MediaWiki talk:Emailuserfooter

Top

The text is somewhat misleading, as using the special page to reply will still give out your email address. --Tgr (talk) 06:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

True indeed. I've clarified the text a bit. How's that read now? - Alison ^❤ 06:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

In case anyone isn't aware, this feature was reverted by Brion and is not active at the moment. I've updated the bug report accordingly (bugzilla:14558). --MZMcBride (talk) 04:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

It's now live :-) ^demon^{[omg plz]} 15:44, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

A note on this page. When it enabled the first time, it accepted five or six parameters. The code change was reverted. When it was re-implemented, it now only accepts two parameters. It also uses plaintext. So while the formatting may look like:

• Foo: bar baz.

The reader will actually see:
* Foo: bar baz.

--MZMcBride (talk) 03:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow this is verbose... -- lucasbfr ^talk 06:43, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I tried shortening it. Got it down by about 100 bytes. Your turn. : - ) --MZMcBride (talk) 09:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Redundancy

"If this e-mail is objectionable or you are unfamiliar with Wikipedia's EmailUser function, please read the following information:"

Is redundant as it is adequately covered in the second paragraph. I have made the change. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

incorrect message text

This text

"The sender has not been given any information about your e-mail account and you are not required to reply to this e-mail. For further information on privacy, security, and replying, as well as abuse and removal from emailing, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Email."

seems to be incorrect, as the sender's e-mail is revealed currently.

In Preferences it is correctly stated that

"Note that the sender's e-mail address will be visible to the recipient. If you change your e-mail address, you will need to reconfirm it."

--Wikinaut (talk) 08:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Note on email footer

This edit has been copied to Checkusers and others who have been dealing with the matter concerned. While it may not be the prettiest solution, please leave the edit standing (due to information that checkusers can see but other users may not be able to judge), at least until other functionaries can contribute to the discussion. Thanks :) FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 02:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Seems like an awful idea to include such a note. And had you bothered using the talk page before making the edit, I would've told you so. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:56, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it would useful to include reasons why it's a pretty awful idea:

1. It completely violates WP:DENY. You've just elevated childish vandalism to center stage.
2. It completely violates WP:BEANS. You've openly declared that there's a problem and currently no solution.
3. The language used in the note is unprofessional and confusing. What's a Checkuser?

--MZMcBride (talk) 03:01, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I've undone the edit. I don't think this is helpful in the slightest and only encourages whoever is doing it to continue. No need to acknowledge this nonsense - I'm sure we can all find better ways to spend our time. I know FT2 has asked the edit remain but I don't feel that is an appropriate request. Edits to MediaWiki pages should have consensus, as the editnotice states. We should discuss first, edit second. - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:04, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Asking someone to mark an email as "spam" may train their filter to automatically bin any further email they may receive from Wikipedia. Nakon 03:06, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

bugzilla:18942 may be able to provide help. Nakon 03:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Looks live to me. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

(e/c)I've duped that bug to bugzilla:18860 (apparently ruwiki got the idea first). According to the server admin log, the changes I made to resolve that bug have been merged in to the live site, so hardblocks of IPs can now set the email block. You may have to bypass your cache to update the javascript on the block form so it won't try to hide the checkbox when blocking an IP. And, FWIW, I mostly agree with MZM's comments Mr.Z-man 03:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that some message would be appropriate, but the one that's there does need polishing. How about:

The Wikipedia administrators are aware that a user is attempting to misuse our email system by sending strange or offensive emails to other users, and a solution to prevent this is being worked on. If you receive such a message, please ignore it. Stifle (talk) 08:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and WP:DENY is not policy, does not have consensus, etc. Stifle (talk) 08:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

@Nakon: The "from" address on Emailuser emails is that of the sending user, not a Wikimedia address. Stifle (talk) 08:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

The email server's IP is still Wikimedia's. Some spam filters may not only filter based on the "from" address. Nakon 14:48, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

(e/c)Just because its not policy doesn't mean its not good advice. As for spam filters, many email clients use more intelligent filters than simple email address-based filters (which are basically useless against all but the simplest spam) and may block messages based on the default "Wikipedia e-mail" subject or the hyperlink to Wikipedia:Email in the footer. Mr.Z-man 14:52, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Small change (grammar and detail)

I just made a change to the text. The pronoun "your" was misleading, because the sender (in addition to the recipient) usually receives a copy of the message. I specified the recipient in place of "your", and also added a little detail for context. -Pete (talk) 20:47, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 18 May 2021

This template uses overly formal language, like "the recipient" to mean "you". I've rewritten it to use more plain English here; could we adopt that? I'd have gone a bit further, but wanted to be cautious in case any of the language is necessary as a legal disclaimer. If needed, we can ping someone from WMF legal to consult. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:47, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 Not done "you" are not necessarily "the recipient" - especially if the recipient was a list, a forwarder, an alias, etc. We can expand on this one so long as it is clear about that "Wikimedia Foundation cannot be held responsible for its contents" part and the extra warnings about what happens if you reply. — xaosflux ^Talk 20:31, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. Ideally it'd be possible to have links and such in this message, but not sure it's really worth the effort. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 23 March 2022

Change "The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, nor any information about the recipient's email account; and the recipient has no obligation to reply to this email or take any other action that might disclose their identity." to "The sender has not been given the recipient's email address, nor any information about the recipient's email account; the recipient has no obligation to reply to this email or take any other action that might disclose their identity." HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 01:09, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

 Done — xaosflux ^Talk 01:29, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Adding a line about forwarding abusive email to ArbCom

I would propose to add a line to the email footer advising those who receive abusive emails to forward the email to ArbCom for action. We might want to change the email down the line (e.g., to the checkuser VRT queue or to another newly established VRT queue), but in the meantime I'd like ArbCom to capture the emails to action them with sanctions and/or other action as appropriate. Several arbitrators (six, unanimously) have expressed support for the concept. If there is no objection here, I will plan to add a line to this effect in the coming week or so. Best, KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 00:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me; support in deference to ArbCom's judgement.

In the spirit of fighting WP:CREEP, though, it'd be nice to balance out the addition with some tweaks while we're in there to make it use plainer, less formal English. My earlier stab at that is above, although some portions of it aren't implementable because of Xaosflux's concern. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 01:27, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I've now done this. To @Sdkb's point, with the new language and Xaosflux's point above, do you have new proposed language? KevinL (aka L235 · t · c) 22:42, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Trying to think through it all, I can't actually see a problem with using "you" for the recipient — for a mass-message that was sent to many people, it's still accurate to say that it was sent to you, and for a forwarded message, I think we can assume people know how email works well enough to know that the forwarded stuff was sent to the original recipient, not the forwarded recipient. Given that, my suggestion would be to adopt the version here (diff).

There are also a bunch of linking improvements that could be made. I'd like to see us be able to just link over the username of the sender and WP:Email, rather than having to spell out the URLs. And it'd be nice to include links to the canvassing/harassment policies and ArbCom, and a mailto link over the email address. But I'm not sure how much MediaWiki can support. Does anyone know about that? (Maybe it's here?) {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:00, 22 January 2024 (UTC)