FANDOM


This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia talk:About the Sandbox article.

  • Be polite
  • Assume good faith
  • Be welcoming

How do I insert a table of contents Edit

--74.116.33.159 15:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Section#Table of contents, Help:Contents --209.244.43.122 (talk) 22:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox spaceEdit

Each user (for example rishi) has a user space, which consists of, among others, pages of the form User:Name/page. Is there a similar sandbox space, for pages of the form Wikipedia:Sandbox/page? Or in other words, given that one can create these pages: are they treated similarly to Wikipedia:Sandbox? Ican't think why they shouldn't be, but it isn't meantioned anywhere, and it has obvious implicaitions for policy ---- Charles Stewart 15:51, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I expect they'd be deleted since they add clutter to the Wikipedia namespace and make it harder to search for something. You can have a sandbox in your user space however, like User:Angela/Sandbox. Angela. 16:12, Aug 27, 2004 (UTC)

Ah, thanks Angela! I missed your comment at the time you wrote it, but better late than never.... Another question: is Category:Sandbox a sandbox category? I presume so, but I can't find any ruling to this effect. If so, or if not, I propose to add the fact to this page ---- Charles Stewart 19:12, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

test.wikipedia 403? Edit

why is test.wikipedia.org 403 forbidden? --Smooth Henry 20:26, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

I found the same problem test.wikipedia.org displays a 403 forbidden error message Wikipedian231 13:24, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
The test wiki was taken offline a few months ago, because it was an extra burden on the developers, and was considered a disproportionate risk to the security of the servers - it always ran the latest unstable MediaWiki code, so that new features and bug-fixes could be tested, but this had the side-effect of it having new bugs as well, potentially serious ones. I've taken out all reference to it in this page, because there's no promise that it will come back, and the fact that it used to exist isn't very interesting. - IMSoP 14:49, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

User sandbox: how to Edit

The description says that members can create their own sandboxes but it doesn't say how. Suggest instructions would be helpful here. ---- CPES 20:06, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Almost a full year has passed since CPES wrote that and still nothing seems to have changed. Maybe I haven't searched well enough, but I can't find any information on how to create one's own sandbox. It would be very helpful. --x-Flare-x 10:28, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I found it out myself. Sandboxes are created the same way as any other subpage. --x-Flare-x 07:39, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

cleaning bot Edit

How about the bot clearing the sandbox everyday rather then every 6 hours. that way people could see any interesting things that pop up.Wikipedian231 15:52, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What is the cleaning bot?Edit

I'm running a wiki, how do I run a sandbox cleaning bot like here? 219.102.32.92 22:50, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One would have to use some form of software that does program writing, and create a bot program that works with the operating system and browser. Wikipedia:Bot_policy. Computer programming. --209.244.43.122 (talk) 22:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipoetry? Edit

For about a day there was something about poetry in the sandbox. Now it's gone. How does one make it again?--1 black hand 14:07, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

The old revision can be found in the edit history. By now, that poetry would be in a sandbox archive. Readded by 1 black hand here. --209.244.43.122 (talk) 22:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Sand box origins Edit

one other similarity between real life sand boxes and wiki sand boxes that isn't mentioned.... Whoever can guess what it is gets a cookie. ;) (hint: thats not a tootsie roll) —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThaDanimal (talkcontribs) 05:57, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

The first wiki sandbox page was created at Ward Cunningham's wiki place in 1997. Here is a snap shot of that page from the Internet Archive:

http://web.archive.org/web/19980115043939/http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WikiWikiSandBox —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.176.24.95 (talk) 05:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Games Edit

Is absolutely anyone allowed to start their own game connected to the sandbox? Simply south 22:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I'd assume you could try, though I haven't seen any guidelines about it. You may also want to check Wikipedia:Esperanza/Coffee lounge for other games such as chess and hangman. Also, you wouldn't be able to add a link to a new game in the sandbox header unless you're an Admin, it's protected. Timrem 01:54, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

If the sandbox is about testing, then I, hereby, suggest that something would be written into the code to prevent the protection template from lasting f/ more than ten minutes, or so.

Dear programmers,

Is that technologically feasible?

