I've just added UTC to this. jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 06:26, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• The UTC conversions added to this documentation make the template essentially useless; if the editor is going to have to make time calculations, the editor, or at least this editor, won't bother using it at all -- and won't bother marking the unsigned comments at all. The whole point of unsigned2 is to allow a quick cut-and-paste. And there's no point to "avoiding meta-template to avoid server load"; this template should always be used with subst:, which renders the issue irrelevant. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:48, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You can also make a template specifically for your time zone:

(preceding unsigned comment by  [[Special:Contributions/(({2))}|(({2))}]] (({1))} +7:00 (UTC))

or

(preceding unsigned comment by  [[Special:Contributions/(({2))}|(({2))}]] (({1))} (PDT, UTC-7)

It is really odd to specify a precise time without mentioning the time zone.--Patrick 22:05, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please put back in the UTC time zone info, as it does not seem to work any more. Philip Baird Shearer 23:23, 16 July 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I have created ((unsigned2Tz)) to allow the user to specify a TZ offset instead of manually doing the conversion. DES ^(talk) 17:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because this is a template of a template, subst'ing it gives you another template, which you then have to subst again if you really want to reduce server load. Maybe this template could be rewritten to not be a template of a template. --Kenyon 19:41, 3 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I did this a few days ago, by the way. --Kenyon 08:51, 8 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• At Template_talk:Unsigned2Tz#Discussion user Cryptic suggested:

  "This [unsigned2Tz template] can be merged into ((Unsigned2)) without breaking its current functionality using the shiny new template default parameter feature - just replace the (({3))} with (({3|))}."

  Could somebody a bit more experienced than I am in editing templates make the change to this Unsigned2 template as per Cryptic's suggestion? My understanding is that the result would be to give an optional time offset parameter as per the discussion above. Thanks to the recent changes, subst'ing the template would not give another template.--A Y Arktos 23:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Optional parameter added. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've substed remaining instances of unsigned2Tz and deleted it (because it's now redundant) -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:14, 11 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I often find myself copying and pasting a line from a history page to get the parameters into this template. The only annoying part was adding the pipe between the date and username. Behold, addPipesToHistory, a script that will add a sort-of-hidden pipe that will be copied along with the other text. I thought this simpler CSS version might work, but it turns out the added content does not get selected. If you try it and have any trouble, let me know, and I'll do what I can to help. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-12-17 05:52:43Z

interesting! I went at it the other way round... in User:Lar/moretabs/monobook.js function addUnsigned2() takes an unpiped history comment as input and tries to figure out where the pipe belongs. It's suitable for invoking from a tab or tabmenu. (and yes, teh second arg on the second substr is not needed...) ++Lar: t/c 06:12, 20 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Would an administrator please delete the comment "Template:Unsigned2", that gets inserted at the end of every single one. It doesn't need to be appended to every single comment where this is used. This was deleted from Template:Unsigned as well. —Centrx→talk 02:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done.--Commander Keane 06:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whether this template should always be substituted or not is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Template substitution#Unsigned and Unsigned2. Your comment is invited. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 01:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

((editprotected))

This template is protected, and should be tagged with ((protected template)), or another suitable protection template. Thanks – Qxz 19:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. Neil (not Proto ►) 22:23, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

((editprotected)) ((editprotected))

Could we have a simple explanation on the template page to describe its function such as:

This is a reversed version of ((unsigned)) so users can just copy (1) the time and (2) the username from the edit history into the template, without needing to re-order it.

Also advise the user to subst (if the admin doing this agrees with me on this point). Thanks, ~ hydnjo talk 15:40, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made a doc subpage, which is not protected, so you can edit it to say whatever you want. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:54, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, thanks. - hydnjo talk 22:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

((unsigned2)) should be identical to ((unsigned)) with the parameters 1 & 2 reversed.

