Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 42

Archive 35

←

Archive 40

Archive 41

Archive 42

Archive 43

Archive 44

Archive 45

November 2019 Twinkle updates, features, and behaviors (2019-11-20 @97d037f)

The latest update brings a number of quality-of-life improvements, such as better filtering of redirect tags and more helpful status messages, as well as a big new feature by User:SD0001: Requested move nominations! You can find the ability to open an RM discussion in the XfD menu. Twinkle will now also attempt to notify the first non-redirect creator for PROD and XfD nominations, and will show its menus on the Special:Block interface. Also included are a number of bug fixes as well as improved handling and functionality. Changes not otherwise attributed were made by User:Amorymeltzer.

• xfd:
  • Add support for Requested Move nominations (698, by User:SD0001)​​
  • Add showontransclusion=1 to Templatespace RfD nominations (720)​
  • Fix bug in notification checkbox when changing modes 740
• xfd/prod: If the page was created as a redirect, notify the creator of the first non-redirect version instead (710, by User:SD0001)
• prod: Fix bug in detection of {{old prod}} (735, by User:SD0001)​
• tag:
  • Add quick filter for redirects and files too (724, by User:SD0001)
  • Put the quick filter higher up and move the patrol checkbox to the bottom 728
  • Disable browser input suggestions and enter key for the quick filter (668, by User:SD0001)
  • Indicate direction of merge in talk page notification (717)​​
  • Don't place {{current}} in {{multiple issues}} (719)​
  • Fix bug causing some redirect tags to fail (731)
  • Fix bug when there are no available tags (732)
• arv
  • Check for bot reports before reporting at AIV (733)​
  • Fix bug calculating hours for AN3 reporting, will now show last 48 hours (736)
• warn: Add {{uw-own4}} and {{uw-tpv4im}} (727)​
• block:
  • Twinkle menus will now show up on Special:Block, in particular allowing sysops to use Twinkle's block module there (743)
  • Correct the WP:NOTHERE label (c26f69b)
• protect: Remove PC option on inappropriate namespaces (738)
• batchprotect: Add support for shift-clicking checkboxes (734)
• morebits:
  • Don't display absurdly long spam blacklist messages (722)
  • Better status messages (646, by User:SD0001)

This section should serve as a catching ground should anything not work properly or if any new bugs crop up, as well as for any feedback or suggestions. As always, input is welcome at the GitHub repo as well. Finally, if you're interested in helping out with Twinkle development, we've started guideline to help new contributors get set up — check it out! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:00, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: RM support shouldn't be available for category pages, but then again, the current XFD options dropdown doesn't check namespaces. Filed as https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/issues/753 DannyS712 (talk) 21:47, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Technical Morebits changes

Also, for the more technical folks, there have been a number of excellent improvements to the Morebits.js library, all made by User:SD0001. They are briefly noted below:

• API calls can now be made using JSON (493)
  • The default is xml, but specify query.format to use json
  • getResponse and Response should be used in favor of getXML and responseXML, respectively, as the latter have been deprecated in favor of the former
• Classes, styles and id are applied on the input/textarea rather than the container div; fixed a bug causing the container and the input field to get the same id; and enable support for custom id. (675)
• Improved handling of invalid token errors (682)
• If a page was created as a redirect, lookupCreation now has an option, lookupNonRedirectCreator, to check old revisions for the first revision that is not a redirect. (710)

Additionally, the morebits library is now loaded as a Gadget in MediaWiki:Gadget-definition, so it can more easily be accessed by user scripts and tools. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:00, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

• W00t! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 18:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Wrong text when requesting unprotection

In this edit, when requesting unprotection the message said I was requesting semi protection due to vandalism, but placed it in the unprotection section. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 10:34, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Well, that's definitely wrong! Something similar was previously reported by ToBeFree, but I couldn't replicate it and got a weird response from the server. This looks similar in concept, but is sort of the opposite case. I've opened an issue, will try to take a looksee when I can. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:16, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

@Trialpears: Are you sure that you changed the 'Type and reason' field from "Persistent vandalism (semi)", which is the default even on a protected page, to "Unprotection"? If you didn't, then this is not a bug. The edit summary and text produced by Twinkle do match. And since the page was at that time under template protection, it was indeed a request for reduction in protection level. SD0001 (talk) 13:12, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Ah yeah, duh. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:58, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Yep, that's probably it! Kudos to Twinkle for being a lot smarter when choosing which section to put it in then I thought! Pherhaps a few of the non-applicable options could be hidden from view depending on protection settings, but that's like a bottom priority task. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 21:48, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Deletion sort issue

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science fiction and fantasy does not seem to work when initiated through Twinkle. TTN (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the report TTN, the issue was that Twinkle wasn't following redirects when posting to the delsort page. That category was recently renamed, hence the issue. I've just merged and deployed a quick fix, which should do the trick. Let me know if you have any further issues! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:31, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Ping Enterprisey since I think his delsort does the same. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:48, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

How to unclutter my user talk contributions?

I started using TW a month ago and it is very nice, but my user talk page contribs are now cluttered with prod/AfD notifications even more than before - but thanks to TW, they all have the same edit summary. So... any tips how can I get them filtered out so I can look for the few messages I sent that are not automated? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:41, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Normally, people would use xtools but for you it looks like the page takes forever to load (probably because of high edit count).

If you find nothing better, you can always open the browser console (Ctrl+⇧ Shift+J or F12) and enter the command $('.mw-contributions-list li:contains("TW")').hide() which instantly hides all TW edits. SD0001 (talk) 12:49, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Towards a better intro and link to this page

I'm learning about Twinkle. I'm a bit of a wikipedia freak, I guess. If not, it is must be very hard for people to find out what the heck the "TW" at the top right next to the search box stands for. And when one does stumble upon this page where "possibly" the TW is explained, it took me quite lot of reading to finally understand I was on the right page - because all a newbie get is:

"Twinkle is a popular JavaScript Wikipedia gadget that .." ?!

You got to be kidding. Starting off that technically?

How about this re-write: "Twinkle refers to the "TW" at the top right of every wikipedia page, next to the search box. The TW pull down menu holds software tools that speed-up the work of people who help improving the articles written on the wikipedia. Twinkle is the name for a popular JavaScript Wikipedia gadget that..."

and I hope someone can explain what the heck the word "twinkle" has to do with the functions under the TW pull down window. I just know twinkle from "twinkle twinkle little star". The other pull-down windows are quite easy to understand: Talk, Read, Edit, "+", View history, More, Page - but then "TW"? Is there no way to link that through to the page here?

Sincerely, SvenAERTS (talk) 17:54, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

While I do agree the front page could use some updating, that's a bit misleading. Twinkle is a gadget that you have to enable in your preferences, it is not something every editor sees or uses. That option said:

Twinkle: automate common tasks such as reporting vandalism, warning vandals, requesting deletion, welcoming users, and tagging articles (preferences)

You enabled Twinkle no later than January 2013, so perhaps you forgot about that link? At any rate, I've edited it to say:

Twinkle: add menu buttons to automate common tasks, including: reporting vandalism, warning vandals, requesting deletion or protection, welcoming users, and tagging articles (preferences)

~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

"If you want to set Twinkle preferences..." box CSS

I was going to style the "If you want to set Twinkle preferences..." box (aka #twinkle-config-headerbox), but its styles are set using the style attribute. Could the style be set using CSS instead? I was going to write a pull request for this myself, but I couldn't find an obvious place to put the new rule (these two didn't seem like good candidates). Enterprisey (talk!) 08:09, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Without commenting on the merits, the former should be fine. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:39, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

You can still style it by using !important. If you want to file a PR, yeah it should go to the first file (the latter is just a CSS peer gadget). SD0001 (talk) 13:31, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Adding protection templates on redirects breaks the redirect

In this edit, Twinkle added a {{pp-protected}} template to a redirect page, but placed it above the #REDIRECT code, therefore breaking the redirect. There should be a check to see if the page is a redirect, and if it is, to add the protection template below the #REDIRECT code so it doesn't break. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 19:57, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

K6ka, what screen were you on when you protected it? This is actually something I fixed last year, so is there a chance that you didn't reload the page after rolling back the edits before protecting? If so, that'd be it. Twinkle uses mw.config.get('wgIsRedirect') to determine if the page is a redirect, but if you load the page after reverting, your browser wouldn't have gotten the new config for the page, so it would have still "looked" like a non-redirect. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:26, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, I was viewing the page history when I used that option. I believe I had clicked rollback on that page as well, and then, without reloading the page, used Twinkle to protect the page. I had thought Twinkle would have recognized the newer changes when it went to edit the page. That might explain it. Thank you for your time. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 01:31, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

You're right. That should actually be happening. The fix for this is trivial. Will file a patch when I get time. SD0001 (talk) 13:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Y Patch filed. SD0001 (talk) 19:00, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

AIV custom descriptions

When reporting an IP at AIV, is there any way to add custom descriptions? Like this.

  {
        "value": "Template:report1",
        "label": "The user has done ......"
      }

~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 22:00, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, could you explain a bit further? I'm not sure what you're asking for. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:27, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Amorymeltzer, When you report a user at WP:AVI. You get a set of labels such as "Vandalism after final (level 4 or 4im) warning given". Is there any way to add a custom label made by a user. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 13:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

ARV does not use templates at all. All data is hard-coded. So no. SD0001 (talk) 19:04, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

@SD0001: That's exactly why CAPTAIN MEDUSA is asking if the custom field can be added, which I agree would be a net positive. - FlightTime (open channel) 19:25, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

Twinkle videotutorial voice is recorded not loudly enough

I'm learning about Twinkle. But the https://tools.wmflabs.org/videotutorials/Twinkle/ voice is recorded not loudly enough. The clicks are loud, but the voice can hardly be heard. Can someone help that? Thy SvenAERTS (talk) 17:11, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

There's a bit more at Wikipedia:Video and Interactive Tutorials, and some notes on the talk page, but I'm not sure there're plans for updating or maintaining these over time, especially as new features get added. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:08, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

RM requests

Thanks for working to support Requested move. On Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests, I notice Twinkle places new request at the top of every request else, (that's immediately below the section heading). This is not ideal for the board due to the way requests are handled. I would like to request this be inverted, that's new request should go below any existing request just like how WP:RFPP works. Thanks. – Ammarpad (talk) 05:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: So right above ==== Contested technical requests ====? --DannyS712 (talk) 05:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Yes. – Ammarpad (talk) 06:34, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/pull/779 DannyS712 (talk) 08:10, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

@Ammarpad: Discuss this at WT:RM. Twinkle is merely following the instructions - the hidden comment says to insert the code "directly below" at the top of the section. The practice looks fairly established - that's where people are adding the requests even while doing it manually [1] [2] [3] (latest from the history) SD0001 (talk) 11:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

I am among the top few editors actioning requests regularly on that board, and so I know where new requests should go. New requests should not go at the top, just like RFPP, AN, and UAA requests are not placed at the top of existing requests. No, I will not open any discussion for this trivial change. – Ammarpad (talk) 15:40, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Well, since you are asking Twinkle to do the opposite of the page, I did. I'll note that the current behavior is XfD-like, which I presume is why it was done. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:16, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

User warning type drop-down list getting cut off

Recently the drop-down list of user warning types has been extending past, and getting cut off at, the bottom of the dialog box, and I've become unable to scroll down to the bottom of the list, only being able to get as far as uw-chat1. When I open the list, a vertical scroll bar appears at the right of the dialog. When I scroll that down and then open the drop-down again, I can get only one item further, up to uw-create1. This is in Chrome on Windows 10. Largoplazo (talk) 16:58, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Not sure if this is related, but scroll bars are also appearing on other dialog boxes as well, such as the Block dialog box. However, this issue affects the Warning dialog the most. Here is a screenshot of the issue. Also using Chrome on Windows 10. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 16:03, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

This will be resolved by 692. @K6ka: the scroll bar in Block dialog has always been there, though it's worth noting that once you open the Warn dialog (and close it), if you subsequently open any other TW dialog without reloading the page, weird scroll bars are come up in them. SD0001 (talk) 17:30, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Subverting an article

Hi Folks, I noticed this Afd Institute of Democratic Society. This article started as a Chinese human rights advocacy group article and then in 2011 it was changed by User:Shakhov into a article about the organisation with the same name in Ukraine. This is complete corruption and subversion on Wikipedia, a hanging offence in my opinion. There is no warning messages on Twinkle to put on the users talk page that they are doing it to warn folk. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 12:43, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

@Scope creep: Such cases (where the article subject is changed with no or very little common text between the two versions) should be reported to WP:RFHM where an admin will split the history of the page. The user hasn't edited in years so there's no point giving a warning now. SD0001 (talk) 13:52, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

I assume this is also something that rarely occurs, so not worth Twinkle warning but a personally-written one or reporting to noticeboards for admin intervention. In addition, even if that warning template is warranted, someone has to actually create the template with everything needed and then finally request for its inclusion in Twinkle. – Ammarpad (talk) 06:12, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

minor tweak to block reasons

This came up as minor side point in a recent discussion of username-based blocks. Up until just now, one of the options in the drop-down menu logged the action as "username represents a famous person". The word "famous" is a bit over-the top, what both the policy and the actual template say is a "well-known" living person. I have already changed the dropdown menu to say "notable" instead of famous, but that change doesn't seem to translate over to Twinkle. So that's all I'm asking, that the same change be made to Twinkle so that block logs are more accurate. Thanks! Beeblebrox (talk) 23:38, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Submitted pull request. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:29, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

