Last modified: 2014-08-25 10:11:50 UTC
I request the addition of an easy method for adding a timestamp to the very end of a message. One way to go about this is to add a line to the bottom of the form, that says something like this: Page or category containing list of pages to leave a message on: Subject of the message (also used as the edit summary): Body of the message: [X] Include timestamp [X] Mark language as using [Pop-up menu, default to English] On at least Meta.wiki and en.wp, I would like this box to be ticked by default. MassMessages sent from these places tend to reach pages that are autoarchived by bots. For the bots to "see" the date stamp, it must be the last thing in the message. People forget to add a date stamp, and this means that these messages have to be cleaned up manually. (In other cases, they don't know that adding just a timestamp requires five tildes instead of four, so you get odd signatures.)
I'm not sure I understand why MassMessage needs modification here. This seems like a purely content issue. Is "~~~~~" inadequate? Or "~~~~" for that matter?
"~~~~~" is inadequate when people forget to add it, or when they sign the message and then add a "P.S." or other content after it. As an example of "other content", consider the common form of e-mail messages: Here's the material I promised you. <Signature> Long message follows signature. Unless MassMessage's design goal is "screw up bot-archived pages whenever someone inexperienced or distracted uses it", then I think this would be helpful.
(In reply to WhatamIdoing from comment #2) > "~~~~~" is inadequate when people forget to add it, or when they sign the > message and then add a "P.S." or other content after it. How are people forgetting when MassMessage specifically warns you if you're missing a timestamp? Is the check not working in all cases? > > As an example of "other content", consider the common form of e-mail > messages: > > Here's the material I promised you. > > <Signature> > > Long message follows signature. That should work perfectly fine with standard archive bots that use a regex for timestamps anywhere in the thread. > Unless MassMessage's design goal is "screw up bot-archived pages whenever > someone inexperienced or distracted uses it", then I think this would be > helpful. I don't think anyone said that or implied that.
