Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 31

Archive 25

←

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

Archive 32

Archive 33

→

Archive 35

Twinkle won't rollback bots

When trying to do this revert using Twinkle, I got the message: Notice: Good faith revert was chosen on SineBot. This is a whitelisted bot, it makes no sense at all to revert it as a good faith edit, will stop reverting.

It's quite annoying to be told your edit "makes no sense at all" in an automated message. Would it be possible to either look at the possibility of allowing rollbacks of this type or else changing the wording to something more straightforward like "Twinkle does not allow for rollback of bot edits as good faith edits"? Formerip (talk) 15:24, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay, I'll amend the wording. How about "Good faith revert was chosen on SineBot. This is a whitelisted bot, and since bots have no faith, AGF rollback will not proceed."? — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, that would be an improvement, but I still think it might confuse the hell out of some people (I know what a "whitelisted bot" is, but a lot of Twinkle users won't. What about, simply: "Good-faith rollback of SineBot is not permitted.

Just to draw attention again to the issue, which I appreciate may not be simple or even possible to resolve: I was trying to revert a human edit. The additional (necessary) rollback of SineBot was requested because the human editor's post had been autosigned. What the current setup did in this case was prevent me from doing an AGF rollback, which doesn't seem a very useful thing to prevent, if it can be helped. Formerip (talk) 23:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

AzaToth (talk · contribs) drew up the logic for Twinkle rollback. You would have to ask him for more info on this.

I really want to leave the bit about bots having no faith, since I assume it forms some part of AzaToth's reasoning behind the behaviour. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Why not allow the rollback? The AGF in this case just signifies that it is rolling back an edit for reasons other than vandalism. Ryan Vesey 13:20, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, bots have no faith, as I said, so it doesn't make sense to use AGF rollback on bots. If you use normal rollback the bot will get rolled back, and if you use vandalism rollback Twinkle will roll back both the bot and the previous editor. So the message is, you should use normal rollback! — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle at ANI

FYI, I made some comments about Twinkle use and abuse here. Warden (talk) 09:48, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Discussion regarding possible misuse of Twinkle

• See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents – TenPoundHammer, AfD and WP:IDONTUNDERSTANDIT. It appears that Twinkle may be facilitating deletion nominations for Wikipedia articles in a counterproductive manner that is contrary to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

To keep this discussion on the productive side

It has been suggested to add an intermediary page when the user selects XfD, giving the links typically shown in the {{find sources}} template, as a way to encourage better WP:BEFORE compliance. Thoughts on this? Tijfo098 (talk) 13:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

• Y Support – Per my comments at the above-mentioned discussion occurring at ANI: Here. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
• Support: as someone who always tries to look for sources before nominating an article for deletion, I think this would make things easier, as well as reminding everyone that WP:BEFORE is important. CtP (t • c) 15:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback module

Can we add {{Whisperback}} to the talkback module? --weltforce (talk) 13:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't use {{talkback}} and related templates, but this one seems fairly unobtrusive—a good thing on user talk pages. I support this being added. David1217 ^{What I've done} 21:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Support. I prefer {{talkbacktiny}} and {{whisperback}} to the big enormous one. Maybe add talkbacktiny too? (oh please please ;) benzband (talk) 21:08, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see past discussions one and twp for some context as to why we don't have this already. Also see here for an alternative version of talkback which allows whisperback. — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

After reading the archived discussions, I still don't get why the templates shouldn't be added. David1217 ^{What I've done} 23:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

I'm setted up the Twinkle scripts for the Simple English Wikipedia (some customisations were needed because they are some differences). During customisation I've also added {{wb}} to the friendlytalkback module. So just search for wb, you'll see it ;) --weltforce (talk) 22:34, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Opening SPI cases with Twinkle not working

Clicking the "submit request" button does nothing now. I've tested this in both Mac OS X and Ubuntu. CtP (t • c) 15:17, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

It's still working for some. Can you give details? See also WP:JSERROR. Amalthea 12:19, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Spam blacklist

When Twinkle asks me to fill in some text (for example a URL for requesting deletion per WP:CSD#F9), I am sometimes told that it is not possible to proceed because the URL is on the spam blacklist, and then my text is lost. Would it be possible to offer some way to recover the text I typed in? If a file qualifies for deletion as a copyright violation, I would typically wish to add a deletion template no matter what. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:21, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Close AfD, Untag

• Is it possible to create a new module for administrators with which they can close an AfD discussion?
  • No; use User:Mr.Z-man/closeAFD.js. — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:33, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
• I see An extra "Untag" tab, providing a list of tags in the article, with checkboxes to uncheck in order to remove them on the ToDo-List. Would it better to add this feature directly to the friendlytag module? We could add some code with which Twinkle checks which tags have already been placed on the article before the window loads up. This tags will appear as checked in the GUI then. Uncheck them will remove the tag from the page.
  • Yeah, that's the plan. Perhaps the todo list box could be updated. — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:33, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

I hope I've explained it comprehensible (as I'm not a native English speaker). All the best, --weltforce (talk) 22:31, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Porting?

I really think that Twinkle should be ported to Mac OS X. It will give Mac contributors a chance to use all of those wonderful tools. Hope to hear from you guys! Interlude 65 14:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think compatability depends on your operating system. It rather depends on the web browser you use. Switch to Chrome or Opera, they might work with it. --weltforce (talk) 14:32, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I've used Twinkle on a variety of different operating systems including Mac OS X and it works fine on all of them. --Stefan2 (talk) 14:34, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

JavaScript, which Twinkle is written in, has no inherent operating system dependencies, or at least none that I'm aware of. It's the browser, not that OS, which must support JavaScript (although Safari and Firefox already do, so I'm not sure what the issue is. You may need to update your version of JavaScript or your browser). Twinkle works for me in Mac OS X, Windows, Ubuntu (Linux), and, to a lesser extent, even on my Wii. CtP (t • c) 20:17, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Merge proposal - only does half the job

I've just used Twinkle to add {{merge}} to an article for the first time and was disappointed that it didn't add the complementary {{mergefrom}} to the target article (or open that page for me to edit, or even just flash up a big reminder for me to do so). Any reason why not? Every {[tl|merge}} needs a {{mergefrom}}. PamD 09:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, it would be reasonable for it to add {{mergefrom}} when {{mergeto}} is added, and vice versa. However, the generic {{merge}} does not imply a target and so it would only be possible to add a matching {{merge}} tag. I think I turned down this request in the past, but I don't see any reason why it couldn't be done. Don't hold your breath, though. I'm rather busy right now. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

{{wikify}}

Requesting removal of {{wikify}} from Twinkle on behalf of WikiProject Wikify, per discussion on the project talkpage and this TfD: the wikify template is being deprecated. benzband (talk) 11:26, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Yep OK, will do. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! benzband (talk) 12:44, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Can we go a little bit beyond removal? We don't want the functionality to go away. It would be great if Wikify could be created as a heading of tags and could contain {{Dead end}} {{Infobox requested}} {{Cleanup-HTML}} {{Lead missing}} {{Lead rewrite}} {{Lead too short}} {{Inadequate lead}} {{Sections}} {{Cleanup-link rot}} {{Citation style}}and {{Lead too long}} underneath. Ryan Vesey 12:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Just trying to see if this has been seen. Ryan Vesey 18:49, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's been seen. I have different ideas for the tag module order, though - something replicating Curation Toolbar's ordering would be good. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:44, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

I just tagged a WP:AFC submission which had no wiki markup at all. No internal links, no table of contents, no inline references (although the article lists a bibliography at the end). In this situation, {{wikify}} fits.

Dumping a huge list of tags onto a page to get the same effect {{Dead end}} {{Infobox requested}} {{Cleanup-HTML}} {{Lead missing}} {{Lead rewrite}} {{Lead too short}} {{Inadequate lead}} {{Sections}} {{Cleanup-link rot}} {{Citation style}}and {{Lead too long}} is ugly as too many of them dumped on a n00b on a first attempt to write an article takes a bit of a WP:BITE. K7L (talk) 22:40, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree with you. However, the consensus at TFD was that {{wikify}} shouldn't be used anymore, so we have to defer to that consensus. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:23, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of a template used by Twinkle

For your information: The template {{subst:ncd}}, used by Twinkle's "Tag" module on file information pages, was deleted yesterday. There is a discussion about this at Wikipedia talk:Moving files to the Commons#Template:Now commons dated. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:55, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Another bug

If you try using the "sockpuppeteer" reporting function, the submit button doesn't work! Mdann52 (talk) 17:10, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Could you give us more information, as suggested at WP:JSERROR? In particular, could you try to report a sockpuppeteer again, and copy here any JavaScript errors you see, according to step 6 of JSERROR? — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:14, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Batch deletion

The batch deletion function seems to have lost the ability to delete the associated talk pages of the deleted pages. Could that functionality be re-added? Thanks! Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it ever had that functionality; however it should probably be added. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:26, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Photos

I would request the following features may be added to the Twinkle module, {{cleanup-images}}, {{too many photos}}, {{image requested}}. A large number of article are messed up with too much photos. This tag will surely help in making the tagging process simpler. Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 05:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, {{image requested}} goes on the article talk page, and Twinkle can't handle such templates.