@Beeblebrox: is there a reason the template itself shouldn't be renamed? I agree with your change (although perhaps well-known would work there as well, rather than notable?), but wouldn't the template itself be better placed at something like {{uw-ublock-wellknown}}? Not really Twinkle related so should be discussed elsewhere (like WT:UTM) but just thinking out loud. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:57, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

My primary concern is the block log, but It certainly wouldn't bother me if the template name was changed and "famous" was completely out of the equation. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:54, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Just to close the loop on this, Ammarpad did indeed open a move discussion, see Wikipedia_talk:Template_messages/User_talk_namespace#Requested_move_17_December_2019. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:57, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Move notification

Please note that Template:Uw-ublock-famous has been moved to Template:Uw-ublock-wellknown per consensus at Template talk:Uw-ublock-wellknown. Best, Dekimasuよ! 05:59, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

uw-inline-el

I have moved {{uw-inline-el}} to {{uw-elinbody}} as all external links are inline and "in [an article's] body" is clearly what was meant by "inline" in the previous name. So please change uw-inline-el to uw-elinbody and realphabetize the items in twinklewarn.js. Nardog (talk) 07:29, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

👍 Thanks ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Questions on potential changes to warn module

I worked on a slew of improvements to Twinkle's warning ability over the summer, and have recently returned to them. There's still plenty of work to do, but I wanted to ask folks who aren't following on GitHub two quick questions:

1. If the warn menu gets the ability to auto-select a template from level 1-4, how old should the prior template be before reseting to level 1? On enwiki, Huggle's value is set to 3 days​, and I believe CBNG uses 2 days. I'm inclined toward 3 days.
2. Should {{uw-wrongsummary}} be moved form the single-warning to the single-notice list, i.e. the "less serious" list? It feels to me like much more of a notice than a warning. It has been in Twinkle's list since its inception but in 2012 was moved on the WP:SLT lists.

Thanks. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:15, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the first question. Personally if I'm giving someone a warning for an issue for which they've received a similar warning within the past 30 days I'll elevate it. If any editor has added unsourced material on December 10, let's say, and they've done it again today after having being warned, then IMO they deserve a stronger warning. That said, I often don't start at level 1 either.

I don't have a strong opinion on wrongsummary. For better or worse I thankfully don't use it that often, as I find no summary at all to be more prevalent, for better or worse.

Hope this helps! DonIago (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm somewhere in the realm of 1-4 weeks, not 3 days, before I reset to a level 1, and that's really only for IPs. Accounts with consistent user talk pages are more likely to get a level 2 for being consistently disruptive even over time. --Izno (talk) 22:01, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

As for wrongsummary, the colors and strength of the verbiage indicates a notice or a caution to me rather than a warning. --Izno (talk) 22:02, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Warnings on shared or dynamic IP talk pages can become meaningless after a few days. Warnings are for people, not addresses. Ideally, the person should have received a warning before being blocked from editing. There was a noticeable number of non-actionable reports at WP:AIV when Huggle automatically created reports for IP addresses that had received a "final warning" 27 days ago. This happens faster and more frequently than one might expect.

For Twinkle, three days sound fine to me too: The user can still choose to escalate, just as before. The pre-selected level, however, should only depend on recent warnings; 30 days would be too much. Experienced users are still free to choose any appropriate warning level; nothing will change in this regard. Twinkle is available to all autoconfirmed users, though, and I am afraid that choosing "30 days" for its auto-detection would teach new users bad habits.

Regarding {{Uw-wrongsummary}}: Contrary to {{Uw-editsummary}}, the former could be a warning for misleading or inappropriate edit summary content. I think it fits into both lists, just like many others. "uw-coi" was always a warning in my mind, yet is in the notices list. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

I suppose one option would be to have two values, one for registered accounts, and one for IPs, but I tend to think that's being too clever by half and more likely to lead to confusion. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:53, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Additional note and ping: In a perfect recent example, Maile66 just seems to have confirmed my explanations above, in Special:Diff/932259921. This is what we would get many times per day if Twinkle automatically escalated too early. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:23, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Removing tags with spaces?

Has anyone else seen a problem with removing tags that have a space? e.g. {{cleanup university|date=January 2010}} RJFJR (talk) 19:42, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

​|name= in the template's {{ambox}} was incorrect (Cleanup-university) – it should match the template's title (Cleanup university). I've corrected it, so it should work now. — JJMC89 (T·C) 19:53, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! RJFJR (talk) 01:41, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Requested moves

I would like to be able to nominate two or more pages to be moved using Twinkle (without doing it manually). Can you add that feature to Twinkle? Interstellarity (talk) 01:01, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

We could show a few pairs of "old title → new title" inputs in the dialog which would be added to the template's additional parameters. – Thjarkur (talk) 01:06, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

"Adding entry at WP:RM/TR: failed to find target spot for the entry"

When I try to make a Requested Move and ticks "Uncontroversial technical request", Twinkle presents me with the error mesage "Adding entry at WP:RM/TR: failed to find target spot for the entry". When I untick "Uncontroversial technical request", Twinkle works fine. Veverve (talk) 10:42, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Veverve: I have restored the comment at the top of WP:RM/TR, as I suspect Twinkle is looking for this exact text. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:58, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@John of Reading: it now works correctly! Veverve (talk) 11:01, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@Alex 21: I have undone part of this edit that you made. Your addition looks good to me, but it should wait until the Twinkle developers have adjusted their code to allow for it. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:04, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Exactly. There was a recent, related discussion at WT:RM/TR. I've gone and made this change as well as that one, and will quickly update the on-wiki Twinkle gadget. Please let me know of any additional changes or tweaks so I can update Twinkle. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:57, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

@John of Reading:The problem is now back again! Veverve (talk) 02:20, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: What comment is Twinkle looking for, currently? The comment was expanded on 26 December, but unfortunately with a typo, which was fixed on 28 December. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:25, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

@John of Reading and Veverve: No, it's been changed since. I changed the comment on 31 December to combine the two conversations, but the this line was removed without comment later on New Year's Eve​. I will update the gadget to use the text currently present, but Twinkle currently needs a consistent text to look for. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:44, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: I wonder if it would be better in the long run to stick something in the comment that looks like magic, perhaps {{TWINKLE-INSERT-MARKER}}, and code Twinkle to look for this marker and then the end of the comment. Then the rest of the comment could be revised without breaking Twinkle. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:07, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, a text like "Twinkle marker" would be fine, although I'm generally hesitant to impose Twinkle unless absolutely necessary. In the end, all the various XfD locales have a better solution: the message doesn't change. I can make the regex search more generic to avoid this ongoing, should take care of most things. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:43, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Add /* PAGE NAME */ to edit summary for RPP

Can we add /* PAGE NAME */ to the edit summary when requesting page protection? This allows user to quickly find the section on WP:RPP from history pages and their own contribution page, so they can check for responses to the request.--- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 09:41, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/pull/790 DannyS712 (talk) 10:11, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

DannyS712, I was trying to follow the github and I noticed it was merged to azatoth:master. What is the next step? When does it become part of current version? --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 07:18, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

@Coffeeandcrumbs: Whenever @Amorymeltzer: releases the next update DannyS712 (talk) 07:32, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, I am just curious how this all works. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 10:16, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Noting this was merged! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:42, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

partial blocks functionality?

Well, partial blocks are a thing now, so I'm curious as to whether there is any possibility the feature will be integrated into Twinkle's block function? It seems like a pretty useful little tool, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who prefers the ease of Twinkle blocks. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:29, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

It's come up, yes. The short answer is I'm hoping to work on something basic this week and next, life depending. It's not entirely clear yet, though, what the framework should be for things like templates, although QEDK's work on {{uw-pblock}} is helpful. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:26, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Excellent. I didn't expect it would be there from day one, but was kind of surprised not to see any mention of it here. I should've known you were all over it already. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

What does ARV stand for?

--MoonyTheDwarf (Braden N.) (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

@Moonythedwarf: Advance Reporting and Vetting. --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:10, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Twinkle and speedies

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Twinkle and speedies. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:42, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Changes to Template:Expand language

These aren't breaking changes, but this template was recently updated to allow up to three languages to be specified using the parameters langcode2, otherarticle2, langcode3, and otherarticle3, so it would be nice if these could be supported by Twinkle. Ionmars10 (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

A New Interface

When nominating an article for deletion some minutes ago I observed that the interface had changed. Is this a general upgrade or is it just me experiencing this new interface. Geez it’s borderline annoying & proving very difficult to navigate for users who predominantly use mobile devices to contribute to this project. If indeed it’s a new interface is there a way I can downgrade mine to the old conventional one??? Celestina007 (talk) 19:13, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

• No, actually on second thoughts it’s great actually.😊Celestina007 (talk) 23:11, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

PROD error

From WP:PROD:

A special case is BLPPROD: an article which has had the BLPPROD-tag removed still can be PRODed via the process described here.

I tried to propose deletion of the article Neve Te Aroha Ardern Gayford; TWINKLE reported that I may not do so because there was a previous PROD removed, but history shows it was a WP:BLPPROD. I sent it to WP:AFD, but if anyone thinks it meets WP:CSD#A7, go ahead. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:23, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, Arthur Rubin, thought I replied to this ages ago! One issue is that there's no way to tell from the talkpage if the article was PRODed or BLPPRODed, both just use Template:Old prod. I'd be hugely in favor of something to distinguish them from each other, ideally a {{Old blp prod}} or something; that'd make this behavior much easier to handle. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:UWs removed from the menu?

Why have some of the entries in Twinkle's WP:UW pop-up menu been removed? For example, the {{Uw-mos1}} series has been removed, but I don't think it was the only one... Why was this done? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 00:03, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

@IJBall: It is still there - but I have to scroll down to the bottom of two scrollbars to see it. The list of warnings has a scrollbar, as you'd expect, and the whole dialog has a scrollbar as well, which looks like a mistake. I'm using Firefox 72.0.1 and Windows 10. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:17, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

You're right – that was the issue: I was only scrolling to the bottom of the "inside" scrollbar, not both scrollbars... What is weird, I guess, is that I don't remember this being an issue before, so something's changed – either within Twinkle, or with the newest version of Firefox. As you're using Firefox too, I've got to think the issue is Firefox. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 07:21, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

This is a known problem with a patch being developed at github, but it kind of stalled. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 07:26, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Should be fixed! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Endorsing PRODs doesn't work in talk page has old prod template

It looks like Twinkle now places {{old prod}} at the talk page at the time of nomination. However, it seems that this stops the script for endorsing an existing PROD via {{Proposed deletion endorsed}}, since it finds the {{old prod}} and aborts. May be I missed something, but previously it always asked if one wanted to endorse instead if an existing PROD was in place. I don't recall if talk prod notice was ever present in those cases. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 21:58, 18 January 2020 (UTC)

SD0001, I think this might be what I vaguely recall[ed] having a good reason for wanting to check the category, but [couldn't] think of it I mentioned in 735. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Amorymeltzer Ok, but 735 does solve the more significant issue (not allowing a re-prod if de-prod was within the last 7 days). Given how uncommon endorsing PRODs is, I wouldn't see this as a priority. This bug can still be fixed after once morebits has been converted to entirely use promises (#765, #783). Basically, just parallelize the API calls (checkPriors + fetchCreatorInfo + main). If the page text contains a prod, allow user to endorse. This is a fair bit of work but also (perhaps more importantly) helps PRODs to go faster. SD0001 (talk) 08:25, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome templates

Twinkle uses a plethora of Welcome templates. Has anyone tracked their relative recent usage, to see if any are no longer needed? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:50, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome templates are substituted as well as a lot of them do not have any hidden tracking text, so mildly hard to guess relative usage. The module has been kept mostly same since the overhaul back in the 'ol days. --qedk (t 桜 c) 19:57, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Some (most?) of them have tracking comments, so it should be possible to get some idea of usage here 'n there. There's an issue here, sort of like with tag and warn: there are a lot of items in Category:Welcome templates, but things in Twinkle will get used much more heavily. Still, I think it'd be good to do some level of accounting, to see if there are templates Twinkle should add or items we should remove. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:02, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I was thinking more of nominating some for deletion (or merge) rather than just removing them from Twinkle. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

If the templates are deleted, they will be removed from Twinkle. If you want to present a case for removal from Twinkle, a simple "used this many times in this duration" would suffice, with sufficient evidence ofc. --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:19, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Isn't that exactly what I was enquiring about? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Well, depends if you want to get the templates deleted or just removed from Twinkle, but again, only one way to track count afaik. --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:44, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle is a script; it could easily have written (or be made to write) to a log. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, true, but I'm against collecting any information without consent. Twinkle does not come with any warranties and as such, any metric collection should be opt-in, which is a drawback apart from the fact that there is some amount of work required to deploy such a change. --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:20, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm not asking anyone to do the work; I'm asking whether they already have. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Nope, tracking the comments is your best shot. --qedk (t 桜 c) 20:44, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

COI

The documentation of {{COI}} states (formatting per original):

Like the other neutrality-related tags, if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start this discussion, then any editor is justified in removing the tag without warning.