The undocumented parameter 3 (which I think is coded wrong, anyhow) is screwing with the archive bots since after substitution it is leaving an (UTC((3|))) on every page

IMO, a much better version for ((unsigned2)) would be quite simply ((unsigned|((2))|((1)))), though that may not get doubly substituted correctly. -- KelleyCook 15:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I like the linked "Please sign your posts" admonition that was in the now deleted/redirected ((unsigned3)). Please see

Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_August_6#Template:Unsigned3

Many unregistered users and newbies do not know how to sign their posts. The link tells them how, and why they should. Saves a lot of editor time explaining this stuff to them. Can it be added to the ((unsigned)) and ((unsigned2)) templates?

I prefer the date/name order of ((unsigned2)) versus the name/date order of ((unsigned)). So I hope no one deletes it.

((subst:unsigned|user name or IP|time-date))

((subst:unsigned2|time-date|user name or IP))

((unsigned2)) is better for copying the date/name info directly from an edit history list (with a single copy-and-paste). Because the edit history list puts the date before the name.

Also, the trailing "(UTC)" added by the ((unsigned2)) template just confuses people (me included) who try to use the template. Can it be removed from the ((unsigned2)) template? It is not used in the ((unsigned)) template. We want to make it easy for people to use these templates. The edit history list uses UTC anyway, I believe. But it does not explicitly say it. So why label the unsigned post notes with it either? Out of sight, out of mind.

On the other hand someone mentioned bot problems if there were no trailing (UTC). Is this true? See:

Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_August_6#Template:Unsigned3. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Timeshifter (talk • contribs) 13:34, 7 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A better template, albiet with a problem (Help!)

OK I figured out what parameter 3 was doing (wrongly, IMO). And now I think this is a much better implementation. It puts in the UTC, but won't double it. It accepts a direct cut and paste from history and reformats it to the proper HH:MM, DD MMMMM YYYY. It has allows a new optional |zone= parameter to convert from the timezone displayed in your history list back to UTC.

<small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:(({2))}|(({2))}]] ([[User talk:(({2))}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/(({2))}|contribs]]) ((#time: H:i, j F Y |(({1|now))} ((#if: (({zone|))}|((#expr: 0-(({zone))))} hours)))) (UTC).</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 --><noinclude> ((/doc))</noinclude>

This part works really wonderfully, for example
((User:KelleyCook/unsigned2|10:10, August 14, 2007|KelleyCook|zone=-4)) yields
<substall>—The preceding unsigned comment was added by KelleyCook (talk • contribs) 14:10, 14 August 2007 (UTC).</substall>Reply[reply]

However I cannot figure out the magic incarnations to get it to subst: correctly. The way it is now leaves the #time calculations (among other things).
((subst:User:KelleyCook/unsigned2|10:10, August 14, 2007|KelleyCook|zone=-4)) yields the underlying wikicode:

<small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:KelleyCook|KelleyCook]] ([[User talk:KelleyCook|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/KelleyCook|contribs]]) ((#time: H:i, j F Y |10:10, August 14, 2007 ((#if: -4|((#expr: 0--4)) hours)))) (UTC).</small><!-- Template:Unsigned2 -->

I can't imagine the Archive Bots being able to parse that gobbledygook either? The tricks I tried based on the Mediawiki page haven't worked. Does anyone know who to ask? -- KelleyCook 16:57, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Here is how I have been doing it:

((subst:unsigned2|time-date|user name or IP))

((subst:unsigned2|10:10, August 14, 2007|KelleyCook|zone=-4))

Hope that helps with ((unsigned2)).

In preferences I leave my time in unadjusted UTC (no time zone adjustment). That way I don't have to use that time zone parameter at the end of

((subst:unsigned2|10:10, August 14, 2007|KelleyCook|zone=-4))

That time zone parameter adjustment does not currently work in ((unsigned)):

((subst:unsigned|user name or IP|time-date))

((subst:unsigned|KelleyCook|10:10, August 14, 2007|zone=-4))

((unsigned)) does not currently add the trailing "(UTC)" in any case. --Timeshifter 00:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The latest template change got rid of the added trailing UTC in ((unsigned2)) also. At least when no "UTC" info is added to begin with. Thanks for the change. --Timeshifter 11:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please add ' (UTC)' after the date, so Miszabot might recognize the timestamp for archiving. The timezone is required. -- SEWilco (talk) 05:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This has been discussed in the past. One problem is that people who insert these tags sometimes use their own time zones (not UTC). Another is that many people manually include "(UTC)".