Thank You.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 16:21, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean, but I have two guesses so I'll explain both.
First, if you are talking about the sandbox header being protected, it is because it's meant to explain the sandbox, not be a part of the sandbox. If people were to mess with the header, others might not understand what the sandbox is all about.
Second, if you are talking about a template you saw in the sandbox (such as {{vprotected}}), it was probably just added by an experimenting user and doesn't really mean the sandbox is protected.
This link can be used to reset the sandbox to its standard state. Otherwise, the Sandbot will automatically reset the sandbox every twelve hours.
If that didn't answer your question, feel free to explain in greater detail what you mean. Also, you may want to consider changing your signature, as currently it contains a lot of useless code at the end. If you need help with that, feel free to ask. Happy editing! Timrem 16:49, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

header If it is protected, then that's good, certainly; but, it is, frequently corrupted, despite that.

{{vprotected}}) Twelve hours is a long time f/ someone to figure that out; ten minutes, @ least regarding that specific code, would assist new members enormously.

sign There is no uselessness about it. You got to my page? Why have you not read about the two weeks' effort @ an alternative solution? That signature is the best solution that I could find, thus far. I'm eager for a more global, & permanent, solution.

Thank You for your efforts thus far; however, each of us have our perceptions, & reasons. I need to do what I can to make this website easier, rather than as difficult as it frequently is.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 17:19, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

I wonder whether I correctly comprehend "If that didn't answer your question, feel free to explain in greater detail what you mean." I sincerely expressed my objectives. Thank You.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 13:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I just wasn't sure which protection template you were talking about in your original post, that's all. Timrem 13:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
Please, If you have suggestions f/ one, or more, of the three issues, please offer them. Actually, the signature issue includes several other issues, as well, & it's much more personal, about me, also. Please read about it on my page.
Thank You.
[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 21:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

How often does it update? Edit

The text at wp:sand says "this page is automatically cleaned every hour" (actually at Template:Please leave this line alone (sandbox heading)). When you edit the sandbox the comment says "this page will automatically be cleaned every 12 hours". In fact, user:Sandbot is resetting it three or four times an hour. The comments should be brought into agreement with each other and with practice. I can understand why it went from twelve hours to one, but more often seems excessive. Is it a spamming issue? -- Randall Bart 23:45, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It's possible to make the bot run manually by clicking the "Click here to reset the sandbox" link at the bottom of them message – and this is, in fact, the source of most of the reset edits. Trying to give an accurate interval between resets is therefore rather difficult, as they happen irregularly whenever people happen to click that link – Qxz 18:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
This is a rather old comment, but for the record I've clarified this in the header. --ais523 12:05, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Okay... so... how often is it REALLY cleaning? ... too funny. --Kuzetsa (talk) 17:20, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Need article-namespace sandbox Edit

Is there anything like a "sandbox page" in the main namespace (article namespace)? I'm debugging a template which uses ParserFunctions to cause it to appear differently depending on which namespace it is in. Of course, I'm having trouble with the conditions when it is placed in article namespace. I could create a page named something like Page for testing templates which use ParserFunctions but if there is a better alternative, I'd like to use that.  :) —DragonHawk (talk) 23:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC) 84.84.77.50 17:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you figured something out, but if not you may want to check out the Wikipedia Test Wiki. You'd have to copy over any templates you're using, but you'd be able to test in the article namespace. Happy editing! timrem 03:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Redirect Vandals Edit

If someone puts a redirect on the sandbox page it causes much confusion since newbies will be lead to a random page and put off. Should we do something about that? Ossie 22:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Just fix it the same way any other vandalism is fixed – by reverting the change. It's not currently possible to prevent a page being turned into a redirect without protecting the page, which obvoiusly can't be done with the sandbox. (Though it is possible to prevent a page being moved while still allowing it to be edited, and in fact this has been done with the Sandbox) – Qxz 18:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Ok. We should probably put in a feature request for the techies then Ossie 22:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

- If protection is the only way to stop this, then lets protect it! - going to nminate if i can work out how. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.197.0.32 (talk) 12:44, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

No, that defeats the point of the sandbox - anyone should be able to edit it. Graham87 02:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Can you get done for vandalism on the sandbox? 90.192.30.68 (talk) 19:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

What's the point of the sandbox? Edit

Seriously, people can test their work by simply clicking "Show preview." There's no need for a sandbox at all, I think it just creates more of a nuisance in the end. LeviathanMist 12:41, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

It here so people can work over longer periods of time and make changes and try stuff without bieng bothered by someone else updating —Preceding unsigned comment added by JD12fh (talkcontribs) 16:47, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