Would it be possible to adjust Twinkle so that, if that template is used, it prompts (better: requires) the user to start such a discussion? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:10, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

• There is quite a bit of discussion regarding this template which may change how the template functions. I would advise against any change in Twinkle until those discussions are complete. --Izno (talk) 16:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

I've restored the above from the archives; can we enact it, now? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Not sure how feasible it is, but it would be nice to have an input box for COI (and other neutrality tags) and have that explanation posted to the talk page as part of the tagging process. ^creffpublic _{a creffett franchise} (talk to the boss) 21:05, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020 Twinkle updates, features, and behaviors (2020-01-24)

This latest update is a big one: partial blocking support is here! The warn menu also has two brand new menus: one that puts the single notices and warnings together, and one that shows every single message available. The menus for picking warnings and deletion sorting categories for AfD noms has been improved, and there are a number of bug fixes as well as improved handling and functionality. Changes not otherwise attributed were made by User:Amorymeltzer.

• block:
  • Add support for partial blocks (813)
    • You can toggle "partial" status for both blocks and templating by selecting the checkbox.
    • There is, as of now, only one template for partial blocks, {{uw-pblock}} (made by QEDK)
    • If you wish, you can set your preferences to default to selecting the partial option.
  • Rename {{uw-ublock-famous}} to {{uw-ublock-wellknown}} (784, by User:Ammarpad)
• warn:
  • Add menu listing all template warnings in one menu, for fast and easy searching. You can set a preference to select it by default (773)
  • Add option to show all the single-notice messages in a single menu. It's off by default but a preference is available to turn it on (759)
  • Show a note if the user is attempting to warn someone for making an old edit (>24h) (757)
  • Move uw-wrongsummary from the single-warning list to the single-notice list (761)
  • If a user has two warnings with the same timestamp, Twinkle now considers the bottom one the most recent, not the top (768)
  • Rename {{uw-inline-el}} to {{uw-elinbody}} (768)
• warn/xfd: Improve menus (replace jquery.chosen with select2) (692, by User:SD0001)
• xfd: Update hidden comment at RM/TR (791)
• csd:
  • Tweak item descriptions to more closely match their wording at WP:CSD (764)
  • Allow users to request salting (789, by User:DannyS712)
• protect:
  • Fix bug for pages made into redirects between loading and tagging (by using text returned by API) (781, by User:SD0001)
  • Add a section link in the edit summary when listing at WP:RfPP (790, by User:DannyS712)
• talkback:
  • Always check user talk page for an optout message (795)
  • Fix bug by not parsing html in optout message (795 and 798)
• unlink: Fix bug preventing unlinking when links used a leading colon (794)
• arv: Disable UAA and promotional account-only options for IP editors (774)
• prod: Trim PROD talk page edit summary (771, by User:SD0001)
• config: Better detect very old Twinkle preferences (746, by User:SD0001)
• batchdelete: Fix bug in select all/select none buttons (806, by User:SD0001)
• General Twinkle:
  • In Timeless, place links under a "Twinkle" heading (763, by User:SD0001)
  • Add select2 library (v4.0.12) to handle menu options and searching better (switch from chosen) (812)
  • Remove checks for versions 9 and lower of Internet Explorer, no longer supported by the MediaWiki software (see here and here) (756, by User:SD0001)

This section should serve as a catching ground should anything not work properly or if any new bugs crop up, as well as for any feedback or suggestions. There were a lot of changes behind the scenes, so feel free to ping me. As always, input is welcome at the GitHub repo as well. Finally, if you're interested in helping out with Twinkle development, we've started guideline to help new contributors get set up — check it out! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:12, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Technical changes

Also, for the more technical folks, there are a number of behind the scenes changes, briefly noted below:

• Use server time rather than client time wherever possible (block, prod, speedy, warn, xfd) (741, by User:SD0001)
  • This adds getLoadTime() to retrieve the timestamp the API loaded the page
• Remove Morebits.queryString (725, by User:SD0001)
• Adjust how the revert/rollback links are loaded (Twinkle.fluff() instead of Twinkle.fluff.init()) (792, by User:Amorymeltzer)
• Unify twinkleconfig and friendlyconfig preference objects, mark as version 2 (762 and 800, by User:SD0001)
• Fix two bugs in lookupCreation for redirects (805, by User:SD0001)
• Restore hardcoded values for Date.monthNames and Date.monthNamesAbbrev (796, by User:Amorymeltzer)
• batchOperation executes postFinish() even when the pageList is empty, and will generate individual status lines even if the worker function is not using Morebits.wiki.page or Morebits.wiki.api (782, by User:SD0001)

Additionally, the select2 library added above as an alternative to chosen is available as a Gadget in MediaWiki:Gadget-definition, so it can easily be accessed by other user scripts and tools. Additionally, 692 added a few functions to the Morebits library in Morebits.select2 that improve the handling of select2 menus. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:12, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Early catch! Partial block error of no namespace selected is thrown is even when pblock box is unchecked. --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:31, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Ugh, thanks. Apparently the API is really finicky about having the partial parameter at all! Stupid mistake, seems fixed now; sorry it broke for so long. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:29, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a ton for the quick fix! --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:31, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Also, the "Preset" menu is empty for partial blocks - should it still be shown? DannyS712 (talk) 18:38, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

@DannyS712: Not for me, it just has one option (intended, I believe). --qedk (t 桜 c) 18:44, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

@QEDK: I meant the preset is only that one option DannyS712 (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Intentional to make my life a lot easier if/when more templates are added. I suppose it could be disabled, though? Is that what you'd like? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

• @Amorymeltzer: This one is a nitpick, while the logic of filling the {{{area}}} is pretty great, there's an extra space lingering there, see User talk:68.132.126.95. --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:12, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

  Weird, I'm not seeing it? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:33, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

  Weirder because the character inserted is a left-to-right mark (‎), not a space. --qedk (t 桜 c) 14:43, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

  @Amorymeltzer: Another one: User talk:23.251.204.197. --qedk (t 桜 c) 16:56, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

  Intriguing! I don't know why it's happening, but some improvements just got pushed up that may well fix it, so hopefully it doesn't occur again but do let me know if it does, even once more. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:08, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Fix needed

There is a bug in the image code reported at https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/issues/821 - unable to tag images for CSD F6. Patch is at https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/pull/822, but this should also be deployed onwiki.

On line 201, please replace event.target.replacement.value && event.target.replacement.value.trim() with event.target.replacement && event.target.replacement.value && event.target.replacement.value.trim()

Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 04:56, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Saw the fix on GH, applied — thanks! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:52, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

Category:Redirects from route numbers and Template:R from route number have been nominated for discussion

Category:Redirects from route numbers and Template:R from route number, tagged as used by Twinkle, have been nominated for possible deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  10:13, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, but I think that was just a copy-paste error when the documentation was created: Twinkle doesn't use it, so no worries! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Automated "merge from"

Twinkle generates the {{merge to}} and {{merge from}} tags correctly, but the section name in the "discuss=" pointer doesn't match the name generated. It's still better than most manual merges, so I suppose I shouldn't complain, but it could be better. Perhaps an option to name the section, also? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:21, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in response Arthur Rubin, but I'm not quite sure what exactly you're asking for. I can tell you're talking about David Hampton and Six Degrees of Separation (play), but what specifically did you want changed? ~ Amory (u • t • c) ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:32, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

In that specific example, Twinkle generated |discuss=Talk:Six Degrees of Separation (play)#Proposed merge with David Hampton in the {{mergefrom}} and {{mergeto}} templates, but generated the section (visibly) as Talk:Six Degrees of Separation (play)#Proposed merge of David Hampton into Six Degrees of Separation (play). The section name in the "discuss" field has to match the generated section title. I patched it by adding an {{anchor}} template to the generated discussion section. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 04:51, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, Arthur Rubin. Will fix 👍 SD0001 (talk) 19:38, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

Pushed a few days ago, should be all set. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:47, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Possible conflict with Navigation popups

Pleas see Wikipedia talk:Tools/Navigation popups#Not seeing disambiguation link repair tool where there are compatibility issues being reported between that tool and TW. Nthep (talk) 20:06, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Replied there, but yup, totally on me. Fix pushed, sorry for the inconvenience! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:56, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Tagging redirects

Anyone else notice that {{R from subtopic}} and {{R to related topic}} don't show up when using the Tag function on redirects? These apply to a large number of redirects, and it would be useful to have an automated way to handle them. Is there a way to fix this? —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:11, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

PR done by QEDK, and now merged! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks to QEDK as well. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 09:56, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Apparent (rather minor) Twinkle bug

Whilst placing a paid editing warning template on a user's talk page, the edit summary for this template doesn't appear to have been added, with it returning an edit summary of undefined.

See Special:Diff/939768046

Thanks,

~~ Alex Noble - talk 18:49, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Can reproduce. Special:Diff/939908590 —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 12:47, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

@Alex Noble and K6ka: could not reproduce; tested with all levels. Can you please enter Twinkle.warn.messages.levels['Promotions and spam']['uw-paid'] into your console and paste the result? DannyS712 (talk) 13:00, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

DannyS712, get

{…}
level1: {…}
label: "Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
summary: "General note: Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
<prototype>: Object { … }
level2: {…}
label: "Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
summary: "Caution: Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
<prototype>: Object { … }
level3: {…}
label: "Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
summary: "Warning: Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
<prototype>: Object { … }
level4: {…}
label: "Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
summary: "Final warning: Paid editing without disclosure under the Wikimedia Terms of Use"
<prototype>: Object { … }
<prototype>: {…}
__defineGetter__: function __defineGetter__()
__defineSetter__: function __defineSetter__()
__lookupGetter__: function __lookupGetter__()
__lookupSetter__: function __lookupSetter__()
__proto__: 
constructor: function Object()
hasOwnProperty: function hasOwnProperty()
isPrototypeOf: function isPrototypeOf()
propertyIsEnumerable: function propertyIsEnumerable()
toLocaleString: function toLocaleString()
toSource: function toSource()
toString: function toString()
valueOf: function valueOf()
<get __proto__()>: function __proto__()
<set __proto__()>: __proto__()

But, error still occurring Special:Diff/939911559, strange. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

@Alex Noble: So it has all of the summaries... DannyS712 (talk) 13:22, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

(FYI just need the level and summary things, not the prototypes, underscore functions, etc). Here is what I found in twinklewarn.js

// build the edit summary
var summary;
if (params.main_group === 'custom') {
	switch (params.sub_group.substr(-1)) {
		case '1':
			summary = 'General note';
			break;
		case '2':
			summary = 'Caution';
			break;
		case '3':
			summary = 'Warning';
			break;
		case '4':
			summary = 'Final warning';
			break;
		case 'm':
			if (params.sub_group.substr(-3) === '4im') {
				summary = 'Only warning';
				break;
			}
			summary = 'Notice';
			break;
		default:
			summary = 'Notice';
			break;
	}
	summary += ': ' + Morebits.string.toUpperCaseFirstChar(messageData.label);
} else {
	summary = /^\D+$/.test(params.main_group) ? messageData.summary : messageData[params.main_group].summary;
	if (messageData.suppressArticleInSummary !== true && params.article) {
		if (params.sub_group === 'uw-agf-sock' ||
				params.sub_group === 'uw-socksuspect' ||
				params.sub_group === 'uw-aiv') {  // these templates require a username
			summary += ' of [[:User:' + params.article + ']]';
		} else {
			summary += ' on [[:' + params.article + ']]';
		}
	}
}
summary += '.' + Twinkle.getPref('summaryAd');

It seams that messageData[params.main_group].summary is undefined. @Amorymeltzer: could we add some debug logging to the console here? --DannyS712 (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Sorry all! @Alex Noble and K6ka:, am I correct in assuming that you were using the new "all messages" menu? I know just the issue, fix coming in a moment! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Yep, it was using the "All Messages" menu, and I searched for the warning by typing it in the search box. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 13:10, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Amorymeltzer, yes I was. ~~ Alex Noble - talk 13:10, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Testing outside live wikipedia

My JS is pretty bad, but y'all seem busy so I figured I'd give creating a module a shot. How do you dev this? You don't point it at live wikipedia do you? Is there a sandbox some place? Do y'all run an MW locally for dev? --LaserLegs (talk) 02:04, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

There are some instructions on testing changes here. You can test at the testwiki: But in some cases, it may be more convenient to test on this wiki itself in a sandbox page. SD0001 (talk) 07:59, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

question re twinkle menu

sorry, how do I enable the option on my Twinkle to use "wel" to welcome new users? I can see my Twinkle drop-down menu, but I don't see any option there for "welcome" or "wel." any help would be appreciated. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sm8900: I think it only shows up if you are looking at a user talk page. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:22, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@John of Reading: thanks so much! yes, that did it. now i have another question. I tried to add a custom template to my list of welcome messages; i.,e., tried a welcome template from teahouse to add to the twinkle the menu. however it doesn't seem to be showing up. can you please advise? thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sm8900: How are you adding the template, via WP:TWPREFS? --qedk (t 桜 c) 16:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

yes, exactly. I presed the "edit items" button for "custom welcome templates," in the section Wikipedia:Twinkle/Preferences#twinkle-config-section-12, and added it. when I press the button again, the template that i added does show up in the list. I simply don't see it in the dialog box, when i click "Wel" on the Twinkle menu. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 16:54, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Sm8900: User:Sm8900/twinkleoptions.js doesn't exist, so perhaps you haven't pressed the "Save changes" button at the bottom of the Twinkle preferences panel? I've done that, and my test template name shows up for me in the "Standard welcomes" dialog. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:07, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

hm, okay, that's good to know. this is a whole new area for me. I'm really eager to see if this works or not. i will give it a try. thanks!! if this works, this will be the first time that I have customized a pull-down menu or dialog box, anywhere on Wikipedia. ok, here goes. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:16, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

hey, I did it!! ok, that worked. I now have a section for custom welcome templates; it shows up in the dialog box, in the second screen, i.e. the one for IP users the first welcome screen. I really appreciate it. thanks!! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:20, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

How to use as a user script?