A better solution would be to recode Miszabot to recognize this template's text. —David Levy 08:22, 15 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

((editprotected)) This template appears to have lost its small font size. I couldn't see a change in font size discussed here, and Template:Unsigned, with which it is supposed to be uniform, still uses a small font. JRawle (Talk) 21:46, 13 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please see Template talk:Unsigned. In the end, all the unsignedX templates need to be in sync. — Carl (CBM · talk) 01:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, at the moment the templates aren't in sync. Template:Unsigned currently has a small font by virtue of a style attribute. I'll join the general discussion about the font size on the other page. JRawle (Talk) 14:38, 14 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, you're right. Personally, I don't have an opinion one way or the other about the size. I would like to get all the templates in sync at the end, though. — Carl (CBM · talk) 18:23, 14 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is this being addressed at all? Unless I'm misinterpreting things, the batsignal at the top of this section is ((tl))'ed, so no one is actually being summoned by it, right?--NapoliRoma (talk) 15:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The user replying to me removed the template. There is a discussion at Template talk:Unsigned, but it has gone quiet in the last few days. Please go and give your opinion there to get discussion going again. JRawle (Talk) 16:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a completely non-intuitive way to "remove the template", IMO. Just looking at it, an uninformed reader wouldn't know what it means; a slightly more informed reader would think it was still valid as a signal; a wonk like me would think someone goofed when adding it.

Better would be to just comment it out, and maybe add something to the comment to indicate the section had been flagged but was cleared on such and such a date for reason X.--NapoliRoma (talk) 19:13, 18 September 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It seems that the only purpose of this template is to be able to cut and paste date and usernames out of page histories. All of those are in UTC. Not only does Miszabot require (UTC), but also the User:RFC bot that is now being used to create WP:RM entries. I would suggest it simpler to go back to adding (UTC) at the end, and specify in the documentation that if you are entering a different timezone than UTC, you need to adjust for it. Leaving it out does not cut the mustard, because it just creates ambiguity both for those who cut and paste from history and those who look at their Rolex/Timex/Swatch to enter the timestamp. 199.125.109.99 (talk) 04:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

((editprotected)) Add (UTC) at the end. 199.125.109.99 (talk) 04:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's probably a good idea, but I think whatever method is chosen should match the other unsigned templates for consistency. I have adjusted this template to just use ((unsigned)) (with the parameters reversed) so I suggest starting a discussion at Template talk:unsigned about this. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've reverted your edit, which prevented users from substituting the raw code. —David Levy 09:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're operating under a false premise, 199.125.109.99. Registered users are able to specify their time zones, which causes their local times to be displayed in revision histories. Adding "(UTC)" would result in incorrect tags from users unaware of the need to manually offset the times (regardless of whether they use their own clocks or copy and paste the information from revision histories). The status quo is superior; it allows users who are aware of the issue to manually append "(UTC)", while everyone else's tags are merely ambiguous instead of flat-out inaccurate.

And because the practice of manually including "(UTC)" is so widespread, your proposed modification would cause it to appear twice in countless instances (both non-substituted transclusions from before the change and future transclusions from users unaware that the longstanding setup has been altered).

Also, please use the ((editprotected)) tag only to request edits that are uncontroversial or consensus-backed. —David Levy 08:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This is part of a double edit request. This page should include an extra unnamed parameter that would allow a user to be listed as a modified username. For instance, User:SPLATCO who prefers to be linked like $plat or User:Chzz who prefers to be linked like  Chzz  ► . This edit would add an extra parameter that would then be sent to the ((unsigned)) template. The edit would look like this:

(( (({|safesubst:))}unsigned|1=(({2))}|2=(({1|))))}<noinclude>
((documentation))</noinclude>

to

(( (({|safesubst:))}unsigned|1= ))|2=(({1|))}|3=(({3|))} ))<noinclude>
((documentation))</noinclude>
</nowiki>

The other half of this two-part edit request can be found at Template talk:Unsigned#Edit request from Banaticus, 22 April 2011. Banaticus (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Not done, per discussion on the other page. Feel free to follow up just on that page, and I'm sure whoever answers will be able to modify both pages if there's consensus to do so. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 12:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I recently discovered ((Xsign)), which uses some kind of deep magic to turn

00:01, 1 April 2012 Example

into

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Example (talk • contribs) 00:01, 1 April 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Impressive stuff.