The sandboxes exist for reasons usually not thought of such as edit histories, being able to view it in saved form, categories and interwikis, transcluded items, new bots testing, and to a lesser degree edits by newbies and practicing savings things like ~~~~. Preview just is not the same as saving. User sandboxes have additional uses such as preparing an article over a long time, lists of links, notes, and filing something for others to review. Using preview for anything other than making sure one's edits to a page are correct is a bad habit and can result in unwanted edits being saved. --209.244.43.122 (talk) 22:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
The above reasons are valid... Especially "preview doesn't show the same as saving" has given me problems in testing in the past. Sandboxes and subpages (examples include: Special:MyPage/Sandbox) are very usefull. Any case, when editing a page, there's even a server-generated notice advising editors to use a sandbox for testing. In short, "that's just the way it is" --Kuzetsa (talk) 17:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand how people can edit "without being bothered by someone else updating", because the sandbox is updated much more often than regular articles. Saving an edit on the sandbox isn't practical, as you would have to look through pages and pages of the edit history to retrieve it. It would make more sense to just edit the page and click on "show preview" as mentioned above. If you really need to save an edit that you are working on, why not just copy it to your user sandbox so it won't be overwritten by other users? --24.7.210.33 (talk) 21:49, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

* For testing, please use the sandbox instead.

Why archive sandbox? Edit

Isn't it a waste of server's space? Springbreak04 06:43, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Advertising Edit

Lately people have been advertising websites on the sandbox —Preceding unsigned comment added by Franky210 (talkcontribs) 17:36, 17 July 2007 (UTC) it isn,t a waste of space becuase sandbox can be hacked to make other websites on the same archive but i t could crash ure server i f it shuts down and you lose all your sites.it also trashs data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.75.123.62 (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Sandbox Edit

but that was exactly my point about the Medical Articles. Real Doctors use Wikipedia, but REAL PATIENTS use it a whole lot more. There's more of us, you see? And some of us don't even have health insurance, let alone immune systems anymore. Product Labelling: "Do Not Use In Cooking" means uh what? Disregard, eat anyway. Excuse me, I need some Trans-Fat right now. Drat, nothing in my cream cheese but anti-penicillin mold 99% pesticide. Thank you for your time. ~ Otterpops 08:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

SVG Sandbox Edit

Can we use Image:Sandbox.svg to test SVG images? MediaWiki's SVG implementation is unpredictable and does not match Firefox's capability, so it has become necessary to upload different versions of the same image many times. (By the way, is there any possibility of a "edit this image" tab for SVG images? It would be appreciated.) And whenever you feel like it, you can delete whatever I have put there, whether you agree with my idea or not. Marco Polo 14:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why not - or you could install MediaWiki on your own system if you felt like it. This is a regular talk page so the only time comments should be removed is either when they are archived or they are vicious personal attacks. Graham87 01:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I was referring to Image:Sandbox.svg. —Marco Polo 21:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Can you make a second personal sandbox? Edit

Can you make a second personal sandbox? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JD12fh (talkcontribs) 16:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

A registered editor can make as many personal sandboxes as he/she wants to. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:20, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


ArticleViewHeader Edit

I heard that on the HRWiki, their sandbox uses the ArticleViewHeader hook to make the sandbox have no header when editing the page. It uses a page called MediaWiki:Sandbox as the header, and if I'm not mistaken, then if we create that same page here, it will make the header show up without it actualy being transcluded on the page. I think it is worth a shot. Soxred93 has a boring sig 19:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be any risk in an admin going ahead and being bold. It would be nice to not have to depend on a template that often is erased to give instructions to those editing the sandbox. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Does that require extensions to WikiMedia not implemented in Wikipedia? If so, an admin won't be enough, you'll need a Developer. --Thinboy00 @180, i.e. 03:19, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, the page mw:Sandbox is in fact a real (editable) sandbox, and the header for it comes from mw:Template:Please leave this line alone and write below (this is the coloured heading), so the above suggestion isn't going to be trivial to implement. But it is true that HRwiki, which uses MediaWiki software, does have a protected (and invisible) sandbox header, so either they have done local customization or there is an extension out there that could be implemented (or something else). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Note: the above posting to WP:VPT. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Which headers to use? Edit

There are several headers being applied to the sandboxes. Should we use one universal template that detects which page it is on and applies correct options such as no sinebot and interwikis,[1] or multiple templates for every page type. --209.244.31.53 (talk) 04:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)