I've been trying to use Twinkle as a user script, but I can't do it. [4] is my latest try. Can you please tell me how I can use it properly, as a user script? Thanks. Ahmad^talk 14:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Ahmad252, is there any reason it needs to be enabled this way? If you're autoconfirmed, you should be able to just enable it from the Preferences → Gadgets menu. Ionmars10 (talk) 15:43, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Ionmars10, I'm actually trying to localize Twinkle for Commons. I'm doing it on my local wiki (as a gadget), but I'll need the ability to load it as a user script for final stages so that I can test it. I can't add it directly to MediaWiki namespace as a gadget, since it wouldn't be ready for use without a test. Ahmad^talk 18:07, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

@Ahmad252: Thanks for your interest in porting TW to other wikis. At the moment, it isn't entirely straightforward to load TW from a non-gadget context. You might want to see how the loading is set up in User:SD0001/twinkle.js (though its a bit dated version)

• Load the ResourceLoader dependencies first, then load morebits.js and select2.js, and finally load twinkle.js. The CSS files can be loaded in any order. So you have:

mw.loader.using('mediawiki.notify', 'mediawiki.user', 'mediawiki.util', 'jquery.ui', 'jquery.tipsy').then(function() {
    $.when(
        mw.loader.getScript('/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-morebits.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript'),
        mw.loader.getScript('/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-select2.min.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript')
    ).then(function() {
        mw.loader.getScript('/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');
    });
});
importStyleSheet('MediaWiki:Gadget-morebits.css');
importStyleSheet('MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.css');
importStyleSheet('MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle-pagestyles.css');
importStyleSheet('MediaWiki:Gadget-select2.min.css');

• In the main twinkle.js file, modify the Twinkle.load function as I have done in User:SD0001/twinkle.js. All the module files are loaded from there, and the initialisations for the modules are placed in a then callback to ensure that they aren't called before the module is available.

If anything doesn't work, let me know. SD0001 (talk) 17:13, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, SD0001. I tried using it, but I think it doesn't work. this is my twinkle script and this is my common.js. Can you please check it? I double checked, but I think it's exact the way you said it should be. Thanks. Ahmad^talk 18:22, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

How familiar are you with javascript? There is an obvious syntax error in your twinkle.js page. The then callback hasn't been closed.

BTW, I have been planning, maybe later this year (or next year) with the help of a rapid grant, to create a fully localisable version of TW that can be used on any wiki after setting up a per-wiki config. You could consider waiting until then. SD0001 (talk) 20:50, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm somehow familiar, but I was probably a bit lazy to write the code again, so I just copied it without paying attention. Sorry about that. Works properly now.

That's great! I hope you can also send translations to TranslateWiki, probably main files to Commons; something like ProveIt gadget (although that requires a lot of work). Importing and updating Twinkle has always been somehow difficult for other Wikis, especially when the Wiki is not in English. However, I think I can do this without a per-wiki config; I'm almost half done and I can see no errors so far. I'd be happy to see Twinkle becoming easier to install. Ahmad^talk 09:33, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

'Famous' username

I've just tried to use Twinkle to report a user account that is namsd after the (human) article subject it has edited (one that would usually result in a {{uw-ublock-famous}} block), but there didn't seem to be an option for that. What should I use, or do we need to add an option to Twinkle? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:59, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing, in those cases I usually tick "misleading" with a comment to the effect of "username matches (article subject), needs famousblock and verification," but I wouldn't be opposed to a specific button for that. ^creffpublic _{a creffett franchise} (talk to the boss) 14:12, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

UAA isn't my area of expertise, but yes, I would suggest using the "misleading" option. Block template aside, it's not a violation of policy to have a well-known individual's name as a username, it is a violation of policy to do so misleadingly (i.e. it's not you); we block to protect the named individual from (the exceptionally likely case of) impersonation. The tooltip could perhaps include a note on this topic, but yes, "misleading" is the correct option. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:13, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Warn template bug? creating unneeded new section headers

Sorry if already addressed here. Example here of creating a new section header for February 2020 when one already existed, though not the most recent section.

This has happened several times. It briefly displays the standard note for when there is in fact no section for the current month, saying something to the effect of "Creating level 2 header because one was not found for this month", presumably because it is only looking for it at the most recently created section header? --DB1729 (talk) 15:26, 17 February 2020 (UTC)

That's correct. Would it be better to place it above subsequent comments with another (potentially unrelated) warning? I'm not sure about that. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:15, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: I had merely expected it to add my next-level warning under the existing heading of the current month. I think you understand what happened, but in case you haven't: If you scroll down the diff and look at the 3 latest sections of the displayed page, you will see I issued a level-1 vandalism warning on February 17, and Twinkle created the 'February 2020' section just like it is supposed to. About the same time, the user had created a bogus talk page to a non-existent main page and I requested speedy deletion (the page was soon deleted under WP:G8) and that deletion notice was displayed in a new section below the vandal warning. So far fine. Then, less than an hour later, the IP went on one more short vandalism spree. I reverted and issued a level-2 warning template. But Twinkle placed that last warning in a new duplicate 'February 2020' section. This all happened on the same day, within an hour. Why didn't it just add it to the existing February 2020 section like it normally would? Why should the addition of that deletion notice have anything to do with how Twinkle handles two vandalism warnings, issued 47 minutes apart? --DB1729 (talk) 00:35, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand, and it's pretty straightforward, basically what you noted in your first comment: Twinkle only checks the last section on the page. It's been that way for a long time, I believe the idea is that once a different section has been created, it might be confusing or missed to put subsequent warnings above rather than below. Personally, I'm agnostic. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:34, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer:Ok, I can see that. Yeah it's not huge deal to me either. I had mistakenly assumed it was very minor bug.

It also occurred to me that there may be a way for individual Twinkle users to get around this. I haven't tried it for real yet, but if looks like if I clicked on the edit button of the section first, and then access the Twinkle options, I could then "force" Twinkle to issue the warning in the opened section? Those buttons seem to be active when did a dry run just now.

Also, sorry about the over-explanation. I rarely trust that I do a very good job communicating both clearly and concisely. Talk pages are just not my strong suit. And thanks for taking the time to read and respond. --DB1729 (talk) 01:58, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

No worries at all, nothing to be concerned about on your part! Twinkle gets the latest page text from the server not the open window, so there won't be a difference in behavior there. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:13, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

New welcome template

Hello, I've created new Welcome template called {{Welcome-anon-summary}}, as a mashup of previous ones. In the doc page it inherited as a base, there is a notice at the top about "being included in the standard Twinkle installation"; this comes from {{Friendly standard installation}}. I don't know anything about Twinkle, but I'd like this template to be included along with the other welcome templates, so Twinkle users may use it in the same way as other welcome templates. If someone could help deal with that, I'd appreciate it. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 08:02, 8 February 2020 (UTC)

Nice template there! I think you can add custom templates in your Twinkle prefs while you wait for a dev to respond. BEANS X3 (talk) 13:51, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 17 March 2020

Please amend the meta interwiki link for interface editors at the top of the page to say "global interface editors" to better reflect their nature as a cross-project group and to avoid confusion with our own interface administrators. OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

 Done Cabayi (talk) 08:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

talkback message

I was testing twinkle functions in my sandbox. When I clicked TB, a pop-up said Is it really so bad that you're talking back to yourself? Whoever programmed that: good job! Made me grin. Schazjmd (talk) 23:41, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

The exact history is lost in the mists of time, but I reckon we have the original author of the Talkback module, Ioeth, to thank (to blame?) for that one! This, that and the other (talk) 09:18, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

March 2020 Twinkle updates, features, and behaviors (2020-03-04 @712686d)

This latest update is full of small, quality-of-life improvements, especially particular to CSD and XfD. Most notably, the default behavior of CSD has changed for sysops: Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if there is no CSD tag present, and default to "deletion mode" if there is a CSD tag present. There's also more detail in some CSD notification messages, some additional templates in the block, tag, and warn menus, and a lot of bug fixes. Not all changes are listed below, and some have already been fixed before today. Changes not otherwise attributed were made by User:Amorymeltzer.

• speedy:
  • Change the default behavior for sysops (844)
    • Twinkle will default to "tagging mode" if no CSD tag is present, and "deletion mode" if a CSD tag is present
    • Sysops can still default to delete using their Twinkle preferences
  • Support additional notification parameters for A2, A5, G6, G12, F9, and P1 (849 and 868)
  • Allow G4 and G5 inputs when selecting multiple criteria (859)​
  • Fix long-standing bug in G6 copypaste notice (872)
  • Log CSD nomination even if an attempted user notification failed (869)
  • Don't uncheck user notification when changing modes (831)
  • Rename submit buttons according to mode (tag or delete)
  • disable G8 and T2 rationales when deleting (848)
• image: Fix bug when no G6 replacement image is given (822, by User:DannyS712)
• xfd/speedy: Watch the actual module page when tagging the documentation subpage (857)
• xfd:
  • Require users to input a target for TfM, WP:CfD, WP:CfD/S nominations (836)
  • Specify which CfD action was chosen in {{cfd-notify}} (836)
  • Disable WP:RM nominations in categoryspace and WP:FfD nominations outside filespace (865)
  • Fix two bugs when RfDing a soft redirect (862)
  • Add note for RfD nomination failures for soft redirects made from the history tab (863)
  • Fix listing of WP:RM/TR nominations (842, by User:DannyS712)
• block:
  • Automatically lookup pages for partial block menu (826, by User:SD0001)
  • Link to pages selected for partial blocking (826, by User:SD0001)
  • Add additional partial blocking templates (847 and 837)
  • Add {{uw-upeblock}} (851, by User:ST47)
  • Disable CU/OS options unless user has the relevant perm (845)
  • Provide a link to Special:Unblock in the footer (if they're blocked) (835)
  • Link pages in partial block templates (825)
  • Add tooltip to block log entry suggesting adding information
• tag:
  • Fix broken discussion links in merge tag (829, by User:SD0001)
  • Add {{R from subtopic}} and {{R to related topic}} (838, by User:QEDK)
  • Add some more common/popular redirect tags (840)
• arv:
  • Reorder AIV options to move VAO up, make spambot is last (827)
  • Note when AN3 diff search returns no results (866)
  • Link AIV and UAA when a user has already been reported (853)
• prod: Include a link to the log for file nomination logging (823)
• warn:
  • Fix long-standing bug in {{uw-c&pmove}} warning (874)
  • Add {{uw-hijacking}} (871, by User:DatGuy)
  • Fix bug with edit summaries from the "all warnings" menu (843)
• protect:
  • Fix bug affecting untagging on PC-ineligible namespaces (870)
  • Add error message for occasional PC-application failure (related to phab:T234743)
• Hide space for the Twinkle menu if the menu is empty (815, by User:DannyS712)

This section should serve as a catching ground should anything not work properly or if any new bugs crop up, as well as for any feedback or suggestions. As always, input is welcome at the GitHub repo as well. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:46, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

CSD R2 instances not being logged

I decided to check my CSD log, and I noticed it was surprisingly lacking in deletions via CSD R2. Whenever I draftified and article, I would tag the redirect for deletion. However, many of these tags seem to not have been logged in my CSD log, even though I have set my twinkle preferences to log all types of CSD tags (besides U1). I then went to my move log, which confirmed my suspcions that the articles that I draftified are logged in this move log, but the CSD log is not reflecting this. I cannot tell if this is because of a mistake that I made or a mistake on Twinkle's end, so I decided to ask here to clear the air. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the report, definitely a bug! When you draftify an article, because you can't suppress the redirect, the redirect left behind was "created" by you. The bug is that Twinkle hasn't been logging nominations when you try to notify the creator but later "find out" it was you. I'll propose a fix that should take care of it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:25, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

This should be fixed, btw. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Notability (geographic features)

Can the "Geo" argument be added to the notability tag please? ----Pontificalibus 08:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

It was there, but under an (older?) name of "places". QEDK put in a pull request to update the name. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

U5 on user pages not available?

I noticed that on userpages the option to CSD U5 (not a webhost) is no longer available, and couldn't find a mention of this feature in the March update information. Has the U5 rationale been taken off from Twinkle intentionally (maybe due to some discussion I missed) or is this a bug? GermanJoe (talk) 17:05, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

• @GermanJoe: I just deleted an userpage under U5. Upload a screenshot? --qedk (t 桜 c) 17:06, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

I think I figured out the - minor - issue. The userpage (already deleted) looked like:

• #REDIRECT [[URL to company site]] on top, followed by
• Unsourced self-promotional content.

