Forum:Warning templates

Something that had recently been on my mind was our warning templates. While I do believe they are well written and understandable, I feel they currently have 2 issues. Firstly, some of the templates, due to the time of when they were made, have some wording and links which are less than helpful, such as one telling the user they can use the Help Desk, which I don't think any of us use any more. With this in mind, it means that some of the wording, while helpful, is quite dated, and could do with some updating. Secondly, I feel that, while it makes them look lovely, having them inside that coloured box makes them look too manufactured. Part of me thinks the reasons people ignore warnings is because they don't look personalised. Now, I recall in previous forums users have stated we need to use more personalised warnings, and I believe we have begun to do so. However after the first few times we then move on to the templates, which may look too manufactured, and is simply getting ignored. Now in a comparison, I have 2 image warnings I give out to users on their first image offence, while I just copy and paste the warning from a notepad, the fact it's not inside one of the fancy boxes makes it look a lot more personal. Just to sort of prove the point, I'll put 2 versions underneath this intro for you to judge for yourselves, as well as 2 versions of an existing template, and one without its shell. Now, what I'm mainly getting at here, is that there's nothing wrong with the templates themselves, I just feel some are a bit dated, and they can just look too manufactured to get proper notice. 20:57, March 8, 2014 (UTC)

Example A - Without shell
Hi. Your recent image "" was deleted as it did not conform to our image policy. It was both badly named and incorrectly licensed. When uploading in the future please ensure to follow the naming and licensing rules as seen on the policy page, failure to do so may lead up to a block if enough warnings are given. If you need any more help on image uploading feel free to ask myself, anyone on the Custodian team or Sysop team. Thanks. 20:57, March 8, 2014 (UTC)

{| width="100%" style="background: transparent; "
 * valign="top" width="50%" style="background: #333333; border: 2px solid #000000; padding: .5em 1em; -moz-border-radius: 1em"|

Example B - With shell
Hi. Your recent image "" was deleted as it did not conform to our image policy. It was both badly named and incorrectly licensed. When uploading in the future please ensure to follow the naming and licensing rules as seen on the policy page, failure to do so may lead up to a block if enough warnings are given. If you need any more help on image uploading feel free to ask myself, anyone on the Custodian team or Sysop team. Thanks.
 * 20:57, March 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * }

Example A - Without shell
An image you recently uploaded" ", was considered to violate the image policy as it was one or more of the following: Please make sure you read the image policy to be sure of the protocols in place for uploading images. You are still free to upload images; however, please make sure they are up to standards! Continued uploads that do not comply with the policy may result in a block. Thanks! 20:57, March 8, 2014 (UTC)
 * Low quality
 * Contained a banned image effect
 * Concerned real life info, which is not generally allowed
 * Poorly named
 * Incorrect/lack of license
 * Duplicate file/superseded
 * Tampered with a photo-editing program

{| width="100%" style="background: transparent; "
 * valign="top" width="50%" style="background: #333333; border: 2px solid #000000; padding: .5em 1em; -moz-border-radius: 1em"|

Example B - with shell
An image you recently uploaded was considered to violate the image policy as it was one or more of the following: Please make sure you read the image policy to be sure of the protocols in place for uploading images. You are still free to upload images; however, please make sure they are up to standards! Continued uploads that do not comply with the policy may result in a block. Thanks!
 * Low quality
 * Contained a banned image effect
 * Concerned real life info, which is not generally allowed
 * Poorly named
 * Incorrect/lack of license
 * Duplicate file/superseded
 * Tampered with a photo-editing program
 * 20:57, March 8, 2014 (UTC)


 * }