As for the others, I think they are too specific to add to what is an already cluttered list of tags. However, if you wish to use them, you may add them as personal "custom" tags for your own use. Visit WP:TWPREFS#twinkle-config-section-7 to do this. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:41, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Amartyabag ^TALK2ME 02:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Uncategorized tag

As mentioned, {{uncategorized}} should be tagged to the bottom of the page. The issue is that Twinkle tags it even after interwikis etc. We got this in the code currently:

if( tagName === 'uncategorized' || tagName === 'cat improve' ) {
				pageText += '\n\n{{' + tagName +
					'|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}';
			}

I tried a little bit of regex:

if( tagName === 'uncategorized' || tagName === 'cat improve' ) {
				pageText.replace(/((\s*(\[\^\+\]\]|\{\{[^\}]+\-stub\}\})\s*)+)$/);
				pageText += '\n\n{{' + tagName +
					'|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}';
			}

However, this does not work; the tag is still placed after the entire page, including interwiki and cats. Any ideas? --intforce (talk) 13:20, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

1. JavaScript replace is not in-place, you need to do pageText = pageText.replace(...) and 2. What do you want to replace it with, anyway? Keφr (talk) 13:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

The script adds the tag to the very bottom of the page. But it should add it before the interwikis, cats, defaultsorts, metadata etc. If there is another way to do this, please tell me ;) --intforce (talk) 15:46, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Not the best forum for this, but whatever. Simple, locate the appropriate index by working back from the end of the article, then do pageText = pageText.substr(0, i) + '...' + pageText.substr(i);. Or if you really want to match the boilerplate with a regex, you can pass a function as the second argument to replace. But I am not sure if a single regex can work reliably here. Keφr (talk) 16:22, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, my JavaScript knowledge is not that good. Can you please give a minor code example or something like that? Thank you! --intforce (talk) 16:36, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Here's a regex I cooked up earlier:

pageText.replace(/((\s*(\[\^\+\]\]|\{\{[^\}]+\-stub\}\})\s*)+)$/, "\n\n{{uncategorized|date=XXX}}$1");

I was going to add it into Twinkle, but I must have run into some sort of problem. What do you think of this? Does it work across all articles? — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:28, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, seems like Intforce has been using my regex. Here's what the code should be:

			if( tagName === 'uncategorized' || tagName === 'cat improve' ) {
				pageText = pageText.replace(/((\s*(\[\^\+\]\]|\{\{[^\}]+\-stub\}\})\s*)+)$/, 
					"\n\n{{" + tagName + "|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}}}$1");
			}

Again I would welcome any testing you might wish to do. — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:32, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Hm, I've tested the code. Twinkle seemed to work fine, the messages were all green, nothing stacked, but it didn't add any tag to the page at all. --intforce (talk) 05:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Sigh… pageText = pageText.replace(...). Keφr (talk) 06:18, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Yep... good old immutable strings. I've fixed my sample code above, lest I copy and past the error into Twinkle at some stage... — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Same problem still after the pageText = pageText.replace(...) code :( --intforce (talk) 13:01, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Please add {{whois}} to the shared IP module

{{Whois}} is pretty similar to the other shared IP templates, but for some reason Twinkle doesn't have it. Could it be added? Thanks, David1217 ^{What I've done} 21:13, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Hello? Anyone? David1217 ^{What I've done} 18:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I guess so. What should its "description" be in the Shared IP dialog? — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:35, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

How about "shared IP address template modified for information who the IP is registered to" or something like that? David1217 ^{What I've done} 22:47, 21 September 2012 (UTC) I made this edit at least a week ago, but only just signed it.

It doesn't really make sense, since {{shared IP}} has a field for that information too. Just to help me to come up with one, can you explain when one would use {{whois}} as opposed to {{shared IP}}? — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:42, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

As far as I know, it's typically used for cases where people don't know whether the IP is shared or static. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 15:31, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Essentially what Nathan said. If there was abuse over several months from an IP, but I didn't know whether it was shared, dynamic, or static, I'd use this template. David1217 ^{What I've done} 00:50, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Try it out. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:56, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Notify article creator for {{db-disambig}}

One of the joys of using Twinkle is that it automatically notifies the creator if I CSD or PROD an article, saving me the effort of doing so manually. But I've just discovered, by checking my CSD log, that it doesn't do this in all cases. Excluded cases include CSD G6 {{db-disambig}}. I suggest that Twinkle should notify the original creator of articles which are nominated for CSD deletion as "Unnecessary disambiguation page". In some cases the creator needs to know that they are misguidedly creating such pages; in other cases it's possible that the page has been corrupted since they created it and they might want to be alerted in order to rebuild it. Please change Twinkle's rules so that it notifies the creator of these articles. PamD 06:48, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Is there even a notification template for {{db-disambig}}? David1217 ^{What I've done} 00:57, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree with Pam that a templated warning should be implemented in Twinkle for db-disambig. In fact I had a discussion about this only a short while ago with User:Boleyn (see User talk:France3470#Elizabeth Cheney (disambiguation) and Nancy Paterson (disambiguation) for the discussion). I have long thought that db-disambig is different from other G6 cases in that these pages are often not clear cut cases, and require a much higher degree of understanding. As Pam has expressed, creators often do not understand why the page they created is invalid (and hence a candidate for speedy deletion); a warning message serves a two-fold purpose, for courtesy and to educate. I did attempt to make a template for use by Twinkle, but I'm afraid I got rather sidetracked, and have never done anything with it. It's also likely rather botched too, owing to no knowledge about how to build templates. Perhaps someone could have a look at {{Db-disambig-notice}} to see if it can be made suitable. France3470 (talk) 23:01, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I've now started using the {{Db-disambig-notice}} template and seems to be working absolutely fine (so much better than writing personal messages). If there is no opposition or problems with it being included, can we go ahead and add it to the script. Thanks, France3470 (talk) 13:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done. This should be working now. Also working for {{db-copypaste-notice}}. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

{{No footnotes}}

A proposal has been made to reword the template message for use in sections. Have a look at Template talk:No footnotes. De728631 (talk) 15:01, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Bug in admin tools

I'm running into a new bug (past week or so) when I attempt to use Twinkle to protect or CSD a page. In both cases, Twinkle loads a mostly-empty interface (top radio buttons and then empty "Preset", "1", and "2" boxes, for PP; "Tag page only, don't delete", Delete-related options boxes, and Tag-related options checkboxes, followed by "Failed to initialize the CSD module. Please try again, or tell the Twinkle developers about the issue." for CSD). I can get the rest of the interface to load for CSD by clicking the "tag only, don't delete" box, and for PP by clicking one of the radio buttons other than "Protect page", but this is a bit of an awkward workaround. Anyone know what's going on here? A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 18:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Works for me. Can you give us more detail, as per WP:JSERROR points 4-6? Amalthea 18:48, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

4) Cache bypassed, same problems happening.

5) Error happening in Firefox 16 (Noscript installed, I have confirmed that it's not blocking anything in this case). Error does not happen in Chrome 22.0.1229.39 beta-m. Both browsers operating on Windows XP Pro SP3

6) Error when I try to use PP: Error: Permission denied for <http://en.wikipedia.org> to call method HTMLInputElement.focus

Source File: http://bits.wikimedia.org/en.wikipedia.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki&only=scripts&skin=vector&version=20120904T141803Z

Line: 47

Error when I try to use CSD: Error: SyntaxError: invalid regular expression flag n

Source File: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle&action=submit

Line: 1, Column: 4

Source Code:

/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle&action=submit

A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 20:39, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait. I took a quick look and couldn't see any reason for these errors. The second one looks like it could be a problem with another script? I don't think Twinkle uses an incorrect regex flag "n", or other people would be reporting errors. The first one is just weird. Are you still seeing these errors? If so, try disabling other scripts. — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:34, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle completely not working?

Resolved

 – Error in another gadget; fixed by Anomie.

It seems that Twinkle unexpectedly stopped appearing on the edit bar, next to "view history" and the "move" drop-down box. I've cleared and bypassed my cache, imported the script to my script file, to no avail. I'm using Firefox version 15.0.1 on a MacBook Pro version 10.5.8. -- Luke (Talk) 01:02, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I thought I was the only one having that problem. It's the same here, and I've tried the same things to no avail as well. Lugia2453 (talk) 01:10, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

The problem is wider than Twinkle. The enhanced recent changes isn't collapsing the groups of edits in my watchlist and watching/unwatching a page reloads the page with just a message confirming the action. Looks like random JS borkage site-wide; some other JS tools like wikEd still work. Probably should be reported at WP:VPT. jcgoble3 (talk) 01:12, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#.22wikitable_sortable.22_tables_are_no_longer_sortable. jcgoble3 (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm having the same problem as well. I'm glad that I'm not the only person having this problem. --Webclient101 (talk) 01:24, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

This should be resolved per WP:VPT. Remove the {{Resolved}} template if you're still having problems after clearing your cache. jcgoble3 (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Have a bug!

Resolved

See the edit history at User talk:109.153.79.43. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 21:58, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Seems to me that a full page name was entered when it expected only a username. A check of the default text in absence of that parameter suggests that it does in fact expect a username, and the code confirms that. The Twinkle interface should be adjusted to ask for the username of the bitten user rather than a "linked article". jcgoble3 (talk) 23:04, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the report. A fix is on its way. In future, Nathan, please don't leave it to others to explain a bug. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:59, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Synched, but also made the template robust enough to accept all forms. Amalthea 07:13, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Optional messages not appearing

When adding an optional message to user warnings with Twinkle's warn/notify user popup, the optional message no longer appears. I noticed this yesterday, but it's been a while since I used that facility, so I don't know when it stopped working.  —SMALLJIM  11:04, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Can you give us the exact message you typed and the notification/warning template you used? Amalthea 11:52, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

The diffs where I tried it are: uw-test1, uw-vandalism1 and a test on my page, uw-test2 The messages varied. Since it's obviously not a widespread problem, I've done some further tests (see my Talk page) and can confirm that the problem is restricted to my admin account, browser has no effect, nor does removing the WP:AFCH gadget, after enabling which I started to notice it. What's the next step - empty my vector.js? No changes there since April... Thanks for any help.  —SMALLJIM  14:10, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

Still not working - clearing vector.js made no difference. Is this affecting any other admins or is it just me?  —SMALLJIM  10:28, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried using another skin? I use Monobook, and the optional messages are appearing as usual. WikiPuppies _bark ^dig 18:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

That's a good idea, thanks! I've tried it, but as my talk page shows, the optional message that should say "if this message appears, it's working now" still didn't show up... Nice nostalgia trip though - I might revert to MonoBook :) Just to emphasise, this only fails on my admin account (this one). If I use my non-admin alter ego it works OK.  —SMALLJIM  22:26, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

I can look into this when I have more time. — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:34, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

That would be appreciated, thanks. It's still not working here - with each warning that I issue now I'm adding a short optional message to test it. This one still failed: I should note that the optional message does appear as expected in the Preview pane in the Twinkle pop-up. I assume that since no other admins have reported this, it's specific to me, but I can't think why it should be so.  —SMALLJIM  11:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

I've spotted the problem... hopefully should be fixed soon. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:58, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

 Done; give it a try. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:17, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Excellent - thanks very much! This edit confirms that it's working again. Obviously not a function used by many admins...  —SMALLJIM  18:08, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Bug in {{multiple issues}} handling