See my change on my user page here (just for testing). Apparently Twinkle skips the U5 rationale in this special case. Not really a big deal, shouldn't happen too often. GermanJoe (talk) 17:18, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

Yeah: if the page is a redirect, Twinkle opts for those instead. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:16, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

If the page is a redirect, I can't see how CSD U5 tagging would be appropriate. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Feature request: merge log

Per Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Any_tool_that_can_create_a_log_of_mergers_I_proposed?. I think it would be highly useful and easy to implement, and complementary to CSD and PROD log features. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 15:23, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

879. SD0001 (talk) 04:50, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Notifying creator

Hello, Twinkle folks,

I've been deleting a lot of stale drafts and sometimes, probably 1 out of 20 times, Twinkle gives me a message saying that it can't find the page creator to post a notification on their talk page about the deletion. When I look at the deleted edits, it's clear which editor began the draft so I'm not sure why Twinkle is having a problem "finding" them.

Again, it doesn't happen frequently, but it does happen and I can't see any rhyme or reason to when it does occur. Just thought I'd pass that along in case there is a bug. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Liz, do you remember an example title of one time it happened? Has it been happening for a while or just for the past few days? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:10, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

I will note here when it happens again. I've been deleting a lot of G13 (stale drafts) over the weekend and that is when I see these notices. I also tag a lot of CSD C1s and I've never seen this message with those taggings. But with G13, it is deleting and notifying, not simply tagging a page & notifying. But it's happening less often today than it did over the weekend. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks — I have a hunch but it shouldn't show up every time if I'm right. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Y patch filed. Twinkle has been attempting to simultaneously delete the page as well as notify the creator. Where the creator lookup succeeds before deletion, there are no issues, but where the deletion succeeds first, it is longer able to lookup the creator as it's only looking in the live edits, not deleted edits. SD0001 (talk) 04:49, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Well, it just happened again with Draft:Margaret M. McCarthy and the page creator is SevennRosess. The message I get is:

Building deletion summary: complete

Deleting page: Could not find name of page creator

Deleting redirects: no redirects found

To orphan backlinks: click here to go to the Unlink tool

Luckily, SevennRosess already had a talk page message about this old draft. It's interesting that this happens only occasionally, not every time. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

The fix isn't live yet.

It's interesting that this happens only occasionally, not every time.

It's a race condition. Two concurrent requests are sent to the API server - either request could get fulfilled first -- that's beyond our control -- but most of the time, I guess creator-lookup would finish first as it's a simple read operation, unlike deletion which is slower (it involves moving rows from one db table to another). So the issue would have been occurring only occasionally, as you say. SD0001 (talk) 17:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Merged and pushed, so should be taken care of — thanks for the patch SD0001 and thanks for the report Liz! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:48, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Actually, I'm seeing a new problem with G13s. Ordinarily, these pages, when eligible, are deleted and the page creator is notified in one step. Now, the process gets stuck mid-way through. There is this message I see:

Building deletion summary: complete

Deleting page: Retrieving page creation information

...and then nothing. If I refresh the screen a minute or two later and check my contributions & log, nothing has happened. It's just stuck. So, I'm first tagging the page for deletion, and then deleting the page separately and that seems to work. But it's an unnecessary tagging since the page is just subsequently deleted a minute or so later. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Ah yeah, silly bug. Should be fixed now (might take five minutes), thanks. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy notification

Please see Template talk:RFDNote#Phrasing. Thank you CapnZapp (talk) 09:49, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Reporting image issues on commons

It would be pretty great if Twinkle could report problems with copyright issues / other issues concerning files uploaded on commons. Not sure if it's possible to do, but it sure would be great to have. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@Headbomb: Click here and the gadget QuickDelete should be activated which should serve your request. For batch copyright issue speedy deletion requests there is also VisualFileChange which can be activated here.Jonteemil (talk) 12:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@Headbomb:.Jonteemil (talk) 17:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Localization

Hello.. I want to complete the localization of the Twinkle tool to make it easier to use on Arabic Wikipedia.. Can I get some help? --MH HR HRX (talk) 02:10, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Request update to new WP:RM functionality

First of all, thank you developer(s) for getting WP:RM integrated for at least single-move discussions! Anyways, I have a request for an update regarding the new RM functionality...

In the edit summary created when a move request is created, can the proposed move destination be linked in the edit summary? For example, in this diff, the title Death of Liu Fan was not linked in the edit summary. Thanks! Steel1943 (talk) 20:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Y 891 My oversight 5 months ago. SD0001 (talk) 09:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

@SD0001: Just tested it again, and it's still not working. Steel1943 (talk) 22:48, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

@Steel1943:: That's because even though I've merged it to the codebase, I haven't synced it on-wiki yet, mostly because I haven't been able to be reliably around. Will get to it tomorrow or Saturday. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:48, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Support template and module merger

Could the Twinkle UI support a merge option of a template with a module? I wanted to TfD a template which has a note that says it is deprecated and to use a module instead (that does not have a template), but the UI just replaces the word "module" with "template". Any chance this can be supported, either automatically or even with a checkbox? --Gonnym (talk) 16:45, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Would love to, but I believe the blocker is that the relevant templates {{tfm}} and {{tfm2}} likewise don't support doing so. That'd have to be done first. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: are you sure? A module->module merge is possible and there is a |module= parameter in both templates, added on February 18, 2019 by you and Pppery. Could you tell me what else is needed so I can do that? --Gonnym (talk) 07:42, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

That's how those templates work. Passing |module= toggles whether everything is Module: or Template:, they'd need to be rewritten to allow for the other two either options. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Red links

Hello!

I don't know if this is intentional or nt but when you're tagging an article with Xfd and press "Review" the articles linked with [[]] all are blue even if the page doesn't exist. Why aren't they red?Jonteemil (talk) 18:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Because it's a software bug, Y patch filed. SD0001 (talk) 18:52, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

I see, just reporting. Thanks for the answer.Jonteemil (talk) 05:41, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

bareurls tagging

Could the maintenance tag {{bareurls}} be handled differently as far as grouping with Multiple Issues? There are two reasons for this request. First, if there is one existing tag, and bareurls is added and grouped, there is extra work to remove the MI template when the problem is fixed. Articles with bareurls are fixed promptly (usually within hours) because there is a group of editors that monitor the category, so bareurls is very transient unlike other maint templates that can remain for years.

The second reason is that the template includes a link to a tool to fix the bareurls, but that link is suppressed when used within MI, making a bit more work for those editors who fix them to invoke the tool.

I realize there is an option to group or not group, but that applies to all tags added at one time. bareurls is the only one (as far as I know) that is best left ungrouped. Changing Twinkle will save editor work. Without this change, I will have to remember to not add bareurls with other tags, and to uncheck the default grouping option. I did not know about the refill link issue until I was recently asked by MarnetteD, one of the prime bareurl fixers, to keep the tag ungrouped. Other editors may not know about this either. MB 03:56, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

My thanks to MB for placing this request. Just to elaborate a bit if you take a look at {{Bare URLs}} you'll see the parenthetical (One such tool to fix up some types of bare URLs is reFill, see also its documentation) - clicking on the word refill in that sentence gets the program to running. That option goes away when the template is put inside a multiple issues template and those of us who work on fixing the bare urls have to take the extra step of separating the template from the others. While it may be seen as a minor inconvenience on its face it is a drag when fixing a large batch of bare urls tagged articles at a time. If anything can be done to save that step it will be appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 04:12, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

You should be able to easily remove tags with Twinkle, is that not working? It's been a while since I've used reFill, IIRC you're probably removing the template manually in the same edit, right? So the first issue is that it's visually easy to forget/miss the {{mi}}, am I understanding that correctly? As for the second, isn't that more of an issue with the template itself? |issue= could be updated to include the reFill link. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

I filed a pull without doing a reading here (rip). Feel free to merge it if needed! --qedk (t 心 c) 13:36, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Not sure how often it gets run, but the tagbot doesn't ever use MI, is that right? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:39, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Tagging articles not working

 Unrelated See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T249565 --qedk (t 愛 c) 21:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This has just been happening in the last thirty minutes or so. Every time I try to tag an article, I get something similar to this:

"Tagging article: Failed to save edit: [b7fa7835-9d7b-4820-a658-839c7aad0ab2] Caught exception of type Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError"

With the long string changing every time. I've tried multiple computers and browsers, but keep getting the error. Is this a problem on my part? Sam-2727 (talk) 23:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind. This is happening for all of my edits, so seems to be a larger problem. Sorry for the confusion, Sam-2727 (talk) 23:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Warning Levels

When using the Warn module, I'm getting the impression Twinkle can choose the correct warning level itself. That is, if the current month exists a talk page section, and it already has a message using, say Template:uw-vandalism1, then the Twinkle warning for "vandalism" will be Template:uw-vandalism2.

• If so, the documentation does not make this clear.
• If not, the documentation does not make that clear.

Also, does this depend on whether Twinkle was used previously? Does it work for handcrafted warnings? Warnings posted through other tools such as Huggle? Here's the specific example that made me come here and ask: User talk:113.20.22.106.

Which is it, and please update the documentation to clarify any confusion. Thx CapnZapp (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I think it's a planned feature, Amorymeltzer can confirm. --qedk (t 愛 c) 21:11, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes indeed — I've been somewhat otherwise occupied lately, and there have been a lot of structural changes causing conflicts, but I'll try and get to it sooner rather than later! CZ, what was causing you confusion? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

My main concern is getting the documentation to explain what Twinkle does and doesn't do in this regard. As an example, see the talk page I linked to above. I expected Twinkle to insert a level 2 template but it inserted a level 1 warning. I tried to make sure I gave the exact same kind of warning, but that didn't help. And so I ask - was this because of the previous warning being issued by non-Twinkle (i.e Huggle) or something else? Could I have done anything? Can Twinkle even do this??

As a friendly reminder, I'm not asking for personal support (I'm content leaving that page as is) so don't feel compelled to answer me here on talk. I'm hoping the documentation will explain what to expect of Twinkle. In other words, my preferred way of getting a reply is "I've updated the doc, does the edit I made answer your query?" Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 09:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle never claims to automatically detect warning levels, it's probably an assumption you're carrying over from Huggle. The documentation doesn't even hint that it does anything more than post the warning that you select, hence I don't see what can be changed. --qedk (t 愛 c) 13:48, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

SPI reports

Recently had to deal with an SPI report which Twinkle filed on the wrong page.

Would it be possible to check when filing an SPI report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/sockmaster, if the page (if it already exists) includes {{SPIarchive notice|some other master}}, (or {{SPI archive notice|some other master}} with a space) then the report should be filed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/some other master, and the same check should be performed until the pagename matches the master declared inside the page. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 12:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Mobile Support

I know this has been asked a lot of times and I know part of it is because of MediaWiki mobile limitations... but considering that Twinkle is one of the most essential tools on Wikipedia, are there any plans or efforts to somehow get Twinkle on the mobile version of Wikipedia? Like many people these days, I monitor my watchlist on my phone... and it's kind of a pain having to "request desktop" version every time I need to use Twinkle for common tasks like CSD, non-vandalism rollback, warn user etc. Is there any hope in sight? — Starforce¹³ 17:05, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Template

Hello!

Twinkle adds {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} to files perfectly, and also leaves a note on the user's page. Can someone add the same function for {{di-fails NFCC}}? This would be very appreciated.Jonteemil (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle doesn't use this template; I think some of the F7 options are better suited. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: I know it doesn't, however my wish is that it do. I use {{di-fails NFCC}} fairly often and it would be nice to don't have to add it manually to the file page and the user's talk page.Jonteemil (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Ping.Jonteemil (talk) 01:19, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

It would also be good if {{Bad SVG}} were added.Jonteemil (talk) 04:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: I am not familiar with image templates. {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} is included in Twinkle's DI menu because it's connected to F7. What speedy deletion criterion is {{di-fails NFCC}} related to?

{{Bad SVG}}, on the other hand, can be added to the Tag menu. SD0001 (talk) 16:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@SD0001: Also F7. Do you know how to add {{Bad SVG}}?Jonteemil (talk) 16:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: will do that. di-fails NFCC template has a large number of criteria. Is it enough to allow support for one of the criteria to be selected? Or is it necessary to allow multiple criteria selections? If the latter is true, it won't be possible to support this template in TW. SD0001 (talk) 16:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

What's the need that di-fails NFCC fills? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amory (talk • contribs)

@Amorymeltzer: It makes the user being able to specify what criterion the file fails and makes it therefor easier for the user who uploaded the file to understand why the file is being proposed for deletion.Jonteemil (talk) 14:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@SD0001: I, myself, have never used more than one criterion on the same file however the template is constructed so that you can, if you want to. I'd rather see the template on Twinkle where you only can choose one criterion at a time, than to not have the template on Twinkle at all. So if you can get the template on Twinkle it would be awesome, even if the multiple criteria option isn't possible.Jonteemil (talk) 14:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

890 SD0001 (talk) 17:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

@SD0001: I would also like {{Non-free svg upscale}} to be added. Is this possible?Jonteemil (talk) 11:52, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Not sure, is it widely used? Since it doesn't take any parameters, you could just add it as a custom tag for yourself via WP:TWPREFS. SD0001 (talk) 14:21, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

@SD0001: I noticed now that RonBot upscaled those SVGs but that bot isn't active anymore so I don't think the tagging of the template will make anything.Jonteemil (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@SD0001 and Amorymeltzer: Hello again! I just wanted to check on the status regarding the implementation of {{Di-fails NFCC}} and {{SVG upscale}} (renamed from {{Non-free svg upscale}}) into Twinkle. Will it be done? If so, when?Jonteemil (talk) 14:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Worth mentioned is that DatBot probably will take over RonBot's task of maintaining {{SVG upscale}} so that template is still to be used after all.Jonteemil (talk) 14:22, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Jonteemil, I'm still not 100% on just straight-up adding {{Di-fails NFCC}}. It's not recommended or even listed at WP:F7. JJMC89, you've used it recently, do you have any thoughts? Aren't various WP:NFCCP items covered by F5 as well?