Would it not be possible to use similar wizardry to detect which of the arguments to this template is the timestamp and which the name? If so, then it could finally be merged with ((unsigned)) and end one of our long-term annoying little niggles. I've asked Xeno, the author of Xsign, to comment here. — Hex (❝?!❞) 19:49, 11 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

At this time I don't see it, at least not in a reliable way. Once we have Lua templates though it will be easy to make all these templates significantly smarter, so we won't have to worry about template order and whether or not to add the (UTC) anymore. Amalthea 20:27, 11 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sweet. I hadn't heard about Lua templates, do you have a link where I can read about them? Thanks. — Hex (❝?!❞) 17:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

mw:Lua --Redrose64 (talk) 17:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't know whether I'm going to cry with happiness or jump up and down with excitement. Maybe both. THAT'S GREAT. Thanks! — Hex (❝?!❞) 12:09, 14 November 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add Category:Wikipedia templates to be automatically substituted - not knowing it should be, I just transcluded a whole bunch of unsigned templates, and it would be nice if the bots knew to substitute it. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 17:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Anomie, doesn't your bot do all the subst:ing? Isn't this one of those that gets done anyways? — ((U|Technical 13)) (e • t • c) 17:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Not done for now: Oiyarbepsy, this won't resolve your problem and isn't the way that this should be done per your previous answer from Anomie. — ((U|Technical 13)) (e • t • c) 18:26, 1 February 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is this template deprecated? If I add this template to talk pages, then user:AnomieBOT replaces it, see eg https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chariot_clock&action=history --Estopedist1 (talk) 06:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See the documentation on the template page. You probably used "unsigned2" but should have used "subst:unsigned2". Johnuniq (talk) 10:54, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Estopedist1: All the templates in this family are subst-only, as advised in their documentation pages - that is, correct use is ((subst:unsigned|(name)|(timestamp))), ((subst:unsigned2|(timestamp)|(name))), ((subst:unsignedIP|(IP address)|(timestamp))), ((subst:unsignedIP2|(timestamp)|(IP address))) and ((subst:undated|(timestamp))). AnomieBOT is merely fixing improper use. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've added lowercase sigmabot III to a talk page (Talk:Gypsy Rose Lee) for its next scheduled run, and I'm adding templates to any section ending in an insigned comment, to make sure they all archive correctly. But I think I'm getting some of Unsigned2's base code instead of results, see text below.

[[User:(({2))}|(({2))}]] ([[User talk:(({2))}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/(({2))}|contribs]])

I did use the subst version of the template. And the very top of the main article for the Unsigned2 template also has the above text on it right now, instead of any actual username, so I suspect there is something busted. CleverTitania (talk) 05:46, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@CleverTitania: You must provide a username, and for it to be picked up by lowercase sigmabot III, you also need to supply a timestamp. These edits will fix it: for the first, I used ((subst:unsignedIP2|06:27, 2 April 2004 (UTC)|66.178.158.136)); for the others, I used ((subst:unsigned2|21:20, 27 March 2006 (UTC)|WesternActor)) and ((subst:unsigned2|23:52, 24 August 2006 (UTC)|HairyDan)) respectively. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 07:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Redrose64:Thanks for fix this. My impression was that the templates were supposed to pull in the username and IP address from the page's history, not that they needed to be added manually; and the instructions for the bot didn't say anything about adding timestamps. But this is my first time using the bot and the templates and I might've missed those details somewhere. I appreciate the assist. CleverTitania (talk) 14:22, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The documentation says that users copy the time and the username from the edit history. Also, bots like lowercase sigmabot III select threads for archiving based upon their ages; so a timestamp is necessary for the bot to know the age of the thread. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:19, 16 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]