If {{multiple issues}} has both old-style and new-style parameters and the new-style parameter is not last, Twinkle will neither correctly convert the existing old-style parameters nor correctly add the new tag. See this edit for example. Anomie⚔ 16:06, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Well, who would mix the two styles?! How silly. I really have no idea how to handle this. Have you seen many of these around? — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:42, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

I haven't really looked, I just find them because they cause AnomieBOT to notify me that it can't figure out how to properly date the tags in the article. Ideally Twinkle would actually parse the named parameters of the {{multiple issues}} template invocation and convert everything accurately. Anomie⚔ 13:33, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

On closer inspection, it seems that BattyBot (talk · contribs) was mangling the syntax. I believe GoingBatty has fixed this problem, so hopefully we won't need to worry about this now... — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:22, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I'm not so confident that BattyBot is the only one mixing old- and new-style parameters, but I've upgraded AnomieBOT to be able to fix this issue with {{multiple issues}} if it encounters it again. Anomie⚔ 13:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

{{Underlinked}} tag

Because of the deprecation of {{Wikify}}, the {{Underlinked}} tag has recently been created to mark articles with too few wikilinks. Could Twinkle tagging be updated to include {{Underlinked}}? Thanks! Guoguo12 (Talk)  22:36, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

It's on its way. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Wonderful! Thanks! Guoguo12 (Talk)  01:35, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

And the definition in Twinkle's menu for {{Dead end}} needs to be updated to say "no links" rather than "few or no", so it matches the text displayed in the article. PamD 07:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Code improvement suggestion: highlight interwiki links

On a number of occassions, editors have nominated articles for AfD without noticing that the articles had interwiki links to foreign-language articles which had references and other evidence which cast entirely new light on whether the article is notable. A recent example is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pontus Schultz. I believe that this is a Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias issue, because it undermines representation of non-English language countries and cultures. Is there any way in which twinkle could highlight interwiki links during the AfD process to help combat this? Stuartyeates (talk) 02:48, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

There was a request earlier on that wanted some WP:BEFORE-related stuff added to Twinkle. Personally, I don't think this is Twinkle's business (it being simply a means of expediting the AFD process), but there was limited support for it at the time. Perhaps a link to WP:BEFORE on the AFD dialog would be enough. If this mentions something about interwiki links, then we should be right.

More often than not, interwiki links are not useful for AFD. It is only in relatively uncommon circumstances that they are relevant. So I'm hesitant to fulfil this particular request. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:57, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

All those abbreviations

Is there any reason that all the "TW" links use abbreviations only? I'm not a friend of unnecessary confusion. --No qwach macken (talk) 01:06, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

It's a holdover from the Monobook skin, where the TW links all use individual tabs. In the Vector skin, we could use longer names, true. But you will observe that they have pop-up descriptions if you hover over then for long enough. — This, that, and the other (talk)

Well, I'm not getting any even after ten seconds - would it be that much of an effort to lengthen everything? --No qwach macken (talk) 16:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps (if it really matters that much) it could be made into a user option? Guoguo12 (Talk)  18:41, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

What I'm saying. --No qwach macken (talk) 20:31, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

What browser are you using, No qwach macken? — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:37, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Firefox 15.0.1, Ubuntu version. --No qwach macken (talk) 14:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, it works now. --No qwach macken (talk) 19:14, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Summary means no abuse?

TW was used on an abortion content dispute. While a summary of the editor's opinion was entered, they are flippant on their understanding of some sources in question, which impacts the content dispute. Does this equate to abuse of TW, or does the summary (even if poorly thought out) mean it's ok? - RoyBoy 04:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

The edit summary looks fine at first glance; in my view, the user does not appear to be abusing Twinkle. If you believe a user is abusing Twinkle to such an extent that they are disrupting the encyclopedia, you should discuss the issue with the user, or take the matter to WP:ANI if negotiation fails. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:12, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Macedonia

I'm wondering whether {{Uw-1rrMac}} could be added for Macedonian naming conventions?

I am hesitant to add new warning templates to what is already a very long list, especially very specific ones such as this. Sorry! — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:18, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:IBM_2260_video_display_terminal.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1

Not an issue for Twinkle. Referred elsewhere.

Several days ago I sent a link to the original web page for this photo and quoted the sentence putting it in the public domain. Peter Flass (talk) 11:30, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

I'd talk to Explicit, the deleting admin—this isn't really a Twinkle issue. David1217 ^{What I've done} 16:29, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Can not change Twinkle Preference

I can not change Twinkle preference Wikipedia:TWPREFS. On 23rd August I changed Talkback header to Talkback on {{subst:DATE}} to make a unique header in user's talk page. But, that did not go well! And since then I am trying to change the TB header (either to Talkback message by Tito Dutta or just Talkback, but nothing is working. I have restored full settings too and cleacred caches many times. --Tito Dutta ✉ 05:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Looks as if you've fixed it, according to User:Titodutta/twinkleoptions.js (which is where your prefs are saved). What exactly is the problem you are having? — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

CSD logging bug

See this edit in which, while logging a speedy deletion nomination, Twinkle also deleted some of the existing log entries. Is this a bug, or is it due to the user setting this in twinkleoptions.js? If it is a bug please fix it. jfd34 (talk) 12:07, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

We hear about this issue from time to time; however Twinkle can't do much about it – it's some sort of transmission error, either between the user's computer and the server, or between the different servers running Wikipedia. The only solution at the moment, unfortunately, is to revert the edit manually. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:38, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle tab not showing at top when creating new user talk page

Resolved

Whenever I try to post a new message to a user's (IP or registered) talk page and the talk page has not been created yet, the TW tab next to the "add to watchlist" button doesn't show anymore. It was showing yesterday, but it's not showing today. Was it something I did, or has Twinkle changed? –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

I am also having this problem. --Jprg1966 ^(talk) 16:15, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Same. I need to use it to warn a user for vandalism. Johnny Au _{(talk/contributions)} 16:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

The bug is still happening. I've tried resetting "My preferences" and clearing the browser cookies/cache, but I haven't been successful. :( –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

This bug seems to be fixed. –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Add intermediary page when the user selects XfD, per WP:BEFORE

(Reposting, because this discussion was archived too quickly by MiszaBot II.)

No it wasn't; the discussion was dead. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:30, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

With comments from two concerned editors, and then discussion with two support rationales, this is hardly "dead". Rather, it was archived by a bot before allowing sufficient time for eyes to see the discussion. Human editors have more gravitas than bots. Now, on to the actual discussion... Northamerica1000^(talk) 10:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle at ANI

FYI, I made some comments about Twinkle use and abuse here. Warden (talk) 09:48, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Discussion regarding possible misuse of Twinkle

• See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents – TenPoundHammer, AfD and WP:IDONTUNDERSTANDIT. It appears that Twinkle may be facilitating deletion nominations for Wikipedia articles in a counterproductive manner that is contrary to Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:58, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

To keep this discussion on the productive side

It has been suggested to add an intermediary page when the user selects XfD, giving the links typically shown in the {{find sources}} template, as a way to encourage better WP:BEFORE compliance. Thoughts on this? Tijfo098 (talk) 13:11, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

• Y Support – Per my comments at the above-mentioned discussion occurring at ANI: Here. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:28, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
• Support: as someone who always tries to look for sources before nominating an article for deletion, I think this would make things easier, as well as reminding everyone that WP:BEFORE is important. CtP (t • c) 15:19, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

How important is WP:BEFORE?

How important is WP:BEFORE relative to the building and maintenance a digital encyclopedia? Northamerica1000^(talk) 10:52, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

proposed change to "Abuse" description

Currently, Twinkle use is prohibited to undo good-faith changes in content disputes unless an appropriate edit summary is used. This seems to conflict somewhat with the instruction one normally receives after manually starting an "undo", which is If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary. Do not use the default message only. It seems to me that in undoing a good-faith edit, Twinkle is abused unless it conforms with the general instruction to provide an edit summary where vandalism cannot be assumed. I would therefore propose that the phrase in content disputes be removed so that the description of abuse reads in conformity with general undoing:

Anti-vandalism tools, such as Twinkle, Huggle, and rollback should not be used to undo good-faith changes in content disputes unless an appropriate edit summary is used.

Cynwolfe (talk) 15:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

On which page is the statement you mention? It should probably be discussed on the talk page of that page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 05:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

The project page attached to this talk page: Wikipedia:Twinkle#Abuse. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Whoa, I didn't even realise that was there, so I didn't think to check. Be bold and go ahead and chancge it if you think it should be changed. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:20, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Reverting multiple vandalism edits by single editor

I'm kind of new here and noticed some people have many acts/edits of vandalism. I was wondering if there was a tool to check to see if all/any of their multiple edits have been reverted. For instance, I noticed this person vandalized the article on endorphins, so i checked their contributions and could see many more potential acts of vandalism. Is there an easy way to check all of them with some kind of tool instead of clicking on each one? Raquel_Baranow (talk) 22:44, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Yah, there's this tool called WPCVN. This gives supposedly vandal edits and the user's karma based on his/her edits. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 15:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Rollback Cancel button

When using Twinkle to rollback an edit, it brings up a window asking for an edit summary. However, if Cancel is clicked, the rollback continues without an edit summary. Is this by design?

Expected behavior: If the text field is empty and if Cancel is clicked, it should not rollback. However, if OK is clicked, it should continue without an edit summary.

Actual behavior: The rollback is still performed without an edit summary (if the text field is empty, of course) regardless of whether Cancel or OK is clicked.

–– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 06:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Ooh, that sounds bad. I'll look into it. Thanks for bringing it up. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... Which browser do you use? — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:51, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Safari (6.0.1) on OS X (10.8.2 "Mountain Lion"). –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 15:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Visit http://jsfiddle.net/LKhec/ using this browser and copy here the text that appears in the bottom-right panel. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:26, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

I got this:
``''
–– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 04:00, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, in that case, I don't think there is much we can do to fix the problem. Sensible browsers will return ``null'', which is what Twinkle expects. Apparently Safari isn't sensible, and we can't really help that. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:00, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, well I guess I will just have to remember not to cause it to happen. Hopefully a future update of Safari will fix the issue. Thanks for the help! –– Anonymouse321 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 13 October 2012 (UTC)

A code question...

I'd like to make some modifications and updates. Where can I find a copy of the source? Thanks, Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 16:25, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

At Github. Alternatively, you can view or copy the on-wiki version. Keφr (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Don't use that "copy" link. There are some noinclude tags in the source and MediaWiki might eat them up if you try preloading Twinkle.