I think the larger issue is that F5-7 are very specific, and don't do a good job of implying coverage of every aspect of WP:NFCCP. Is that a fair read? Basically, F7 is Invalid fair-use claim (emphasis added) rather than Violates non-free use policy. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't really think that it is worth adding. For criteria 1, 2, 4, 7, 10a, 10b, and 10c there are more specific templates that should be used instead, {{di-replaceable fair use}}, {{db-f7}}, {{di-no source|non-free=yes}} (F4), {{di-orphaned fair use}}/{{db-f5}} (F5), {{di-dw no source|non-free=yes}} (F4), {{di-no license}} (F4), {{di-no fair use rationale}} (F6)/{{di-missing article links}}, respectively. (Some have shorter deletion delays.) For criterion 9, no tagging, just remove the use. My most common uses of {{di-fails NFCC}} are for criteria 3a and 8, which can be covered by {{di-disputed fair use rationale}} easily enough. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:16, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Mutually exclusive tags

From time to time I see images that have been tagged with both {{BadJPEG}} and {{Overcompressed JPEG}} simultaneously, and the edit summary indicates they were tagged using Twinkle. This is nonsense, as the two templates are mutually exclusive. The error seems to derive from two factors:

• The inline description of {{Overcompressed JPEG}} in the Twinkle UI is vague - "JPEG with high levels of artifacts".
• Twinkle doesn't validate the set of checkboxes the user has ticked when using the Tag feature (except for "You must select at least one tag!") as far as I can see.

Of course, there are other tags that are mutually exclusive, but these are the pair I most often seem to see inappropriately used together.

It would be good if the tool could be improved a bit to lessen this:

• by amending the description a bit. "JPEG is suitable format, but there are high levels of artifacts" or similar, maybe?
• by adding validation that kicks in when the user presses Submit Query and pops up a message / blocks the submission if the user has selected any of certain pairs of mutually exclusive tags including this.

— Smjg (talk) 09:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Smjg, There are some checks, but mainly for article tags. I do think there should be some for images. How about:

• {{Bad JPEG}}, {{Bad GIF}}, {{Bad SVG}}, {{Bad format}} all mutually exclusive
• {{Should be PNG}}, {{Should be SVG}}, {{Should be text}} mutually exclusive

There are other, more granular checks I can imagine (such as with {{Artifacts}}) but I think those would be enough to start with, yeah?

Regarding the two you mention, maybe I'm reading them wrong, but they don't have to be mutually exclusive, right? {{Overcompressed JPEG}} says "Yo this JPEG has artifacts, please fix (and also maybe don't be jpeg)" while {{Bad JPEG}} says "This really shouldn't be a JPEG, change it please." Couldn't someone apply both to a non-photographic JPEG with artifacts? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:08, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: You are indeed reading them wrong. {{Overcompressed JPEG}} is specifically for images for which the use of JPEG format is appropriate but which have the compression strength set too high. This is naturally mutually exclusive with the use of JPEG format being inappropriate. Indeed, if you ignored the "the use of JPEG format is appropriate" criterion then most if not all {{BadJPEG}} images would be {{Overcompressed JPEG}} as well, somewhat defeating the point of having the two separate templates. — Smjg (talk) 22:48, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, yeah; I guess I was reading Overcompressed as too broad. The rest sounds good? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Making subsequent deletions

When a topic is once again nominated for deletion, it displays the article name along with text in the brackets as (2nd nomination). In Malayalam Wikipedia, it is dislayed as 2 മത് നാമനിർദ്ദേശം. It needs to be displayed as രണ്ടാമത് നാമനിർദ്ദേശം (proof). How can this be done? Adithyak1997 (talk) 14:38, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Change the text in the RegExp.escape bit at line 524 of ml:മീഡിയവിക്കി:Gadget-twinklexfd.js. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:50, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

@Adithyak1997: That nomination wasn't made using TW. The Twinkle.xfd.num2order function near the top determines the naming, which is presently set to return num + '-ആമത്തെ' (which sounds more correct than num + 'മത് '). However, I don't think the automated naming actually works at present because the regex on line 525 to check for existing nominations is wrong (it looks for th|nd|rd|st which won't be there).

If you want the numbers to be in words, then you'd change num2order to something like switch( num ) { case 1: return ''; case 2: return രണ്ടാമത്; case 3: return 'moonamathe'; case 4: return 'naalamathe';}. But then you'll also have to change the logic on line 525 to look for these new types of names, which is quite involved - you can't do it with just regex any longer. SD0001 (talk) 07:17, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Technical problem for WP:RM/TR

Hi, I was unable to use Twinkle to file an uncontroversial technical RM from Template:Uw-lang to Template:Uw-engvar because the target section could not be located. The rationale read: This is not about languages in general, but English-language variants (i.e. [[WP:ENGVAR]]) specifically. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

@LaundryPizza03: The page formatting had been damaged, but it may be OK now. Could you try it again? -- John of Reading (talk) 06:24, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Y –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Mistargeted CSD notice

Moved from User talk:Creffett/Archives/2020/April § Mistargeted CSD notice

This speedy deletion nomination notice regarding Siege of Carthage the Third Punic War appears to have tagged the talk page of the wrong user with a {{Db-csd-notice-custom}}. If this is a bug in TWinkle, can someone please have a look? Thanks. Mathglot (talk) 21:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Although initially created at User:Michaelchan1998/sandbox, the page was created with {{dashboard.wikiedu.org sandbox}} by Shalor (Wiki Ed). We could theoretically try and skip those (like we do with initial creations that are redirects) but that's a very specific case. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

@Amory: aha, thanks for that explanation; that's starting to make sense to me, now. I'm wondering if there's a way to improve the situation by increasing transparency about what's going on, so Wiki Ed content experts aren't blind-sided by these notices. Off the top of my head, what I'd like to see would be to keep the notice posted to the currently targeted user as is, but pass an optional param to the template which would allow inclusion of a string in the generated template text containing the text you added, i.e., "|add-text=created by [[User:Moving User]] via move from [[User:Original User]]-created page by {{tl|dashboard.wikiedu.org sandbox}}". This way, the targeted user would at least understand what the speedy deletion notice is doing on their Talk page, when they didn't actually create the content, so they can either ping the content-creating user, or forward the notice to them. Shalor is a context expert at Wiki Edu, and this is a situation that may arise in the normal course of her work with Wiki Education students. Pinging the other two content experts, Ian and Elysia, to alert them to this situation. Looping in the other folks at Wiki Edu via WP:ENB. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Just to clarify my view: I think we do want to continue sending the notice to the content experts who performed the move, as was done in this case, because they are the first point of contact with the student who created the article, and would be able to advise them in this situation, but only if they continued to receive the notice. However, absent the additional information in the notice, as proposed above, it might just appear to be a random Twinkle bug which they could ignore. However, that's just my opinion; and the Wiki Edu folks may view it differently. Mathglot (talk) 23:53, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

trwiki

Unlink module doesn't work on trwiki. Can you help work? Thanks. ToprakM (talk) 11:23, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

What are the errors you're getting? I'd assume that, since the morebits was only changed for 3 minutes, any changes weren't propagated. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:46, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm not getting any errors. When I confirm the unlink, the empty menu appears. ToprakM (talk) 12:36, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

There should be an error in your browser console. I would guess that part of the issue is that the main Twinkle.js gadget hasn't been updated. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

I couldn't see a problem in Twinkle.js. Can you check it too? tr:MediaWiki:Gadget-Twinkle.js ToprakM (talk) 11:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

That's why I asked about your console errors. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Nothing. No console error in the Twinkle.js. ToprakM (talk) 16:40, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle TfD put a misplaced line break after closing noinclude, and linked to the wrong date

Two possible bugs to report: Please see the recent history of Template:Wrap, where a closing noinclude statement had an inappropriate newline placed after it, and (more importantly), the auto-generated link to the discussion page linked to the page for the next day instead of the current day. Both errors had to be fixed manually. Also see the recent history of Template:Allow wrap, which had both of the same errors, generated by the same Twinkle process.

I don't do a lot of XfDs, but I have never had either of these things happen before. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

The date issue is definitely a bug, I'll put together a fix. As for the space, did you check the "noinclude" box but also select the "standard" TfD style? AFAICT that looks like an inline template, Twinkle doesn't add the newline if you select "inline", so that formatting for everyone is maintained. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:54, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Can the sockpuppet documentation be expanded?

Still exploring twinkle, but find it really useful.

One area though that I think needs some improved documentation are the two sockpuppet options. There's no distinction as to which option is appropriate over the other. Also, I'm not positive, but I think there should be an option for naming the main account rather than just listing all as sockpuppets. I'm not 100% sure about this as I just used TW to report SPI and i'm comparing what TW created to other users.

In any case, love the gadget. thanksToeFungii (talk) 16:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: If I interpret you correctly, there is. The "sockpuppeteer" option lets you name the main account.Jonteemil (talk) 15:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Correct - if you're opening a new SPI, you'll probably want sockpuppeteer (and then you can list the sockpuppets). If you think an account is the sockpuppet of a known sockpuppeteer, you would use sockpuppet and put the name of the existing sockpuppeteer. creffett (talk) 15:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I should have taken another look b4 posting the above so i could be clearer about what i was confused. So to do the report i should go to the talk page of the puppeteer? ToeFungii (talk) 15:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii, yeah, you would go to the suspected sockpuppeteer (usually the oldest account) and choose the sockpuppeteer option. If you need help, feel free to post on my talk page with the accounts you're concerned about and I can walk you through what you'll need to do. creffett (talk) 16:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

will do, thanks. fortunately i've only seen/recognized one in the past month so not something i'll have to use - i hope. ToeFungii (talk) 16:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Possible bug needing fixing regarding posting RMs for talk pages

Please see this edit. When I was using Twinkle, I intended to post a WP:RMTR request for Wikipedia talk:Introduction (a talk page), so I used Twinkle while viewing Wikipedia talk:Introduction. However, Twinkle posted the request on WP:RMTR to move Wikipedia:Introduction instead ... again, even though I was using Twinkle while viewing Wikipedia talk:Introduction, not Wikipedia:Introduction. I get it, there will probably be an almost 0% chance that there will be a full discussion to move a talk page, but sometimes, talk pages need to be posted on WP:RMTR, especially in the event they have move protection (such as the case with Wikipedia talk:Introduction at the present time.)

My thought on how to resolve this would probably be to implement something like a choice asking which page the editor is trying to move if they are viewing the talk page. Then if they choose the talk page, restrict the choice they can make with Twinkle to a WP:RMTR request. But ... as long as the current situation is resolved somehow, that would obviously be preferable. Steel1943 (talk) 18:24, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

...? Steel1943 (talk) 03:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, maybe asking would be better? Maybe worth asking at WT:RM. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: I'm sorry, I'm not clear what you mean. Ask what? Steel1943 (talk) 14:14, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

No, sorry, that's my bad: two uses of "ask" neither clear. I meant to first consider that yes, it might be beneficial to ask first when trying to nominate a talkpage. I then meant to suggest asking at WT:RM if such a thing would be beneficial; as you state, it should largely never happen, and folks there might be better able to opine. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Deleted template

Hello!

Just wanted to point out that {{duplicate}} has been deleted and redirected to {{Db-f1}} so it can be removed from Twinkle.Jonteemil (talk) 15:29, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Should be removed now. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Signature in Articles

Is there any reason that {{subst:Uw-articlesig}} and all of the appropriate lvl 1 through 4 are not available in TW? My CVU course says this is a common issue (especially with new users but I went through all of the available templates in TW and could not find one. I look forward to the feedback! Galendalia^{Chat Me Up} 17:20, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

They used to be, but were removed in 2015. It used to be a much more common occurrence, since the button to sign when editing used to be present in mainspace. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Messages being left on user pages, instead of user talk pages

See this edit, my revert, and my talk page.

tl;dr: Over the years I have seen messages being left on the *user pages* of banned users, likely because the talk page is a redirect. A rather strange issue which I believe has been around for quite a while. Can it be fixed? Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 13:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it's a long-standing issue. Thankfully, there's a PR by SD0001 to address just this very sort of thing! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok, cool. :-) In my experience, Wikipedians turn a talk page into a redirect to mark it as 'closed down'. This is always done, without exceptions, to the talk pages of community banned users, to bury past drama, and discourage possible future drama. My feeling is that there's no point in leaving messages for indefinitely banned users, since unbanning of these people is rare. E-mailing is perhaps possible, but it may be best to just leave these people alone. Thus, no message, and a notice that no message has been left due to the talk page being a redirect (and the user being blocked). Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

April 2020 Twinkle updates, features, and behaviors (2020-04-25) @ffe5bbed

Some nice new features this month. Too many menu options? There's a brand new option that lets you hide any Twinkle modules you don't want to use! You can also now add a reason when removing or adding article maintenance tags, and can finally preview your talkback messages. Other new features include the ability to add a reason when removing or adding article maintenance tags, support for stub template nomination at CfD, and you can finally preview your talkback messages before sending! A number of other improvements and bug fixes are present as well; a brief summary of some of the more notable items are below. Changes not otherwise attributed were made by User:Amorymeltzer.