Associated passage Edit

We need to agree upon the best for each kind of sandbox and place a copy of it here. 209.244.31.53 (talk) 21:55, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

As in: <!-- Hello! Feel free to try your formatting and editing skills below this line. As this page is for editing experiments, this page will automatically be cleaned every 12 hours. --> Clark89 (talk) 05:23, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Trigger-happy cleaner bots Edit

Templates {{X1}} through {{X9}} are meant for testing purposes. The text on these pages states: "this page is automatically cleaned every 12 hours." More often, though, the bots clean within one minute, like here:

  • Saved at 21:44, restored at 21:45: [2]
  • Saved at 21:48, restored at 21:49: [3]
  • Saved at 21:59, restored at 22:00: [4]

The short lifetime of the saved versions makes testing almost impossible.  --Lambiam 22:46, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Indeed, I suspect this is why the page WP:About_the_Sandbox at the bottom suggests creating subpages on one's user namespace for testing things out. --Kuzetsa (talk) 06:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. This leaves the question: given that they are not practically usable for testing purposes, why do we have these nine templates? In the meantime I've come to realize that subpages such as {{X9/doc}} are left alone by the cleaner bots.  --Lambiam 13:04, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

user namespace subpages / acceptable "sandbox" convention Edit

Am I to assume that user namespace pages (such as under my own userpage User:Kuzetsa)) are allowed to have a "reasonable" sandbox / scratch space in the form of a subpage? It's been a few months since I quoted an old version of WP:About_the_Sandbox and the "create your own subpage" note at the bottom persists. If anyone can give me a more deffiniative answer than guessing on such matters... please do so in the form of sending me a message on my talk page (new section please) ...and please note that I understand that user pages are meant solely to cover a wikipedia-editor's life as a wikipedian, and nothing else --Kuzetsa (talk) 13:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I've replied there. Graham87 15:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
... For the record: Graham's answer was yes, subpage-style sanboxes are considered acceptable --Kuzetsa (talk) 06:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Sandbox header policy Edit

Many registered users remove the header when using the sandbox for testing, otherwise very editors few change the header in any way (following the non-specific statement of "please leave this line alone"). Is removing the sandbox header allowed at any time on a sandbox page? 209.244.43.122 (talk) 17:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

There's no policy against it - you won't be blocked for it. A bot comes in and puts the sandbox header back every few hours anyway. Graham87 03:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
What I am trying to say, is the header important enough to the sandbox that it should be replaced every instance it is removed (usually clearing the entire page for testing), replaced just when it someone adds or deletes characters from it (probably vandalism), or is this time and effort better spent on something such as recent changes patrol? Once the header is removed it could be missing for several hours while many newcomers find the sandbox page and no information. Or, consider just replacing the header on the main sandbox page because that is where thousands of sandbox links go to.
In other words, does the header matter? Should the header be there or is the current situation of it occasionally being removed and then replaced by a bot good enough? Should there be a policy against removal? 209.244.43.122 (talk) 19:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I think that if an editor passes by the sandbox and finds that there's no header there, they should put it back. Patrolling the sandbox shouldn't be a high priority - if someone adds "I eat poop" someone will replace it a minute later with "the quick brown fox jumps over a lazy dog". Patrolling actual articles is more important. Graham87 02:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

merged from related thread:

Currently the sandbox header is restored as part of the general clearing of the sendbox every three hours by ClueBot II. People often seem to delete the header. Would it be desirable / possible for someone to set up a bot to restore the header whenever it gets removed? It needn't reset the rest of the page - just reinsert the header. Thanks, — Alan 09:20, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Re the above -- also the header from the sandbox talk page, from which this page is now prominently linked, needs to be restored quickly if removed. It is difficult to find this page if the header is removed. — Alan 12:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
User:SoxBot IV is another Sandbox clear-bot; in its RFBA User:MBisanz raised the point that a bot designed to restore the header could end up in an edit war which would make the page impossible to edit. ~ AmeIiorate U T C @ 12:40, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure I quite follow the logic of that objection -- maybe someone can explain it to me? It seems to refer to the situation only in the presence also of a vandalbot. But then surely we just block the vandalbot? And a vandal-bot, if not blocked, could in and of itself create edit conflicts for normal users, regardless of whether there was a header-restoring bot or not.
But aside from this, to throw another suggestion into the mix. Is there currently, or could we ask for, anything in MediaWiki that lets you add a header within the interface on a page-specific basis? Then there would be no need for a bot at all, simply for the purpose of keeping the header visible. — Alan 16:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Louise Brill Edit

If I am to start a new page on a person, does it need to be fully created in the sandbox before it can be released into the mainstream?... and can I use any photographs that are available on the internet...(clearly not ones that show her bottom or anything!)