Also, we welcome "issue" reports and "pull requests" on Github, if you wish to contribute that way. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

My bad, I thought the <nowiki> tag took care of that… Keφr (talk) 16:06, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, actually it might... but I wouldn't trust it to :) — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, that's how I make changes to the existing code (through pull requests). And it works very well, because as a JS Intermediate, I do have the tendency to make small mistakes which are then fixed by atlight (TTO) in the pull request. --Ankit Maity^Talk_Contribs 06:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Optional templates to replace new level-1 warnings

Is there a way to add custom templates to Twinkle's warnings? I wasn't aware of the RfC regarding level-1 warnings, and would prefer to at least have the option to use the text from the previous versions of the level-1 warnings when necessary. Thoughts? --Ckatz^chat_spy 08:07, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Well, I think there are many very good reasons why the wording was changed - you should read the RFC if you haven't already. I certainly don't intend to add a way of circumventing the consensus of this comprehensive RFC. While the new templates may seem weaker to you, they are in the end more effective. — This, that, and the other (talk) 08:53, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Actually, I did read through the RfC, and while I understand the rationale behind the change, I also understand the feelings expressed about when the old level-one templates were appropriate. Keep in mind that allowing custom templates - such as what can be done with article tagging - is hardly "circumventing" the RfC. No-one said "you cannot use the old ones", they just agreed to change the wording. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:06, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree that perhaps a custom warning feature should be added to Twinkle in the future. — This, that, and the other (talk) 21:57, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Duplicate signature when using custom welcome templates

Is there a way to suppress the duplicate signature that is appended at the end of a custom welcome template? Here is an example of what I am referring to: User talk:MrX/sandbox/dup

Thanks in advance for any help. - MrX ^(TALK) 14:46, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Bugs

Unlink

Bug 1

Problem

Unlink doesn't seem to respect the namespace choice set in one's prefs for image use.

Steps to reproduce

• Go to WP:TWPREFS#twinkle-config-section-9
• Deselect everything except User namespace
• Go to File:Example.jpg and open Unlink

Expected result

Only backlinks and file usage in userspace show up

What happens instead

Links are only from the userspace, but file usage is from all namespaces.

Hmm, that seems to be an oversight. I'll fix it. — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Bug 2

Problem

Unlink doesn't work for galleries and templates

Steps to reproduce

• Keep the userspace selection for unlink as described above
• Go to File:Blah.jpg
• Open Unlink
• Select User:Siddhartha Ghai/Sandbox and execute

Expected Result

The file should be removed from the gallery and {{Infobox settlement}} used in the sandbox

What happens instead

Unlink gets stuck at Retrieving page... for the sandbox, and goes on to say Unlinking backlinks: 100% (completed) and Unlinking instances of file usage: 100% (completed)

Unlink tries its best! Obviously it isn't perfect. I'll have a think about this. Would it be enough for the tool to simply remove any instances of the file name from the wikitext after it has removed all links? — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Not from the entire wikitext. But I think removal of all instances within templates should be safe, whether the parameter is named or not.

I don't see why the removal can't be done in galleries (since there's a different regex in morebits for removal from galleries).--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 14:59, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Config

WP:TWPREFS#twinkle-config-section-6's point Keep the CSD userspace log at this user subpage has the helptip i.e. User:username/subpage name. Only works if you turn on the CSD userspace log..

However, Twinkle practically asks for only the subpagename (not the namespace and username).

See for example: User:Siddhartha Ghai/twinkleoptions.js and the newly created User:Siddhartha Ghai/User:Siddhartha Ghai/csdlog.

Same bug for the wording of the PROD log.

Yes this is not good. Can you think of a short helptip that makes it clear that

1. the subpage name only is supposed to be entered in this box, and
2. the CSD/PROD log can be found at User:_____/_____?

— This, that, and the other (talk) 02:12, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

The following formatted wikitext should be appropriate:

Enter only the subpagename. This is automagically prefixed by User:yourusername/

It seems to fit nicely on a 1366X768.--Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 14:59, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Hope these can be fixed soon (especially the unlink ones). Regards --Siddhartha Ghai (talk) 18:07, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Template messages/User talk namespace#User notification for attack pages about {{db-attack-notice}} which will effect Twinkle. At the moment, the only change (as far as Twinkle coding is concerned - the template will be very different) will be that the page name will no longer be a parameter. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

There is a change that needs to be made in Twinkle - for CSD tags under speedy deletion criterion G10, Twinkle needs to be altered so that the name of the deleted article doesn't show up in any edit summaries or in anyone's CSD log. However, there is no big rush to implement it. {{db-attack-notice}} will be getting simpler, and the changes to Twinkle don't need to be done at the same time as changing the template. However it is still probably a good idea to watch out in case anything strange happens. — Mr. Stradivarius on tour ^{(have a chat)} 05:25, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

My point was the Twinkle will still try to add the name of the article as a parameter to the template. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Certainly the article name should be hidden in the user talk edit summary for G10 deletions; I'll do that now. Not so sure about hiding article names in the CSD log though. I need to be convinced on that one. — This, that, and the other (talk) 08:33, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see that the CSD log was something I was thinking about when I said that "this would require quite a few technical changes", but never actually mentioned in the RfC. I guess the jury's still out on that one, then. Some of the responses in the RfC. would have been against including the article link in the CSD log, though, e.g. JohnCD's "Even giving the unlinked name leaves on public record that this person was the subject of an attack." Let's leave the CSD log as it is for the moment, and I'll mention this matter at the user talk template messages thread. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 10:11, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Template changed, now to find an attack page to test it out on. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

I tested it on db-attack-notice test page. Here's the warning message. Looks like everything is working ok. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 11:59, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Should be Y done now: try a G10 nomination and check the edit summary of the user talk notification. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:13, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Yep [1], thanks for that. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:27, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Bug

Today, I was reverting to an unvandalized revision of Chicago Bears using Twinkle, but I ended up receiving a message stating, "Failed to save edit: Namespace doesn't allow actual pages". I eventually tried using Twinkle to flag my sandbox for CSD as a test to see if it works again, but I received the same message. I later tried configuring my WP:TWPREFS, and saved it, but received the message again. Any way to fix this? ZappaOMati 21:59, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I am getting the same error when trying to add vandal warnings to User Talk pages. Road Wizard (talk) 22:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Seems to be working again for me now. Road Wizard (talk) 22:04, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I think this was a problem with the warning system in general, since I couldn't issue warnings with Huggle, and ClueBot NG wasn't issuing any warnings. Lugia2453 (talk) 22:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

I had the same problem, but it is working again also for me. SchreyP ^(messages) 22:09, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle isn't even coming up for me any more when I go into Special:Newpages. I've long had a problem that it doesn't show at all when I go to a new user page that has no previous edits. How to fix that? Valenciano (talk) 04:34, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Same problem reported in AWB's bugs page at the same day. -- Magioladitis (talk) 11:45, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Anyone else w/firefox having a problem recently?

Recently (I think the problem started w/in the last week), most of the time that I open a new window (including when a user's talk page is automatically opened by a rollback), Twinkle doesn't load. I often have to reload pages 3 or more times to get the twinkle pulldown menu to appear. I have the same problem with the editing toolbars (the ones with bolding, the citation templates, etc.). This may have something to do with the new edit window, not Twinkle...or something with Firefox (I'm on version 15.0.1). Qwyrxian (talk) 15:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like a broader problem with JavaScript if the edit toolbar isn't loading properly. Try disabling other scripts and gadgets (including Twinkle) and see if the edit toolbar consistently appears. If that has no effect you should ask at WP:VPT; otherwise you could try adding scripts/gadgets back, piece by piece, until the problem re-appears, so you know exactly what is at fault. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC) — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:14, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

If it doesn't let up, I'll give it a shot; I'm not so hot at that type of technical work. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm also having problems with Firefox and Wikipedia, not sure if it's a Twinkle problem or not. When I click on some pages it briefly shows the page then goes to "connecting" again as if it's still trying to connect to the page? I've then got to press "back" in order for the page to show again. Anyone know anything about this?--5 albert square (talk) 18:56, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Related Firefox/JS?

I've noticed that Rollback (Vandal) doesn't seem to complete on the destination user's Talk page - it opens a the Talk page in a new window, but doesn't paste in the warning, or popup the TW Warn dialog. When I pulldown a TW Warn, then the TW Warn dialog is filled in with the correct article. Is this correct, expected behavior? If so, cool. --Lexein (talk) 07:47, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure that's the expected behavior, as that's how it's always worked for me. One might want to issue a welcome message (e.g. {{welcome-anon-vandal}} for week-old vandalism from a dynamic IP that might belong to somebody else by now) or leave a personal message instead of a templated warning. jcgoble3 (talk) 16:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Warning/caution for removal of PROD template

Why's there no warning/caution for a removal of WP:PROD template? There is a warning/caution for removal of WP:BLPPROD template. I'm sorry if this has been answered but I've been coming across this lately.--Astros4477 (talk) 21:36, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

PROD templates can be removed at any time per the PROD page you linked: "PROD must only be used if no opposition is to be expected. The article is marked for seven days; if nobody objects, it is deleted. The first objection kills the PROD."

BLPPROD templates can only be removed once a reference has been added to the page per the BLPPROD page you linked: "Unlike standard proposed deletion, the BLP deletion template may be removed only after the biography contains a reliable source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article."