• Add new option to disable individual Twinkle modules (793)
  • In your Twinkle preferences, the first section ("General") will have checkboxes to disable any modules you don't want to clutter your menus. It won't speed up page loads.
• Properly color links (redlinks, already-visited links, etc.) when previewing​ (904)
• talkback: Add ability to preview messages​ (902)
• tag:
  • Allow entering a reason when removing (or adding) tags (889, by User:SD0001)
  • Add the missing space parameter to {{notability}} (877, by User:QEDK)
  • Link page names in the merge discussion section header (891, by User:SD0001)
  • Remove reference to the {{Multiple issues}} tag in the edit summary (886)
  • Add {{Bad SVG}} (890, by User:SD0001)
• warn:
  • Remove {{uw-bizlist}}, deleted at TfD (925, by User:JJMC89)
  • Better search for prior warnings (922)
  • Add a note when warning for a revert you didn't do (855)
• arv:
  • Correctly handle all diff link formats when providing evidence of other attempts at AN3 resolution (899)
  • Better messages when AN3 diffs are revdel'd (875)
• revert/rollback: Fix reverts from Special:Contributions if the "Do not view page content below diffs" preference is used (913, 914)
• xfd:
  • Support stub template deletion or renaming nomination at WP:CfD (897)
  • Link the destination page in WP:RM nomination edit summary (891, by User:SD0001)
  • Follow redirects when nominating via CfD and RM (match other venues) (864)
• prod: New option to automatically mark the page as patrolled/triaged upon nomination; off by default (per NPP consensus, like CSD) (917)
• xfd/prod/speedy: "Mark as patrolled" option now uses the page triage function​ (917)
• speedy:
  • Look up the creator before deleting. (884 and 7c6fe4d2, by User:SD0001)
  • If notifying on deletion, don't do so unless deletion succeeded (918)
• protect: Don't ask to remove tags if you've already chosen to remove them (881)
• block: Show block expiration in currently blocked message (846)
• batch: Better date formatting in protection warnings (906)

This section should serve as a catching ground should anything not work properly or if any new bugs crop up, as well as for any feedback or suggestions. There were a lot of changes behind the scenes, so feel free to ping me. As always, input is welcome at the GitHub repo as well. Finally, if you're interested in helping out with Twinkle development, there's a guideline to help new contributors get set up — check it out! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Technical changes

Also, for the more technical folks, there are a number of behind the scenes changes, briefly noted below:

• Add a new Morebits.date library to replace moment dependency. Really stellar work by User:SD0001! (814, 907, and 921)
• Finally update how tokens are retrieved (use csrftoken via meta=tokens rather than intoken) (888)
• The patrol function has been improved to make use of revid, and a corresponding triage function has been added (and made use of throughout). (917)
• Remove code handling the deprecated notoken error (883, by User:SD0001)
• The deprecated lookupCreator function has been removed (replaced June 2019) (867)
• The tw_status class has been renamed to the more appropriate morebits_status (885)

~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

---

BREAKING CHANGES: Twinkle no longer defines Date.prototype.getUTCMonthName. I found a couple of userscripts which rely on it, pinging the maintainers:

• User:Darkwind - User:Darkwind/DAVT/Beta.js
• User:Enterprisey - User:Enterprisey/afch-master.js/core.js (GADGET)
• User:CAPTAIN MEDUSA - User:Captain Medusa alt/fork.js
• User:Wikidudeman/wikidudemandeluxe.js - User:Wikidudeman
• User:Ostrichyearning3/challenge-submit.js - User:Ostrichyearning3
• User:Bellezzasolo/Scripts/arb.js - User:Bellezzasolo
• User:Kangaroopower/igloocsd.js = User:Kangaroopower.

To get your script working again, you need to change the Date object to a Morebits.date object (that is, change var x = new Date(...) to var x = new Morebits.date(...)). Morebits.date inherits all methods on Date. If your script doesn't use Morebits (which means till now it wouldn't have worked for non-Twinkle users!), then define your own function to get the month names. SD0001 (talk) 12:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Ugh, that's on me, thanks SD0001. We should probably restore the objects/functions for a quick bit. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:36, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

I've gone and done this. Apologies to all for any inconvenience, sorry for not reaching out to you all earlier! SD0001's advice is spot on. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:02, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)@Amorymeltzer: No need to re-introduce anything. The WP:MOSTIMPORTED list shows that apart from Bellezzasolo's arb.js and Enterprisey's gadget, the remaining are all pretty much unused. User:Wikidudeman/wikidudemandeluxe.js does have 16 users though, but only 1 is active. Some of these script writers may not have even realised that getUTCMonthName isn't native but coming from TW (hence they wouldn't work for folks who don't use TW). This is exactly the reason we shouldn't be modifying native prototypes. SD0001 (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Agreed on that point, for sure. Had I thought of it beforehand, I would've contacted the active ones beforehand. No harm in lingering for a month when I should have notified them. The gadget in particular should be updated to explicitly make use of morebits. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:14, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Any chance you or @SD0001: can add a summary of the changes to Wikipedia:Scripts++/Next? If not I will at the end of the month, but you two are probably most familiar with which changes are important enough to highlight DannyS712 (talk) 23:24, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Sure — the technical stuff, or main features? Or both? I can try to make a habit of doing so if you like. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: both ideally - but whatever you think people should know about DannyS712 (talk) 03:26, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

By the way, looks like wgMonthNames has what it says on the tin, so I'll just make AFCH index into that, I think. Enterprisey (talk!) 22:43, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Edit summary

We use 2 different types of templates in the friendlywelcome module and we want to use different edit summary according to these types. So I made this edit. However, after made the edit, it is stuck in the "Retrieving page" message when sending the template. I'll be happy if you can help me. Thanks. ToprakM (talk) 17:49, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Spurious "A uw-vandalism1 has been issued in the last minute."

Steps to reproduce (Firefox 75 Linux, timezone UTC-7):

1. Leave a level 1 warning on a talk page with no warnings
2. Wait a few minutes
3. Attempt to leave a level 2 warning.

Result is a "A uw-vandalism1 has been issued in the last minute." message.

Possibly relevant: Special:Diff/953090512

It looks like FF can't handle the parentheses in the timestamp:

> new Date("19:37, 3 May 2020 UTC")
Date Sun May 03 2020 12:37:00 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)

> new Date("19:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)")
Date Sun May 03 2020 19:37:00 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)

Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Suffusion of Yellow, are you seeing that at User talk:Sandbox for user warnings right now? Can you paste each of the following into your browser console and share the output for each line:

new Morebits.date("19:37, 3 May 2020 UTC");
new Morebits.date("19:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)");

~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:34, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer:. Yes, I get the same warning. And:

new Morebits.date("19:37, 3 May 2020 UTC");
Object { _d: Date Sun May 03 2020 12:37:00 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) }

new Morebits.date("19:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)");
Object { _d: Date Sun May 03 2020 19:37:00 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) }

Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 20:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I have the same issue of the spurious message on FF 75, but weirdly while I get "Object { _d: Date Sun May 03 2020 12:37:00 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) }" for the first one, I get "Object { _d: Invalid Date }" for the second one. Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Galobtter, the latter is because you're using the script that changes timestamps to be local time. It's showing like "Today (UTC-offset)" right? If you copy the source, I'd be curious for the same answers above and below from you. Also linux? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

🤦🏾 I should have figured. Yeah I'm on Linux. Now that I'm copying the right thing I'm getting the same as SoY. For the below code I'm getting "19:37 3 May 2020 UTC" for both lines. Galobtter (pingó mió) 21:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Fun!​ Could you try another bit, in your browser again:

"19:37, 3 May 2020 UTC".replace(/(\d\d:\d\d),/, '$1').replace(/\(UTC\)/, 'UTC')
"19:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)".replace(/(\d\d:\d\d),/, '$1').replace(/\(UTC\)/, 'UTC')

If you have a different browser and/or a terminal-based JS repl (e.g. node or jsc), I'd love to see the results from there as well. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Both result in "19:37 3 May 2020 UTC" on FF and node.js version 8.11.1. Also from node.js:

> new Date("19:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)")
Invalid Date
> new Date("19:37, 3 May 2020 UTC")
Invalid Date
> new Date("19:37 3 May 2020 (UTC)")
2020-05-04T02:37:00.000Z
> new Date("19:37 3 May 2020 UTC")
2020-05-03T19:37:00.000Z

Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 21:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I can replicate it in Firefox 75. The issue is mainly with the comma. Basically, mediawiki on enwiki uses dates formatted like 19:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC), which is an invalid date for two reasons. The first is that (UTC±offset) isn't correct for a timezone, and the native Date converts it to a local date; that is, 17:00 (UTC) become 17:00 (local). The second is that the comma after the time is just plain wrong. Twinkle's new date function handles both of those, except that apparently Firefox 75 will actually now accept the comma as valid. Thus, Firefox is short-circuiting the initial check to see if it's a valid date, before we clean up mediawiki's cruft, which is leading to the local timezone issues. My evening is starting now, so I'll try and get a fix out tomorrow. Thanks for the digging you two. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

@Suffusion of Yellow and Galobtter:: https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/pull/936 ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Quick response, as usual. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 03:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I pushed this out this morning, lmk if there's an issue. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Works for me! I also get the warning, when I'm supposed to. Thanks again. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 18:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

{{R from abbreviation}}

Hi, do you know why the template {{R from abbreviation}} doesn't appear in the tagging page on redirects? It says there that the template is in Twinkle. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 09:44, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

It used to be a redirect to {{R from initialism}}, but was created two years ago following Template talk:R from initialism#Requested move 17 October 2016; folks must have missed it then or not be notified and nobody noticed/cared until now. The documentation was created incorrectly saying it was in Twinkle. It was also never added to Template:R template index, which is why I missed it recently when adding some popular templates. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:09, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 May 6#Template:Welcomeshort

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 May 6#Template:Welcomeshort. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Multiple XfD nominations

Is Twinkle able to bundle multiple pages in the same XfD nomination? Alternatively, is there a way for Twinkle to add a page to an existing nomination? SpinningSpark 17:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm decidedly not an expert, but it's been my understanding that the answer to both of those questions is 'Unfortunately not.' DonIago (talk) 18:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

That's a pretty good summary! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Late notification: {{Uw-ew}}

{{Uw-ew}} is being discussed for merger with {{Uw-3rr}} at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_April_29#Template:Uw-ew. Best, Mdaniels5757 (talk) 01:11, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Now relisted at Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_May_7#Template:Uw-ew ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:34, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress regarding renaming WP:XFD notification templates

There is a move discussion in progress on Template talk:Afd notice which affects most, if not all, of the notification templates for WP:XFD discussions that are used by Twinkle. Since moving these pages to new titles affects Twinkle, participants and watchers of this page are invited to participate in the move discussion on that page Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

To follow-up: this was closed, actioned, and Twinkle's been updated (although it's fine with redirects). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:35, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Template:Welcome-delete - new parameter

Hi folks, I've added a parameter (ordinal 3 or br for bad reason) to Welcome-delete indicating that there was an edit summary left explaining the removal of content, but it was not a sufficient reason to remove the content (for example, "This isn't true" when removing content that's well-sourced). It'd be great if a checkbox for that could be added into the welcome template on Twinkle! Cheers, Naypta ☺ | ✉ talk page | 11:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Add ping fix?

