of previous warnings and/or blocks left for this IP. Please do not modify it.
Hi, the recent edit you made to the Foo article has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. — Some Editor, some time (UTC) Hi, the recent edit you made to the Foo article has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. — Some Editor, some time (UTC) Hey! please stop it! Thanks, Other Editor.

I have seen something like this before; so I added a "div" tag that now surrounds the text within the table ... that seems to have resolved the issue. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Great! Actually I'm sure that I experimented with divs, but apparently not nested correctly. Han-Kwang (t) 17:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC) ... actually, after looking more carefully, I see the problem is only partially solved. At least the text isn't centered/right-aligned anymore, but the second warning does not start on a fresh line ("... Some editor (UTC) Hi! the edit...") Han-Kwang (t) 17:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

That's odd, I remember having a similar problem when I was first creating the template, but I thought I'd solved it. Does it happen on the older, uglier version too? --barneca (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Example using subst'ed old version (Oct 2007)

Hmmmm, it's always been that way, and I just never noticed. --barneca (talk) 18:29, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Inserting helps (I did that above so that it displays better now), but it's Mediawiki that doesn't insert those tags at empty input lines near floatingn images in the first place. Bug or feature? Han-Kwang (t) 21:42, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Subst or transclude?

Should these templates be subst'ed or transcluded? I would say transclude since (a) improvements of the template and wording should not be a big deal for talk pages where it is used and (b) it's cleaner in the page source. Han-Kwang (t) 17:54, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I've been subst'ing them, but since they're unlikely to be placed on high volume pages, it's not like they're going to be a big drain on the servers, and probably they should be transcluded for the reasons you mention. --barneca (talk) 18:24, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

alternative

Have a look at {{wan}}. IMO it's better to get masses of old IP warnings off the page and into an archive, so that future editing of the page is easier. Equazcion ^(talk) 20:20, 14 Apr 2010 (UTC)

IPs are not always shared

IP addresses, especially static IPs, are not necessarily shared. Is there support for adding a parameter to eliminate the word "shared" and text about multiple users? Jojalozzo 17:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

+1, I just used this for a dynamic IP address. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:48, 7 June 2019 (UTC)