As a summary; you can issue a warning for removing a BLPPROD template without adding a reference but you should never issue a warning for removing a normal PROD template. Road Wizard (talk) 22:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

{{dead end}}

Twinkle's definition of {{dead end}} needs updating. The current text — "{{dead end}}: article has few or no links to other articles" — should be changed to "...has no links to other articles". DoctorKubla (talk) 18:04, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

CSD Log

Sorry if I misread the instructions, but I checked the csd log box in the preferences, yet it hasn't logged any csd's yet. Am I supposed to create the user page first or...? Thanks! Dengero (talk) 16:19, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure you have cleared your browser cache completely as described at WP:BYPASS? — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:47, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

And whatdaya know, I misread it as "reloading the cache" and wala! It now works ^^ My sincere thanks. Dengero (talk) 01:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Viewing

I believe that I used to be able to see rollback buttons on the 'View History / Revision History' tab of articles, yet now I only see the 3 rollback buttons on diff pages. I tried looking at the Twinkle Preferences and didn't see anything, and I'm using Chrome on an XP laptop and a W7 desktop and can't see the buttons on that page. I tried clearing the cache and bypassing it, with no result. I tried removing gadgets, no result. Does anyone know how to get that function back? It was very helpful. I still do see the Twinkle drop-down bar next to the 'add to watchlist' star, yet the rollback buttons used to be next to each user's edit on articles' 'view history' pages.--ɱ 20:53, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't think these buttons were ever shown on the history pages. They are certainly seen on user contributions ages; maybe this is what you are thinking of? — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:31, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Well I don't see them there either, but I'm fairly certain that I have seen them on the history pages, when I noticed them missing I was thinking that I could've sworn they were there just the other day... Hmmm. Well if they aren't on the history pages, I wonder if there's a place to request that, as it was a very handy tool (if it existed) or could be a very hand tool (if it will exist). Thanks. If anyone else has the same memory or same wish that there was that option, please do say.--ɱ 02:53, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Merging

Pardon me if this has been answered before, but would it be feasible to require—or at least encourage—Twinkle users to start discussions when they tag articles with {{merge to}} and {{merge from}}? Users may think their intent is obvious in some cases, but it's poor form to do so without starting a discussion (see Wikipedia:Merging#Proposing a merger). Most editors wouldn't propose an RM or AfD without a rationale, and it shouldn't be done for merges either. --BDD (talk) 01:45, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Exactly! Very good point! --Tito Dutta (talk) 02:11, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

• Qualification for merging is certainly functional. Oftentimes the templates are placed on articles and then remain in place for years without any rationale or commentary provided for their placement whatsoever. Northamerica1000^(talk) 02:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

For example this one Google Docs, the way we started discussion, we are going to reach consensus within few days, but nothing there still. And it is confusing for the readers too when they see It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into XYZ. (Discuss) and when they click on discuss they don't find anything! --Tito Dutta (talk) 03:07, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Just got a target failure on an AfD...

Twinkle was able to execute all of the process for AfD except finding a target in the log. I'm not sure why, as the day has not yet turned over, and today's log definitely exists. There was a redlink in the log at the very top, however. Other than that, I've got no explanation for it. MSJapan (talk) 23:53, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

May be related, but I just got a failed transclusion to the AfD log that was picked up by Snotbot. MSJapan (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject tagging

Is there anything on Wikipedia that is like Twinkle, but helps you add WikiProject tags to article talk spaces? It would save a hell of a lot of time and all the remembering of different codes like |a&e-work-group=yes or typing out |class=stub 20 times. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 00:24, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

There used to be WagTools but it has been withdrawn. Waggers is apparently building a replacement though if you want to show your interest. Road Wizard (talk) 22:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

See also User:Kephir/gadgets/rater but pay attention to the stability warning. Road Wizard (talk) 02:12, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the pointers. I will check it out. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 03:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Dodobot is designed specifically for this purpose. TimL • talk 06:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Is that bot active though? The operator does not appear to have edited in a year. Road Wizard (talk) 10:42, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

AnomieBOT can do WikiProject tagging as well. See the top of the the bot's talk page for details. jcgoble3 (talk) 18:38, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

To Do functionality

I have recently begun using the {{To do}} functionality, which creates a To Do List like so:

I think it would be great if Twinkle could automatically create the To do page using the tags as a structure, alternately it could use {{Tasks}} template to create the list. Then once it has created the list, it could add that the To do template to the Talk page.

Thoughts? Is this worth me sending in a request? ReformedArsenal (talk) 15:18, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle self-reverts when MFDing user talk page

See notification and MFD tag. The notification was completed fairly quickly, but Twinkle spent so long waiting on the MFD tagging to complete that I began to think it had gotten stuck. It finally completed, and when I checked the history, I found that the tagging edit had reverted the notification, which I then had to fix manually. Any idea on how to fix this bug? jcgoble3 (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Most of the page history, including my edits, has now been deleted, so only admins can view the diffs now. jcgoble3 (talk) 23:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Correction: it's been suppressed. So not even admins can view them. My explanation is hopefully clear enough to stand on its own, but ask if you need further details. I'm guessing this should be easily reproducible, also. jcgoble3 (talk) 23:20, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

In this case you should simply disable the "notify page creator" check box! But you're right, this shouldn't happen. It was fixed for speedy, IIRC, but not for XFD, it seems. — This, that, and the other (talk) 08:54, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle statistics

Is there a way of getting Twinkle usage statistics? I am particularly interested in its use for reverting vandalism. The changes in the number of warnings, cautions, reverts etc would give some indication of vandalism growth. A bit crude indication but if normalised against TW usage overall it may be ok. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:41, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

You could ask a user with Toolserver access to compile statistics based on edits containing the string "[[WP:TW" in the edit summary. — This, that, and the other (talk) 08:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Heads-up

Probably not a big thing, but I just split a documentation off of Template:Bad format, which has Template:Twinkle standard installation attached. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 20:18, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

That's fine. There is really no need to notify us unless the template's parameters are changed, or the template is deleted. Thanks, — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Not working

Something's up somewhere. Twinkle is no longer working for me. Anyone else having this problem? Cindy(talk to me) 03:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Missing_Gadgets_Tab. All gadgets are down right now. jcgoble3 (talk) 03:10, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Gadgets have been fixed, however in the process all gadget on/off settings were returned to default. Therefore, if you had Twinkle installed as a gadget, you will have to re-enable it. jcgoble3 (talk) 03:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Or perhaps not. I know mine were reset, and a couple others confirmed that, but now one user has reported that his settings were not reset. Regardless, if Twinkle is still not working, check your gadgets first. jcgoble3 (talk) 03:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

AfD bug

I am not going to create an account to list a bug so I am going to do so here. This should have been added to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 November 17 not Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 November 18. Do notice the timestamp. Thanks. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 00:53, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

At present, the user's clock is used instead of the server clock. If the user's computer clock is saying it is 18 November, Twinkle will use this date, even if signatures, etc. are still showing 17 November. Once, a user's clock was set months off the current date and Twinkle was going mad... it seems that this is a similar case (although out by hours not days). Perhaps you could request that the user change thier computer clock. Also see issue 6 on Github for a suggested fix on our end. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle SPI reports down?

Anyone else unable to use Twinkle to create SPI reports this morning? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:08, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

self-edit conflict when protecting

The last few times I have protected a page using Twinkle it appears to be edit conflicting with itself. That is, it issues the protection just fine, but believes it is in an edit conflict when adding the tag to the page, apparently "conflicting" with the actual action of adding the protection. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, that's a worry. Problem is, I'm not an admin, and to test this out I would really need to actually be able to protect a page. You could try pinging Amalthea (talk · contribs) or AzaToth (talk · contribs), but you may have limited success, since they frequently disappear for extended periods. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:40, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I,forgot to watch this page and missed your reply. I'll try to hunt one of them down. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Why not try it on testwiki? They say that developers can be granted adminship just because they need access to the relevant bits. Or am I missing something about how things work over there? — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 23:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons Talkback option

I think it would be a good idea to have a Talkback option in Twinkle for messages on Wikimedia Commons. I think a lot of users don't check Commons as often as Wikipedia. I couldn't find this in any archives so what does everybody think?--Astros4477 (talk) 22:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I would agree, but someone would probably need to create a template to handle it. As an example, I have a notice at the top of my Commons talk page instructing users who leave messages there to notify me on my enwiki talk page because I check enwiki several times a day but only check Commons a couple times per month. jcgoble3 (talk) 02:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Pending changes

Today is the day, pending changes will officially be put back into service within the next few hours. It looks like Twinkle does not currently support it when protecting. I can't remember if there was support during the trial or not but given the number of admins who use Twinkle it would be super awesome if it did. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:57, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I came here to ask for the same thing in the RFPP module; a Pending Changes Protection section in addition to the Full and Semi would be nice. Vacation^nine 01:53, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I think the number of admins using Twinkle is quite small. I have often found fairly noteworthy bugs in the admin tools that have been lurking there for months, with no-one having reported them to us...

I will have to learn about PC protection, and might have a go at implementing it soon. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:31, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

While I've got you here, are there any templates akin to {{pp-semi-blp}} etc. for use with PC pages? In my draft code, I'll make Twinkle use the semi-protection templates, unless I hear otherwise. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:46, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

From my understanding padlocks aren't used on PC protected pages, as the software has it's own display. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2010 July 27#Template:Pp-pending Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:53, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

To be more clear, I am a non admin asking you add the ability to request pending changes protection of a page using the RFPP module. Vacation^nine 17:49, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Well Callanecc, Cyberpower678 (talk · contribs) has just created {{pp-pc1}} and {{pp-pc2}}, then added them to all the PC-protected pages. David1217 ^{What I've done} 01:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

{{twinkle}}

Since this may be of interest: I nominated that template for deletion, because it does not seem to be used in any fashion. Anyone with a clue is invited to the discussion. Keφr 20:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Feature request: Automatically keep logs of every action completed

I have recently switched on/found out about the logging function for CSD and PROD tagging, and I think it would be really useful to be able to save custom logs for all functions twinkle can be used for. ie. ARV, RPP, XfD and some maintenance tags like merge proposals. Also the ability to choose what content is included in the log, for example remove all details except the article link in the current CSD and PROD logs, or add the expiry date of the PROD, or just change the formatting of it. I understand what I am asking would take a considerable amount of work to achieve, so it's just a suggestion. Thanks! -- Patchy1 05:33, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle menu misaligned

I just noticed today that the right side of the "TW" menu to the left of the search field is misaligned. It may be related to an edit that was made today to the source code. Anybody else see this? The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 20:44, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Rather, I suspect this was caused by changes to Wikipedia's software. I'll investigate. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:27, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

"Misaligned" doesn't begin to describe the trouble I am seeing. The top of every page is overlaid with bold, extraneous words ("Personal tools", "Views", "Search", "Namespeace", etc.), obscuring the normal links and hampering editing. I hope this will be fixed soon. Hertz1888 (talk) 03:55, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

