Template talk:Test

Abuse filter

Can this page be somehow excluded from abuse filter? Just tried to test something, and got:
"This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Size vandalism"
86.115.19.146 17:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Most likely since you’re unregistered and it's a template, however I can’t be sure. I would say register, but if you prefer not to, I would take it to the Community noticeboard —ϟAwesome_Diamondsϟ (talk) 18:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I've just edited the abuse filter properly. Try now. – Ferretwings ^(talk) 21:03, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, managed to do some tests. Got a "Your edit includes new external links." when I was reverting to your revision though, and I didn't notice any links in it, so maybe something else in abuse filters got broken in the process? Anyway, thanks again. 86.115.19.146 05:15, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

The "external links" is another filter. Your revert didn't show up in the Abuse Log, so I'm not sure what triggered that warning. Regarding your test, {{#ifexist}} is an expensive parser function, so you could try Template:Ifexists instead. {{ ifexists|(pagename)|(then)|(else) }} – Ferretwings ^(talk) 12:58, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the lesson. "Expensive parser function count: 0/99" though I'm still baselessly doubting if it's actually less resource intensive. Kind of wish I had saved other stats to compare. Anyway, I was kind of just messing with it, without a real purpose, trying to see if I could make it work(error reporting color is kind of a kludge, and could probably use readability/whitespace tweaking, but works). I don't think it would be all that useful a template, since archiving itself is done manually. Many thanks, sorry for taking your time. 86.115.19.146 14:10, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Blanking The Template

Regarding your last edit summary, we do ask editors to blank the page afterwards. I apologize for not blanking it myself, as that was my test on there. I meant to go back and finish testing, but something came up, and I never got back to it. I have copied my experiment onto another page, so we can blank Template:Test for the next user. In the future, you can check the page's history to see when it was last edited. If it's been a week since the last edit, it's fair game ;) – Ferretwings ^(talk) 15:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks yet again. I did check edit dates and "what links here", before editing the first time, and figured no harm would be done since test shouldn't take too long, and I'd revert afterwards. Sidenotes, apparently doc template is also expensive(seems to use #ifexist though I haven't looked too closely since I can't(nor want) edit it). And figured out why I got link warning, it's probably from privacy policy link inside the help template(filter can't know if link is built-in or if it's passed as argument), so everything is working properly. 86.115.19.146 15:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)