Maxload11 (talk) 06:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

You don't need to use the sandbox at all, if you don't want to. You may use pictures if they don't have copyrights in place, or under fair trade - see Wikipedia guidelines. Good luck with the article!--Dark Green (talk) 15:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

IF you're looking to start your first article, you may want to check out this tutorial first: Wikipedia:Your first article. Cheers --Superflewis (talk) 11:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Archived discussion moved from WT:SB Edit

See /Use of sandbox talk

Category:X1 Edit

It was suggested in an XfD discussion that Category:X1 should be noted in WP:SAND as a "test" category.

I'm neutral on it, but I thought it should be noted, at least. - jc37 19:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Vandalisim! Edit

Someone put a long scream on the sandbox critisizing wikipidia's NPOV policy. To be honest I think one day Wikimedia should create Wikisoapbox. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipatrol (talkcontribs) 16:13, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflict Edit

Every time I use the sandbox, I always end up in an edit conflict which results in me losing all of my work. It's really annoying and if there is anything we can do to help that it would be great. ~ Her Holy Jamoley Highness Rebel Queen Pokeynut 03:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC) My suggestion to you would be to stop making edits if it bugs you that much....or you could copy+paste when you finish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.221.242.253 (talk) 13:15, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

  • There's not too much too be done about this, because it's usually just for tests and not "work." If there's something that you are test-editing and it's important, the best thing you could do would be to create your own sandbox in your userspace. That, or use someone else's. Cheers. – Alex43223 T | C | E 04:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Uh you can't edit someone else's sandbox unless they give your permission. If you don't have permission that's considered vandalism. Reliable Forevertalk 19:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:UP#OWN, you don't need to ask permission to edit someone else's sandbox. I find your interpretation that that would be vandalism very strange.--Atlan (talk) 20:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

What is appropriate and what is not Edit

I've seen a lot of "vandalism" on the sandbox, but wondered if it was actually vandalism. The sandbox is for editing tests, but does this mean there is no limit to what can be placed there? Is it possible to vandalise the sandbox, when the user warning system directs people in level 1/2 to make editing tests there? Thanks, Matty (talk) 06:48, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

no, it is not vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Estemshorn (talkcontribs) 15:11, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
I would believe its not vandalism. I mean its just a practice space for people who are new to this--KingRatedRIV (talk) 13:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
It is if it is mean and inappropriate.Etineskid (talk) 00:59, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Stupid non-noinclude instruction of the template:X1~X9 Edit

I was testing macro template in {{x1}}/{{x2}}/{{x3}} and the cumbersome instruction of "If you defined parameters such as {{Template sandbox|First|Second|name="Named"}}" just ruins the layout of the macro structure. When I use the <noinclude> to include this part, the restoration bot is triggered and revert all my testing within 1 minute. What's the purpose to "include" such thing in a template? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Header moving to MediaWiki namespace Edit

It might be better to have the header in the MediaWiki namespace, to cause it to be where it is now with edit window material appearing below it, or onto the edit page above the edit window. This has been suggested at the village pump and Wikipedia:Huggle/Feedback. When source of header

{{Please leave this line alone (sandbox heading)}}
<!-- Hello! Feel free to try your formatting and editing
skills below this line. As this page is for editing experiments,
this page will automatically be cleaned every 12 hours. -->

is tampered with the header on the page may disapper. Therefore the header name and invisible message. Bots have been used in the sandboxes for at least several months to restore sandbox or append header above content every time it is touched, users are always frustrated and confused about the sandbox being reset so often.