@The Anonymouse: I agree with TTO that this is likely from a change to a MediaWiki: page, not a Twinkle page, because other drop-down menus have a broken alignment too. @Hertz1888: your problem is unrelated to Twinkle—see WP:VPT#What just happened to the UI?. You can clear your cache to fix it. David1217 ^{What I've done} 05:04, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, both of you are probably right. It's nothing really problematic, but it's just a little unusual. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 05:27, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Hertz1888, see Wikipedia:VPT#What_just_happened_to_the_UI.3F. KTC (talk) 11:18, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, David and KTC. Your advice led to a fix. Problem solved. Hertz1888 (talk) 18:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I've pushed a fix to the repository, so it should show up on-wiki soon. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Will we have to re-purge our caches to see it? — Francophonie&Androphilie^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 17:54, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, not yet, since the fix hasn't yet been deployed. When it is, you hopefully should see it straight away. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:18, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Should be fixed now. Thanks Amalthea! — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

No sig

I notice today that when placing the {{welcomelaws}} template with Twinkle, it doesn't leave a signature. -- Mufka ^{(u) (t) (c)} 12:19, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

It's because the template documentation was wrong; I blindly trusted it. A fix is on its way. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:Uw-unsourced4

According to {{Uw-unsourced4}} it "is used by the standard installation of Twinkle." However, it does not appear in the drop down menu under the 4th level warnings. So is the documentation incorrect or is Twinkle? CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 13:29, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Strange. My version of Twinkle does not have {{uw-unsourced4}}. Actually, {{uw-unsor4}} redirects to {{uw-generic4}}.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 13:44, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

That's because we've only had Uw-unsourced4 since May and documentation was probably copied over from somewhere else. {{uw-unsor4}} now redirects to {{Uw-unsourced4}}. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:52, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

And I've removed the Twinkle template from the documentation (for now at least). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:02, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, would you all like me to add uw-unsourced4 to Twinkle? — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:54, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

It would probably be a good idea. There is no way to tell that {{Uw-generic4}} could be used as a last resort for unsourced material. Especially as that isn't available in Twinkle either. Although I now see I am mentally unstable. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 07:20, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

CSD Criteria T3

Currently Twinkle does not seem to be able to accept rationales for this CSD criteria. The criteria, at least in the current language at WP:CSD covers orphaned templates with no use, yet trying to tag a page T3 using twinkle asks for a template that is being duplicated, and provides no way to select one of the non-duplicate T3 criteria. Monty₈₄₅ 19:01, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmm, that's interesting. I'll think about this one. — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

PC is back

Wikipedia:Pending changes is back. Can we get it integrated with the RFPP module? --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 00:09, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

It is already :) — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:12, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

You don't support {{pp-pc1}} ATM, but other than that it seems good. --Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 00:22, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Pages needing translation into English

Would it be possible to Twinkle to take care of the necessary additions to Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English when you use it to tag pages with {{not English}} or {{rough translation}}? It's a bit of a fringe scenario but I love the fact that Twinkle does all the housework for deletion nominations and stuff, this seems like a natural addition. --Noiratsi (talk) 20:02, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

CSD tagging error

I'm always getting Adding entry to userspace log: Failed to save edit: error "Gateway Time-out" occurred while contacting the API. when trying to tag an article for speedy deletion. the CSD template does go threw, though. -- LuK3 (Talk) 02:30, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Might it have something to do with the size of your log—nearly 136 KB? I've never seen a log that big before. Try reducing the size of the log page by moving most of the older entries to an archive and see if that helps. jcgoble3 (talk) 04:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Self-warn warning message - please consider reword

Resolved

 – Wording changed and deployed. Amalthea 22:34, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Firstly, sorry if this is in the wrong place - please feel free to tell me where to go, as it were.

I would like to propose a revision to the warning wording that a user sees if they hit "Warn" on their own talk page. At the moment it says "Warning yourself can be seen as a sign of mental instability! Are you sure you want to proceed?" I think this is a bit too cute, and seems to poke fun at mental illness, which we should not do (although I am quite sure that no deliberate offence was intended, of course). Why not just reword it to something neutral such as "You are about to warn yourself! Are you sure you want to proceed?" which checks the intention just as well but omits the insult ... or something along those lines. Let me make this plain - I do like the fact that we can use it on ourselves - I sometimes find it useful to be able to see how it will appear before I use it on someone else and I am probably no more mentally unstable than around 50% of all Wikipedia editors, on a good day. So I am not asking for any change in functionality, just in the wording of this message. Indeed, you will recall that there was a period in which self-warning was not permitted and I found that very unhelpful - an unnecessarily fussy level of intervention. To summarize: it's a great facility; please leave it in; please just reword the message so it is not offensive. Thanks and best wishes to all DBaK (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm...I'd have to agree. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree—since this tool is available to everyone via the gadgets panel, I feel it should aim for the same level of professional wording as interface elements, maintenance templates etc. --Noiratsi (talk) 11:06, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I disagree. I like to have a bit of fun when I write (or maintain) user scripts; since they are opt-in, they can afford to offer a bit of refreshing humour that isn't possible in the rather po-faced regular interface. However, I see your point; AzaToth came up with that particular wording and you should contact him if you feel concerned about it. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Wow. I have to say that I am extremely disappointed by that response: really quite shocked and upset. I think it might not be helpful if I dwell on why, in terms of your content. But just to confirm a detail, you are telling me, are you, that the way to ask for changes to what looks to me like a fairly core feature of the encyclopaedia's functionality is to ask one individual editor? And do they own it? Is it up to them whether this change gets made or not? Is that the process? What is the intended function of this page? It seems ... odd ... from where I am sitting. I'd appreciate a comment on this. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 21:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Although I am happy to maintain Twinkle and keep it working, I am generally not prepared to destroy another user's personal contribution to the user script. However, see my comment below. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:24, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I might also add that I certainly did not intend to upset you with my response. Perhaps the issue is that I don't find the message in the least bit offensive, whereas you find it quite insensitive. I certainly respect your opinion. — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

You can also preview the message before you post it (probably easier than posting on your own talk page). Nevertheless, I do agree that the current "self-warn" message could possibly offend some users. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) ^{[Merry Christmas!]} 06:19, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that. At the risk of going "yeah but no but" I do appreciate your point but I'm not sure it is easier, though of course as with all these things "what I'm used to doing" plays a part, sure. I like testing these things on myself (and have been doing so for some years) because I see the finished effect in what I feel is a completely safe environment (well I mean safe apart from the obvious mental health risks) and I just do it and revert it - this feels to me like a very simple and clear process. I did try the preview process (on your Talk page, warning you about some vandalism you've apparently been doing, as it happens!) and it feels to me to be less safe - one careless click a centimetre or two too low and, oopsie bumbum, I've sent it. On my own Talk page this risk is not there and I can just see how the finished item looks in all its glory. I suppose I would go on from this to concede that, if people thought it was an actively bad idea to allow self-warning - I do see that you haven't said that but am just thinking aloud - then maybe the click could be refused, with a message saying "you can't do X, please use preview" or whatever - that could work. I wouldn't like it, but I would like it very much more than the current "mental instability" message. Thanks again and best wishes DBaK (talk) 21:22, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

*sigh* Want a safe environment without the message? Then use User talk:Sandbox for user warnings, which was designed for that very purpose. Simple as that. jcgoble3 (talk) 23:26, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

The message in its current form is not appropriate, whether deliberate or accidental use of the function isn't the issue the message is.Blethering Scot 23:34, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, my point exactly. DBaK (talk) 00:01, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what the *sigh* was in aid of - was it meant to sound snotty? It did, but apologies if I misjudged that. I didn't know the bloody thing was there, I'm not psychic, and I've only been using the encyclopaedia for er ten years or whatever so, yes, there are probably a few corners into which I have not stumbled yet. So it's a partial answer to my side-point about testing, and thank you for that, but no answer at all to my real point about the inappropriate language. That needs to go. Disable self-testing, with or without a helpful message, or leave it and edit the message, or whatever - doesn't really matter. Getting rid of that wording does. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 00:02, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd have to agree with DBaK here. I'm sure in earlier wiki-times, when developers roamed free in open pastures, such messages were fine. But time has moved on, someone has build a housing estate on the pasture, and the only roaming permitted is on mobile phones. In short, time to smarten this up. Elen of the Roads (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this case seems to have attracted more outcry than I had anticipated. I'll make the change; however, be aware that it may take some time for it to appear on-wiki. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:24, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Please see below. DBaK (talk) 10:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

For the record, whenever I need to check something warning-related and click the "warn" tab on my own talk page, I look at the message, chuckle, and remind myself to go take my antidepressants. I know there's a fair number of high-profile Wikipedians with psychological or emotional conditions or disabilities, so if someone would like to go on the record saying that they were personally offended by this warning, I'll chalk this one up to my being less sensitive than most people (scratch that - I'm extremely sensitive, but I'm fairly good at not taking offense to remarks made in unambiguous good faith). But otherwise, this reminds me a tad too much of Fahrenheit 451 - baldlerizing good content for fear of offense. — Francophonie&Androphilie^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 03:05, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

As someone who has Asperger's syndrome and bipolar disorder, I don't find it offensive at all. As I said above, those that don't like it are free to ignore it by using User talk:Sandbox for user warnings instead of their own talk page. The rest of us can enjoy the laugh that it was meant to provide. jcgoble3 (talk) 03:23, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I wonder how many editors know about the existence of the very sensible User talk:Sandbox for user warnings? It would be helpful if the self-warning message pointed editors there, instead of the current silly/offensive message. Something like: "You are about to warn yourself. If you want to test a warning, you might like to use User talk:Sandbox for user warnings.", and even offer 3 buttons - not just "proceed" and "cancel" but "Go to User talk:Sandbox for user warnings". I'm with the group of editors who are very wary about experimenting on other users' talk pages and sometimes want to see what a warning will look like before throwing it around! PamD 08:00, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

If you "want to see what a warning will look like before throwing it around" just use the little Preview link in the warning dialog box! — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah but no but ... the other method, warning yourself, was and is available. The preview function is great, and so is the Sandbox, no dispute here - but I still think that it was inappropriate to have that particular message, whether or not the method that would lead an editor to it was a good approach. I would still say - and history has of course overtaken me, please see my next edit - that we needed either to make it impossible or to allow it, but in either case to avoid that kind of wording, for all the reasons discussed above. However ... next edit coming up ... DBaK (talk) 10:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you all. Well, goodness me, that caused a kerfuffle. I'm so sorry, I didn't want to reenact the Battle of the Somme (albeit with a bit less mud and many fewer fatalities) and I had thought I had a straightforward request. Doh! Sorry sorry - I hope no-one was offended or upset by my sometimes OTT reactions. (Though to be honest, swearing, throwing my teddy in the corner and blocking myself a few days was probably far better for my mental health than a number of other things that I might have done ...) I would like to thank everyone very much for the thoughtful debate, and, of course, in particular I'd like to thank Twinkle's maintainers (This, that, in this case, I think?) for actually making the change. It really is much appreciated and I was very pleased to see it when I tried it this morning: probably more pleased than I can easily express here. Thank you SO much. I am going out for a celebratory coffee which I will raise twice, in admiration and thanks, first to the toolset's maintainers and next to everyone who participated here. Wishing everyone love, light and peace (which I stole from Spike Milligan but never mind) I remain yours, with thanks and best wishes, DBaK (talk) 10:46, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

New template

Hi. First, sorry if I put this in the wrong place. I have created a template, welcome-delete. I am suggesting that it be included in twinkle's welcome feature. Passengerpigeon (talk) 10:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

No, you've come to the right place. However, I have a concern: the template is a bit of an "information overload" for a new user. I removed many similar templates from the Welcome module a few months ago, since I didn't think they were very "welcoming" to our newest users. I think the template would work better if it were made similar to the other "problem user" templates already present in the Twinkle welcome box.