I just added Template:Ping fix to the single-level user notices list. Is there anything I need to do to get it added to Twinkle? Help bringing the template itself and its documentation up to standard for a user notice would also be appreciated if anyone is inclined — bad ping fixes seem to be a pretty pervasive misunderstanding, and it'd be good to make it easier to spread awareness. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 11:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Also, btw, Template:Welcome-personal now redirects to Template:Welcome cookie, so the name should probably be updated. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:13, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm... not sure about that one. The changes to all these are a little tricky for me to catch up on, but, speaking personally, I think there's enough daylight between {{Welcome cookie}} and what you removed at {{Welcome-personal}}. For example, {{Welcome cookie}} isn't very personal, which seems like was sort of the point of {{Welcome-personal}}. It might be worth taking a more comprehensive look at these, but, purely on this matter, I'd be inclined to undo your redirect/merge pending further discussion. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Most of the differences reflect the fact that {{Welcome-personal}} was a copy of a very old version of the standard welcome template that has become very outdated, whereas switching it to a redirect updated it to reflect the changes from the Village Pump discussion. If there was any language lost that you're particularly attached to, we could turn it into a wrapper template that uses |customstart=, but in the spirit of WP:CONSOLIDATE, I don't think we really need two wrapper templates for the welcome template with a plate of cookies. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, bringing the template itself and its documentation up to standard for a user notice would be a good start! I'm not sure {{Ping fix}} actually belongs on Template:Single notice links though; I'm not sure what the criteria for inclusion is, but it's not really a user warning per se. To wit I wouldn't think it would be a good fit for something like the warning module in Twinkle that's aimed mainly at problematic behavior. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

A lot of the user notices from {{Single notice links}} are aimed at bad-faith behavior or mistakes beginners make, but there are a few (e.g. {{Uw-hasty}}) aimed at more advanced users making understandable good-faith errors. Using pings incorrectly is, in a very mild sense, a form of problematic behavior we'd like to correct; hopefully my recent edits helped make the wording soft enough no one who receives it will feel at all attacked. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:58, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy notice: many welcome templates now wrappers

Hi Twinkle folks! Many of the welcome templates had fallen out of the sync with the standard welcome and did not yet reflect the updates to it from the VPR discussion that closed last month. I just completed a refresh that brought them into alignment and converted them into wrappers so that they will remain synced if the standard welcome evolves in the future. I checked that they still work correctly on Twinkle, so hopefully there won't be any issues, but if there are feel free to ping me and we can resolve them. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 10:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Oh, one small thing to change: {{Welcome-image}} no longer autosigns (it was an outlier in doing so before). {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 10:34, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

As a note, most of the changes mentioned have been rolled back. Primefac (talk) 15:05, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

I think given this (and the rest, best to hold off on changes for now. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Relevant RfC at Wikipedia talk:Welcoming committee/Welcome templates#RfC on welcome template standardisation ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Partial block notice

So I partially blocked an editor. I went to the "block" tab on their talkpage, unticked "Block User", ticked "Partial Block". I chose "Edit-warring" from the drop-down, entered the article name (Fanny Cradock) and the period of blocking (1 week). This is what came up on their talk page "You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week Fanny Cradock for edit warring" [5]. It should of course be "You have been blocked from editing Fanny Cradock for a period of 1 week, for edit warring".

Is this a bug, or am I doing something wrong? Black Kite (talk) 21:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

So... it's complicated. Basically, {{uw-ewpblock}} passes the area parameter to {{uw-pblock}}; that's technically a natural language type thing. When you're blocking and templating from Twinkle, Twinkle can know what to build for that and use proper language, but if not, you need to manually enter it. When you entered the article page, you probably didn't notice that is said "Area blocked from" rather than "Linked page." The tooltip has some more info, but basically you should have written "from Macbeth" or something to that effect. Could be made more clear? Preview should show it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:51, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah right, OK. I'll have a play about with it next time I do a partial. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 10:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Belated TFD notification: {{Uw-ewsoft}}

{{Uw-ewsoft}} has been nominated for deletion. The TFD is here: Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2020_April_29#Template:Uw-3rr-alt. Best, Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Now deleted, but thanks for the heads up. Removed. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:32, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I've now opened a DRV for the template: Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Template:Uw-ewsoft. Galobtter (pingó mió) 05:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Relisting of Template:Uw-ewsoft at TfD

{{uw-ewsoft}} was part of Twinkle until it was deleted following a TfD on 7 May 2020. The outcome of that TfD was then appealed to deletion review on 11 May 2020, which decided to relist the template for further discussion at TfD: please see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 May 20#Template:Uw-ewsoft for the new entry. Mz7 (talk) 01:06, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle keeps reposting the same date header at MfD

Does this happen for anyone else? Can it be fixed? Adam9007 (talk) 14:41, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Yup, it's a bug! Should be fixed in the next few minutes, thanks for reporting. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:19, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

One thing Twinkle could benefit from

Is a button that files a report at m:SR/G under "Global locks" so we can report spambots more quickly. Aasim 10:16, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Or not. I just created another script that handles this: User:Awesome Aasim/SRGL Aasim 21:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

PROD

I just tried to PROD Guts and Glory, but Twinkle refused to do it, saying the talk page says there's an old XfD. This is a problem if, for example, the XfD'd article is about a different subject that just happens to have the same name (I don't know if that's the case here). Perhaps this should be changed to a confirmation request instead? Adam9007 (talk) 02:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Adam9007: Regarding that specific page: it was previously listed for AfD and deleted. Maybe you could try tagging it with the appropriate CSD? RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 02:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I can't tell if that's a G4 because I can't see the deleted page. Adam9007 (talk) 02:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

If the article is about a different subject, just remove the old XfD, and then twinkle it. But this is likely to occur only in case of biographical articles. For something like this, it's extremely unlikely for the subject to be different. The right thing to do here if you're concerned about notability is another AfD. G4 can't be valid here since the old AfD was deleted on TOOSOON grounds, before the game was even released -- so those AfD arguments no longer stand. SD0001 (talk) 10:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Template:Promotional-2

Hello, I suggest that when you mark pages for deletion you can also choose to include this template. So, if you select G11+promotional username on userpages, that will bring up an option where you can choose if you want to add this template. Such a similar function already exists with salting. --TheImaCow (talk) 17:04, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

question re custom welcome templates on twinkle

is there a numerical limit on how many custom templates that I can add to Twinkle, for welcoming new users? I tried to add at least ten templates, but it seems to limit me to seven custom templates total. please ping me when you reply. thanks.--Sm8900 (talk) 17:03, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any such limit, did you get a message or error notice or something? It looks like you had more than seven quite recently, are you sure you didn't just misclick? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:18, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Re-adding warnings

• Template:Uw-ewsoft (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)
• Template:Uw-3rr-alt (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages)

Now that these warnings have been kept, can they be restored to the Twinkle warnings? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 21:54, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:40, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much! - BilCat (talk) 01:47, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Did you add {{Uw-3rr-alt}}? I don't see it. Thanks. BilCat (talk) 01:54, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

It wasn't actually part of Twinkle, so it wasn't actually removed. ;) Whether it should be added is a different question I suppose. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. I never used it anyway, as it wasn't in Twinkle, so I didn't realize it wasn't in Twinkle! :) - BilCat (talk) 02:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Link appearing

Hello!

Since the rollback function covers edits by one user only, I think the three rollback links should be disabled if Special:Diff covers edits by more than one uer. It's quite confusing otherwise if you think you rollback three edits but only two are rollbacked.Jonteemil (talk) 12:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, there's no way to tell if the intervening edits were made by more than one user or not without querying the API and delaying loading. I do agree it's misleading though, so could be worth it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 09:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Twinkle does not inform the page creator upon speedy deletion

Hi, i have been trying to fix the issue of Twinkle not informing the page creator upon speedy deletion, but i couldn't fix the problem. I would be glad if someone could help me. Thanks --Euvonia (talk) 09:48, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Disabling italics

I find it quite annoying when I add an additional comment that the text is in italics. This doesn't serve a useful purpose as far as I can see (especially since I try to write a coherent sentence explaining the specific issue when the template is not precise enough, and this disrupts the otherwise uniform formatting). Is there a setting which disables this? It's not in the preferences which can be edited automatically. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Ditto. I even avoid leaving a personal comment (or go back later and add it manually) because of the italics. But it never occurred to me to ask for it to be changed or if there was a way to change it, so thanks for bringing it up. Schazjmd (talk) 22:26, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: I patrolled RC without twinkle before and the default behaviour of the templates is not italics so this should definitively be changeable. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:30, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

@RandomCanadian and Schazjmd: There's actually a simple way to disable the italics: Just add a space and two single quote marks at the beginning of your message, and close it with two single quote marks and a space. (If you don't add spaces at the beginning and end, it will bold your comments instead, and leave a single quote mark.) Yeah, it's a hassle to remember to do this every time, but it'll work until a permanent solution is implemented. - BilCat (talk) 04:28, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Ah, ok, yes hassle, but better than the alternative, so thanks. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 13:04, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

BilCat, thanks! Schazjmd (talk) 13:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't know, but I assume the idea was so that the personalized message stood out from the template text? I'm not sure if there was harm (perceived or otherwise) in such things happening. I'm not opposed to this, but it's been this way for years and years, so I think it would be good to get some more feedback before changing things. Are there folks that like this? Could be good to ask at WT:UW or something. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:14, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

It seems to be an artifact of Twinkle, not the UW warnings themselves. I manually warned myself here, and the added note is not italicized. - BilCat (talk) 02:32, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes; it's quite clear in the code. I meant to say that I assume the idea was to make the additional comment (Twinkle feature) stand out from the generic templates, but I don't know. I figured that it might be good to solicit opinions from other Twinkle users before changing something others may actually like, since it's been this way for ages. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:52, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, I understand now. I was primarily responding to you're suggestion that we go to WT:UW. We can still do that. I have another question though: Is it possible to make the italics an optional Twinkle setting, either in Preferences or in the warning dialog? If it is possible, we can present the option to allow both at WT:UW. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 04:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: - BilCat (talk) 05:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Technically, yes, but it's such a small thing it hardly seems worth it. I only meant that, minor change though it is, it's been that way for years, so it's possible someone beyond you three has an opinion. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 09:27, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll try to bring the subject up at WT:UW later today. - BilCat (talk) 12:11, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Final warning ;{uw-unsourced4}}: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material only tells the editor they added unsourced material

Which justifiably bothered an editor who had used sources, just not properly. Doug Weller talk 11:55, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: This is not a Twinkle issue. Twinkle makes it easy for its users to choose, preview and place a warning message; however, there's nothing in Twinkle that tries to work out whether the message is appropriate. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:25, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

@John of Reading: how is this not a Twinkle issue? I thought I was telling an editor that they had added unsourced or improperly souced material. Twinkle gave them a different warning. Doug Weller talk 14:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: Ah, I see. My apologies. The Twinkle dialog's generic description of the uw-unsourcedN series is incorrect when the level is changed to 4. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:58, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Just to clarify Doug Weller, you're saying that the description (Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material) and summary (Final warning: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material') for {{uw-unsourced4}} is misleading since the template itself only says unsourced and not "improperly cited," is that right? That makes sense I suppose (it probably wouldn't hurt to audit these descriptions) but if folks are going to nitpick on that, shouldn't the template itself be more inclusive to match its prior siblings? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:50, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Doh! Amorymeltzer of course. I guess it needs a discussion or RfC to change that? Doug Weller talk 08:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

​Nah. It's just a template, we can just change the text to "unsourced or improperly cited" or something else sufficiently succinct. It's template protected (although that's overkill IMO) so a talkpage notice/discussion could be appreciated, but that's it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 09:30, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: I've raised the issue at Wikipedia talk:Template index/User talk namespace. There's not a lot of consistency. I'm not sure what the "hp" was meant to do in your ping. Doug Weller talk 15:59, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

{{hp}} is {{Hidden ping}}, a way to ping someone without adding to the visible message and clutter of a page. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:24, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Tagging redirects – June 2020

Is there a way to add {{R from adjective}}, {{R from adverb}}, {{R from verb}}, etc. to the Tag function for redirects? Thank you. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 00:12, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Help

Hello. I would like to ask about Twinkle link cleaner feature. In trwiki it is not working. After deletion of a page; I can not clean links to the page which deleted, with Twinkle. Can a user who knows about this help me please? Regards. ChanSey 23:36, 6 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chansey (talk • contribs)

@Chansey: It's hard for me to investigate because of the language barrier, so you may have better luck on your home project. That being said, a good start would be any WP:JSERRORS. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 18:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: thank you for your help. I will check it. ChanSey 18:47, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

High Priority Pull Request

{{subst:w-short}} currently creates this mess. I made a pull request to fix it here alongisde this edit. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:39, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

What "mess" are you referring to, other than the aforementioned oddity with the whitespace? Primefac (talk) 12:23, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

@MJL and Primefac: Could it be the same problem as the one I fixed here? The code is too messy for me to figure it out in this instance. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:12, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

@RandomCanadian and Primefac: I was just referring to the double signature, weird whitespace, and missing header thing issues. Also, it gets signed "MJL Happy editing!" because |1= is meant to be {{PAGENAME}} like an extra mesage or something. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 01:43, 7 June 2020 (UTC) Edited: 01:48, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, I should probably explain that it happened because the recent merge of {{subst:Welcomeshort}} (which Twinkle was set up for) into {{subst:W-short}} (which has a differing set of parameters). –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 01:50, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

MJL, Yeah, sorry — it was on my radar, but then I was away for a while when it finally went through... I replied to the PR, but thanks for submitting this! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:13, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

@Amorymeltzer: Responded, and it's all good! :D –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 20:49, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Could a Twinkle user aid me in the correct direction

It is my personal opinion that the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Banayoti or Edward Banayoti should be nominated for immediate deletion due to current talk users being unwilling to consider any other facts. It being very defamatory and is not biographically worthy due to how it's written. It may be worthy of staying as an article? I believe this is within the guidance of speedy deletion, would the community please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suwritter251 (talk • contribs) 23:46, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Refspam

Can Template:Uw-refspam be added to Twinkle? Daask (talk) 12:08, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Template:Inadequate lead not present in Tag feature

Would it be possible to add this template to the list of tags in the Tag popup box? I couldn't find it in there even after a search. --letcreate123 (talk) 22:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I'd say use {{Lead too short}}. AFAICT the TfD was a mess with no real consensus (cc Plastikspork) but I can't imagine it'd be helpful for Twinkle to have both. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:15, 9 June 2020 (UTC)