 | This page in a nutshell: This page provides information and advice on using user warning templates, as well as additional information such as archiving user warnings. |
All standardized templates take several parameters that are entirely optional. For example, you can use {{s/block}} instead of {{s/block|~~~~|1 hour|vandalism}}; the template will automatically insert generic text. Further, all parameters are designed to be very flexible; you can typically write anything in them, including diff links, in-depth messages, and HTML. A sandbox page is available for testing these templates at User talk:Sandbox for user warnings.
If you spot someone vandalising Wikipedia or making disruptive edits, you should revert their changes to a previous version. You can leave a message on their talk page to notify them that they've violated a policy or guideline, and that you've reverted their changes. There are various user warning templates available to simplify this by outputting a standardised message directly onto the editor's talk page.
There are a wide variety of templates available. These include multi-level templates for vandalism, multi-level templates for disruptive editing, and single issue notices and warnings. There are also templates that administrators can use to advise an editor that they have been blocked from editing.
It is not always necessary for an editor engaging in vandalism to receive a full 4 warnings before they can be reported or blocked. In cases of gross, extreme, or numerous vandalism it may be appropriate to use the Level 4im warning. Alternatively, in cases of obvious bad faith vandalism, it may be appropriate to use a level 3 warning in the first instance. If an editor continues to vandalize after a Level 4 warning or Level 4im warning, they should be reported to Administrator intervention against vandalism. An administrator will then review their edits and determine if a block is required.
It is important to remember that disruptive editing is not vandalism. Although it may be appropriate to warn disruptive editors, it is not appropriate to report them as vandals at Administrator intervention against vandalism. Instead, you should consider the nature of the disruptive editing. If the edits relate to obvious disruption that is not properly defined as vandalism, it may be appropriate to report them to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. If the nature of the disruptive editing appears to be a content dispute, and an editor continues to engage in such edits, after a level 3 warning; consideration can be given to reporting the matter at a relevant noticeboard.
Aside from the multi-level templates—which range from a polite pointer to the sandbox, to a stern warning that they desist immediately or face consequences—there are also single issue notices that serve to remind other editors about minor mistakes. These generally cover common editing errors, such as not leaving an edit summary. These notices are not classed as warnings and the actions they advise against almost never result in a block.
There are also single issue warnings. Single issue warnings generally serve to advise editors of policy breaches that, if repeated, are likely to result in a block. An example of such an act would be edit warring.
subst the templateYou should "subst" user warning and notice templates to ensure the wording stays the same. Otherwise the text will change when the template is changed. You should avoid this in order to keep an accurate record of exactly what the editor you warned was told.
If you type the text {{uw-test1}} into a page and save the page, the result will look like this:
Hello, I'm Example. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!
However, any time you or someone else edits the page, the contents remain what you wrote, namely:
{{uw-test1}}
Now imagine someone edits the template {{uw-test1}}. This would mean the above text would also change. This could create unwelcome uncertainty as to exactly what the editor was told. To avoid this, instead type the text {{subst:uw-test1}} and click save — the result will appear the same, but when clicking "Edit this page" to check on the page's source code, you'll see this instead:
[[File:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]] Hello, I'm [[User:Example|Example]]. An edit that you recently made seemed to be a test and has been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]]. If you want to practice editing, please use your [[User:Example/sandbox|sandbox]]. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on [[User talk:Example|my talk page]]. Thanks!<!-- Template:uw-test1 -->
As you can see, the template's contents was written directly into the edit. The template was substituted. If {{uw-test1}} changes, the display of the page on which {{uw-test1}} was substituted will not change, because the template has been replaced by its constituent text. This is good, because it makes it very clear what the editor was warned about. What you intended for the editor to see when you placed the user warning or notice template will not change in the future.
It is best to keep things organized on user talk pages, by using section headers. Type "==October 2026==" above the first warning, adding a new header for each month.
Block templates differ from user warning templates in two fundamental ways. First, they're enclosed inside a message box, which means that placing your signature outside the template will place it visually separate from the message. This is resolved by typing out your signature (typically ~~~~) as the first parameter.
The second difference is the order of the parameters: whereas user warning templates are in order of use, block templates are not. This is because some of the parameters are less optional than in user warning templates, and they happen to be at the end.
As such, although the order of parameters in the templates are time-reason-signature, the template parameters are input as signature-time-reason. This way, you can ignore the more optional parameters by using "{{block|~~~~}}" instead of "{{block|||~~~~}}".