As for having it on the edit view only will remove need for anything foregin (no preview) to be in the way at top of the page, making test edits-particulary practicing with a full article-a better experience. Clark89 (talk) 23:47, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this was what my post was about at WP:VPT. Is it possible to have the header be a system message at the top of the page? Note that I'm not just talking about an editnotice here, because the header should be visible when reading the page normally.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 15:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
It might be possible by creating a MediaWiki namespace page with the header in it, then editing a main css or script page adding the new page to it coding a transclusion to the sandbox pages, but I am not sure. I placed this section to ask if we should if we could, and wait for the WP:VPT to give wether it is possible or not, but noone responded. Clark89 (talk) 19:07, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Support I think this is a great idea, but the devs will steadfastly refuse to do anything without overwhelming consensus, but people aren't interested in the sandbox enough for that to happen. --Thinboy00 @187, i.e. 03:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Support I also think it's a great idea. The header gets removed far too much, and could confuse some users, so I think moving it would be a good fix. Also, although it would be simpler to add it as a notice just above the edit box, it's definitely needed when viewing the page, as well. Hopefully others will get on board. – Alex43223 T | C | E 12:06, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Support I have already made an {{editprotected}} request, which I include below for archiving purposes. Iceblock (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


Taken from Template talk:Please leave this line alone (sandbox heading) (Section Special:ExpandTemplates)

{{editprotected}}

If you don't like edit conflicts, you could try Special:ExpandTemplates. You can't create templates there, though. Iceblock (talk) 05:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I mean, that the above text be added to the template. Iceblock (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 05:59, 29 January 2009 (UTC).

Quoting Wikipedia talk:About the Sandbox#Edit conflict:

Every time I use the sandbox, I always end up in an edit conflict which results in me losing all of my work. It's really annoying and if there is anything we can do to help that it would be great. ~ Her Holy Jamoley Highness Rebel Queen Pokeynut 03:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC) My suggestion to you would be to stop making edits if it bugs you that much....or you could copy+paste when you finish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.221.242.253 (talk) 13:15, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

  • There's not too much too be done about this, because it's usually just for tests and not "work." If there's something that you are test-editing and it's important, the best thing you could do would be to create your own sandbox in your userspace. That, or use someone else's. Cheers. – Alex43223 T | C | E 04:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
Uh you can't edit someone else's sandbox unless they give your permission. If you don't have permission that's considered vandalism. Reliable Forevertalk 19:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Per WP:UP#OWN, you don't need to ask permission to edit someone else's sandbox. I find your interpretation that that would be vandalism very strange.--Atlan (talk) 20:52, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a need for this. Iceblock (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2009 (UTC)


The problem that the sandbox makes one end up in an edit conflict was presented on 8 October 2008. The IP address was permanently blocked on 16 October 2008.

Iceblock (talk) 11:36, 30 January 2009 (UTC)


(End of included request) Iceblock (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Header Missing Edit

Hi! I just visted the Sandbox and the Header is missing somone probably edited the Do Not Edit This Line. Etineskid (talk) 00:57, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Just revert them. Maybe warn them about it too. --Thinboy00 @014, i.e. 23:20, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

no date on references Edit

2/14/09 what does it mean when their is not date on references on a paper? what does that tell you about the writer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.193.42.164 (talk) 01:22, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

What is a sandbox?Edit

What is a sandbox, it's a sandpit! --203.36.108.27 (talk) 00:48, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Sandbox for the user talkEdit

Is there a sandbox for the user talk, or is this the sandbox for the user talk? Coffee Kitten (meow) 02:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Nope, there isn't one; the user talk and Wikipedia talk namespaces function identically. This is not a sandbox - it's an unofficial place to discuss the sandboxes. For the Wikipedia talk sandbox, see Wikipedia talk:Sandbox. Graham87 05:45, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Got it, thanks! :) Coffee Kitten (meow) 07:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
What then might the purpose of that page possibly be? Would it be supplementary to this one? Why not simply use that page to discuss the sandbox? I am, &c, J№. HANCŐCK (talk) 15:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Inappropriate thingsEdit

Hello. I've always wondered if you could put inappropriate stuff on certain pages. If you can't has there been anyone that's done it and gotten away with it? Please answer this question.!!!!!!!!!!!Also tell me the words I am not allowed to use so I know if I accidently write them I won't get into alot of trouble.Italian4life 97 (talk) 22:21, 6 March 2009 (UTC)Toni Bell March 6th, 2009


You are not allowed to put inappropriate things on pages - see Wikipedia:Vandlism. Wikipedia is not censored, so profanity is allowed in context; also see Wikipedia:Words to avoid. Graham87 02:31, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

This is cool. Edit

I totally didn't know they had this!!! Way, way cool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.49.94 (talk) 17:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.