MediaWiki talk:Sitenotice

Alignment problems
This is running up against Template:Locked and Template:Featured (see Gettysburg Address, for example). Maybe adding more &amp;nbsp; would be a good idea. --Spangineerwp (háblame) 20:47, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Alternately, we could stop right-aligning the sitenotice. It's usually centered, but it was apparently right-aligned when the announcement was copied from Wikipedia. // [ admin ] Pathoschild (talk/map) 04:26, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * That would work too. Incidentally, the text needs to be updated again (see w:MediaWiki talk:Sitenotice). --Spangineerwp (háblame) 13:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I've blanked it, since it's been up long enough to notify regular contributors; it's irrelevant to most visitors. // [ admin ] Pathoschild (talk/map) 14:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Blanking Request
Please completely blank the page to remove the site notice. This is what is done for other sites, see http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Sitenotice&action=edit. Cbrown1023 23:22, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Completely blanking the local site notice will default it to the global site notice defined at foundation:MediaWiki:Sitenotice. The easiest way to hide it is to define the local site notice with an invisible character such as &amp;nbsp; . — {admin} Pathoschild 00:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Announcing American non-acceptance of the rule of the shorter term
Based on Scriptorium, I am making a very simple announcement, but if any admin needs a lot of room to announce something temporary, I will not object temporary removal of my announcement. Once the temporary announcement is no longer needed, please restore my announcement. Thank you.--Jusjih 17:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think an online petition is important enough for a global announcement to all readers and editors. It is of limited interest and unlikely to have any effect on US law. Please discuss on the Scriptorium if you think it should be added. — {admin} Pathoschild 00:06:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I think it is important for Wikisource. It has an impact of the whole project. I have no objection to have it in the Sitenotice. Yann 10:09, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Is it possible to have a site notice that only appears for logged in users? I can see why this isnt critical for the average reader (and is horribly complex to boot), but it is worthwhile for contributors to read even if they dont sign their name to the petition. John Vandenberg 12:50, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Pathoschild, I already talked about this based on Scriptorium. When I asked about adding to the site notice, Benn Newman objected mentioning the attached petition but liked my compromise to link to the Meta page only. Please read the discussion there that I already started.--Jusjih 14:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Jusijih. I've added further comments in that discussion; I have been away for the last month, so I couldn't keep up with discussions. — {admin} Pathoschild 16:08:33, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Whatcha mean November ended?
When? Who said? Did we get to vote on it? I am happy to support but just need to be told these things. ;-) billinghurst (talk) 15:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, good news! Thanks to FreedomFighterSparrow and Brion, unregistered users can now hide the sitenotice again. Previously, they were forced to see it continuously.

In all cases, please use the sitenotice with care, and keep in mind that occasional visitors see sitenotices on all their visits, if they visit less than once a month or they don't click "dismiss" and save a cookie. Nemo 15:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)