If you like the template as it is, you can add it to your custom welcome templates at WP:TWPREFS. However, if you modify the template as I suggested above, I would be happy to add it to Twinkle in the "problem user" section. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:02, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

reworking {{welcome teacher}}

I'm going to overhaul {{welcome teacher}} so that it provides much more specific and focused info for people who seem to be trying to run a Wikipedia classroom assignment. Namely, the idea will be to point them to the Training for educators and suggest that they use a structured course page so that the students are easier for us to keep track of.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 15:27, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Couple of things:

1. Is the correct syntax still "$HEADER$ {{subst:welcome teacher|$USERNAME$}} ~~~~"?
2. Are you doing anything to {{welcome student}}?

— This, that, and the other (talk) 02:28, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I just took a look at the new template, and can thus answer the first point: the template no longer contains any parameter for username or anything else, so the syntax would now just be "$HEADER$ {{subst:welcome teacher}} ~~~~". jcgoble3 (talk) 04:44, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks... see, I \was too lazy to check for myself. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:07, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmm... I didn't change anything involving a username parameter (it uses a PAGENAME parameter instead, to pull the username), so if syntax isn't compatible, I think that happened before my changes.

I do plan on taking a look at {{welcome student}} when I get a chance, although that one is trickier because recipients vary more widely in what they are trying to accomplish, what they already know, and what will be useful for them.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 23:19, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

You did remove the parameter here; it's the code {{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[user talk:{{{1}}}|my talk page]]|my talk page}} in the line beginning with "I hope you enjoy editing here" in the April 12 version by KillerChihuahua. It was meant to take the username of the person leaving the message to provide a link to their talk page. The removal doesn't really matter, though, since it won't break the template (any parameter passed to the template will be silently ignored/dropped). jcgoble3 (talk) 03:11, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, I totally overlooked that. Thanks.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 12:06, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle overwriting RfD noms

See [2] and [3]. Looks like Twinkle didn't notice it was edit-conflicting with itself. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 11:00, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken, this type of thing has been reported in the past, and the only solution is to slow down and wait for one nomination to complete before initiating another one. jcgoble3 (talk) 18:03, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

db-spamuser

Is it possible to use Twinkle to tag pages with the {{db-spamuser}} tag? --Vincent Liu (something to say?) 12:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I suppose we could have it... I'll add it. — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:05, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! --Vincent Liu (something to say?) 09:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

This, that and the other - could you please add to the template's title (on Twinkle) that it is used when the username relates to the same promotion that is on the userpage (have a look at the template for en explaination of when it's used). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:40, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

OK, will do. As is typical of db- templates, the wording is quite dense and takes a few goes to understand properly. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:57, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

I think this is done. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:28, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

More talkback templates

Do you think the {{Talkbacktiny}} and {{Whisperback}} templates could be added to the talkback function? The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) ^{[Merry Christmas!]} 07:13, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

This is a perennial request. The problem is, it should not be the sender's choice, but the recipient's choice, as to which kind of talkback template is used; however, we haven't managed to rig this up yet. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:44, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle SPI report

We are trialing a new Javascript-based SPI report wizard (see Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive12#A new wizard for filing SPI cases). It uses {{subst:SPI report}} right now, but since substitution is rather fragile (e.g., a typo in a link [[like this}] can break it entirely, I'd rather move to a format that's coded in the JS itself. That would, however, desync the format used in SPI proper and the format used by Twinkle. I suspect that the easiest way to fix this is simply to have Twinkle use the SPI wizard as well for the SPI reporting. Do you guys see any potential technical problems with this? T. Canens (talk) 11:58, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

For the moment, because SPIW uses a completely different user interface from Twinkle and is invoked in a different way, a merge would not be practical. Additionally I am hesitant to make Twinkle dependent on other, non-Twinkle scripts. However, it would be possible to make Twinkle post its SPI reports using exactly the same format as SPIW.

While you're at it, you might like to look at this Twinkle issue that has been sitting in our system for some time. I have never bothered to fix it (since I never use SPI), and I am not even sure if it affects your code, but it might be something to consider. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

My primary concern is that if we later make changes to the format, we'll have to change it in not one but two places. We had had the Twinkle format for SPI desync'd with SPI's own format before for quite a while, and it wasn't pretty. Another possibility would be to set up a special page on wiki that each script queries for the currently used format which they'll then fill out, but that's one extra API request.

That issue is by design when I redid the SPI report function. Merging new reports into old ones is difficult to implement, creates a lot more format dependency in the code, causes all sorts of problems with case status tracking (e.g., merging into a closed case? a case where CU has been endorsed? a case where a check has been run already?), and is very rarely useful. T. Canens (talk) 01:46, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

What we really need (in general, not just for this) is a hidden, disabled, ResourceLoader-savvy gadget providing "backend" support for features like this one, the DRN filer, etc. It would have, for example, a function to format SPI requests, given a JSON object in a known format. It could even allow tools like the Curation Toolbar and Twinkle to share information on CSD criteria and article tags, etc., avoiding duplication of effort. It would have to be listed as a RL dependency of all gadgets requiring its services (meaning it is loaded only when needed, as opposed to putting such code in common.js). What do you think of that? — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:15, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

That's a great idea, and I really like the extensibility. It's going to be quite a bit of work though, and I'm not sure I'll have enough time to do it, with my two-year exercise in masochism to start in a week. T. Canens (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

UW-Attack

I can't seem to figure out how to add {{uw-attack}} to the warn menu. Anyone know how? I've looked through the Twinkle options. Mkdw^talk 04:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

It's already there under "Single-issue warnings". jcgoble3 (talk) 07:01, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Silly me; I guess I don't go into that menu often. Thanks, Mkdw^talk 08:43, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Project tagging ratings

Could we add functionality for tagging talk pages with WikiProject banners; including class and importance ratings? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:43, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

This is a perennial request. The main problem with this is that there are over 1,200 WikiProject banners. On top of this, there are some frustratingly pedantic ones, like {{WikiProject Mathematics}}, that require special treatment. I think you can see that such functionality in Twinkle would be unwieldy. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:42, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Twinkle could prompt the user to type the name of the banner, with some kind of autocomplete, for instance. Or we could start a taskforce to standardise banner names and behaviour, where practical. I'd be willing to help with that. We could also exclude any "frustratingly pedantic" banners until such time as they fall inline. We could also start with a "top 20", or allow the user to specify their preferred projects in user settings. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:42, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I thought you might convince me... I'll think about doing this. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:07, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

;-) Thank you. I've just noticed some related discussion, which may be useful, at WP:BOTREQ#List of WikiProjects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Feature request

I don't have a github account.

I'd like to suggest that {{Welcome to Wikipedia}} be added to Twinkle.
RiverStyx23{^talk_email} 03:06, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

See here for the last time this was requested. It is a really splashy, excessive template, and I would only add it if people really want it, or if Andy (or someone else) produces the WMF research that was hinted at in the last discussion. David1217 summed it up nicely last time: "It's a bit overwhelming for new users..." — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:13, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Bug report {{SVG version available}} doesn't remove {{Should be SVG}}

see that edit, I had to correct that two edits later manually. mabdul 13:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait. Yes, this can happen. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:22, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

This should finally be working now. Once again, sorry for the long delay. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Review of pending change when reverting

If an user with reviewer right revert an edit that is pending review by using native rollback or undo, then the combined null edit is automatically accepted. It appears that when reverting using TW, such edit isn't automatically accepted nor is the user prompted to accept the edit. See recent edits at Hamburger for example. A possible feature request? -- KTC (talk) 16:06, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

I'll look into this. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the wait. I'll get onto this, as it is wasting reviewers' time. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

New welcome template

One of the regular requests at WP:RFP/C is to be autoconfirmed so that they can upload images. However, so many of them have no understanding of the image use policy, and related file policies. I created {{Welcome-image}} to be used in situations like that (literally dozens a week) - the image was chosen specifically as its in the file tutorial itself, and the wording captures the issues. It will certainly also get their attention. I recommend it (or if someone wants to standardize the colours) be added to the interface with the description "For new editors who have an interest in uploading files and images" (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

It's coming. — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate the tweaks you made to colour, wording, etc! (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:01, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Now should be working in Twinkle. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback request - more noticeboard pages

Could we get WP:Helpdesk included in the noticeboard talkbacks? Thanks Tiggerjay (talk) 18:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

OK. I found an old template for just this purpose, {{helpdeskreply}}, which I have modified so it works with Twinkle. The addition to Twinkle will appear on-wiki soon. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Sweet, thanks!

This should be working now. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

{{Third-party}}, please

There's a discussion at Template_talk:Primary_sources#Propose_making_the_contents_match_the_title about the problem that the "Primary sources" template is being used where {{third-party}} is much more appropriate, and revised wordings are being considered. Could we please have {{third-party}} available in TWINKLE, as it's the message we more often need to convey? PamD 10:20, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

{{third-party}} is now in Twinkle, and I have also tweaked the annotation of "primary sources". Thanks for bringing this up. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you!!

To all of you who are involved in creating and maintaining Twinkle, thank you so much! It makes editing Wikipedia so much better and easier. Thank you!! Lova Falk talk 08:19, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Seconded. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

type=tiny for TfD

It would be good to have an option to use |type=tiny when tagging a template with TfD, please. Here's an example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

CSD tagging

I was new page patrolling when I came across an article that was I was going to tag for deletion. When I selected the issues that apply and submitted the edit via Twinkle, I was notified that someone else had already tagged it. The CSD reason this user used was fine, but there was still a speedy deletion reason that would have applied better - multiple, in fact. However, I couldn't add them with the ease of Twinkle as the tool kept telling me that {{db-spam}} was in place. Is there any way Twinkle could allow for the modification, addition, and removal CSD of such tags (the majority of which would use {{db-multiple}})? As a bonus, Twinkle could log, in the relevant new page patroller's log, a note that says something to the effect of "User X changed $article's tag(s) from $tag1 to $whatevernewtags." Thanks, MJ94 (talk) 17:50, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Problems with Twinkle?

Is there currently a problem with twinkle? None of my options are showing up. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 03:03, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I've been having lots of problems as well. I have stopped using it for applying page protection as it seemed to choke up every time and get in edit conflicts with itself, and just now it did this. It deleted the message I just left in favor of the second one. I had of course meant to lerave them both. (I should note that IO am using Safari for IOS on an iPad most of the time when I have trouble, it does seem to work slightly better on my laptop) Beeblebrox (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

There's a report above of SPI not working on Safari. However, I have no way of testing Safari, so I can't really help you. It sounds like you have a problem with lag (which may not be entirely the browser's fault, but rather your Internet connection). — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Updated Template:Welcome student

I've just updated {{Welcome student}}, to emphasize the training for students we have now and generally cut down the size of it. I don't think Twinkle usage will be affected by my changes.--Sage Ross (WMF) (talk) 21:42, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Is there a way for Twinkle to check that notices have been placed in a valid location?

Several people at once just warned User talk:Rajvir Singh Randhawa; none of the notice showed up because he had left an open <gallery> tag at the bottom of his user page. As a result the subst: wasn't parsed. When I went to fix it, all the notices suddenly appeared at once, all signed by me (since they were all suddenly substed as a result of my edit). I get that this isn't a problem with Twinkle as such, but is there any way to mitigate against it? A real user would notice the open tag when editing and would see when previewing that their message didn't display. In this particular case, using Twinkle, none of the people leaving messages on the talk page could see that others had already tried to leave messages, or that there was an invisible tag cutting off the rest of the content. Thanks! --Noiratsi (talk) 11:07, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

It's unfortunate, but there isn't a lot Twinkle can do about this. It's a bit difficult for automated code to handle such situations. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

I was also going to say, it would be nice if Twinkle scrolled you to the bottom of the page after leaving a warning, so you can check whether it showed up, and give it a final read-through before leaving the user talk page. How does that sound? — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:50, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Yea, I can see there's no easy solution. I suppose Twinkle could leave an invisible span tag on the page with a unique ID and information about the action Twinkle took, which it could then check for in the DOM to ensure the page had been properly updated (it might even be a useful way for Twinkle to track the actions it's taken on a page)... but that seems a bit complicated and cluttery for not very much gain. Or it could check the DOM for the correct heading? Except some messages don't have a heading.

A scroll-to-section might be cool, in much the same way that MediaWiki auto-scrolls to the section you edited if you do a section edit. I hadn't noticed Twinkle didn't already do that.

By the way, did you spot my message a while back about tagging pages {{not english}}, {{rough translation}} etc? I think it got archived. Essentially I was wondering if Twinkle could deal with adding pages to the list of Wikipedia:Pages needing translation into English.

In other news, I second the thank you messages below—Twinkle is brilliant. --Noiratsi (talk) 11:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for not replying; I was on wikibreak. Making the warning redirect scroll to the bottom of the page is easy enough; as for the translation request, I'll look into this, however don't hold your breath. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Update Template:spam-warn

Please update the warning issued to {{spam-warn}} when a page is tagged with G11. Thanks. FrankDev (talk) 02:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't intend to make such a change. Instead, please reconcile any changes into {{db-spam-notice}}, the standard notice for G11 deletions. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:11, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

new page patrol features

It would be handy if twinkle marked pages as reviewed automatically if tagged, prodded, or CSDed. There is a lot of overlap between reviewers hitting the same pages. Would cut down on the reivew backlog significantly if we could mark as reviewed when taking action. Gaijin42 (talk) 21:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, according to Twinkle preferences, "Due to technical limitations, pages are only marked as patrolled when they are reached via Special:NewPages." The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 22:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Welcomes broken?

I notice that only one of the standard welcome templates currently allows you to specify an article. What changed? There used to be more that allowed you to do that - I'd look into it myself, but I'm not sure where the Twinkle · Welcome User interface comes from. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 17:10, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

It seems that nothing has changed. Here is the old welcome interface; there are really no more templates with asterisks than there are in the current list. If you think it would be appropriate for some of our current welcome templates to have an article parameter, you are most welcome to edit the templates to include this, or request such an edit. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:42, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Broken CSD notice

Notices are also broken. When I nominate things for speedy deletion, the templates posted onto the creator's user_talk page are shown as wikitext rather than being transcluded or subst'ed. —Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 05:31, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I split this into its own section because it appears to be a separate issue. This is how MediaWiki normally operates when you try to substitute a template that doesn't exist, as is the case with Template:Db-duplicatetemplate-notice. The correct notice here is {{db-t3-notice}}. jcgoble3 (talk) 06:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

I've created the appropriate redirect. Sorry about this. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:33, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Strange AFD behavior?

Perhaps it has always been this way but this is the first time I noticed that the "this article's entry" link on a page sent to AFD was a redlink. Please forgive the interruption if this is expected behavior. - UnbelievableError (talk) 04:35, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

This is normal because Twinkle often (maybe always) saves the article before saving the nomination page. The simple solution is to purge the article. jcgoble3 (talk) 05:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Documentation error or Twinkle error?

The documentation pages on {{uw-af1}}, {{uw-af2}}, {{uw-af3}}, {{uw-af4}}, and {{uw-af4im}} all include the "used by the standard installation of Twinkle" notice. However, when I scroll through my user warning options, I don't see any of them (and I'm sure I'm not overlooking it, since I've checked the 4im options, of which there are few enough that you can't miss an option). I figure this means one of three things: these documentation pages are wrong about this (most likely), something's wrong with my configurations (surely possible), or something's wrong with the user warning settings for Twinkle in general (least likely). Anyone know which it is? Thanks. — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 00:49, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

The warnings are not in Twinkle; the template documentation is incorrect. Do you think they should be added to Twinkle? — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:36, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

I, for one, think it'd be useful. Monitoring is like a more relaxed version of RCP, and especially since the stakes are lower, I imagine I'm not the only editor who really only gives warnings for the most severe cases: Obviously I deal with repeated abuse or severe violations (saw a combo legal threat/death threat yesterday), but if someone just writes "fuck u," I'm normally too lazy to manually insert a {{uw-af1}} on their talk page. So I'd say, not only would it be useful to add it to Twinkle, but it could actually drastically improve the way we deal with feedback abuse. — Francophonie&Androphilie (Je vous invite à me parler) 23:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for letting this go so long that it got archived! Please poke me if I forget to do this. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:55, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Mind if I add it to the To-do list at the top of this page? In a few days I'm jetting off to Costa Rica for two weeks, and I haven't yet determined what my Internet situation will be. — Francophonie&Androphilie^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 11:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

And wow, this did lie stagnant for a while - I posted this two signatures ago! — Francophonie&Androphilie^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 11:49, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

It's on its way. They will be quite low down the list - there doesn't seem to be any order to the list of warnings, so I just put them in where I thought it would be good. — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:58, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

This should be working now. Give it a try! — This, that, and the other (talk) 03:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

This, that and the other - would you also please add {{Uw-af-personalinfo}}, {{Uw-af-contact}}, & {{Uw-af-question}} to the single issue notices on Twinkle? Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

On their way! — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:48, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

This should all be  Done now. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Copy to Commons - add username

When Twinkle is used to tag an image with {{Copy to Commons}}, that template's |human=username parameter should be (optionally) completed. Please can that behaviour be added? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm unclear on this. It would appear that the parameter exists so that another user who comes along later can give "thumbs up" to the file. As far as I can tell, the tagging user isn't supposed to fill in this parameter, as reviewing one's own tagging isn't very helpful. Correct me if I'm wrong, though. — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:15, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

The template documentation says:

If you have checked the file and it is ok to move to commons add "|human=username" to the template so other users can see it has been checked and can help you copy the file to Commons.

It says nothing about a second person doing so; an indeed I always sign the tag when I use it and no one has ever suggested I should not do so. I strongly suspect - and its name seems to support this - that the parameter is intended to distinguish between nominations made by editors, and by bots. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

It's very vague. I'll see if anyone at WP:FNN knows. — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:34, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Any joy? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, so it seems we probably should be filling it in. How about this: you can update the template documentation, and I fix Twinkle? Does that sound good? — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Twinkle should be fixed now; have you kept your end of the deal?? — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

A7 Criteria Expansion

Per consensus here [[4]] A7 has been expanded to include organized events. I've been asked to notify the people who maintain twinkle and the templates not sure where all that happens so I'm hoping if it's not here someone can point me the right way! Hell In A Bucket (talk) 13:52, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

• Also {{db-event}} has been created, per the linked discussion. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you sir Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:50, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

It's on its way. — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Talkback

Resolved

Template:Talkback has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 10:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

• Withdrawn. Amalthea 01:26, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Cross-post

Resolved

Twinkle's use of a deprecated template figures into this ongoing TfD. Posting here both to wonder aloud if there's any reason Twinkle's still using it, and as a heads-up in case it's deleted (though if there is a consensus, I'm sure the reviewing admin will wait for Twinkle to drop it before deleting). — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 00:39, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

No reason, nobody here was informed of the change at WQA.
Y Removed now. Amalthea 01:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

SPI reports failing?

I use a Mac, Snow Leopard and Safari. Twinkle plain burps and does nothing at all when I click submit. not a thing. It used to work for me. Am I alone in finding this happens (well, doesn't happen?) Please drop me a Talkback on my talk page to let me know there is a reply here. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Just me, then? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I have no means of testing on Safari, since Safari for Windows is moribund. Are there any errors in your JavaScript console (see WP:JSERROR)? — This, that, and the other (talk) 22:48, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Not just you – I am experiencing the issue with Safari 6.0.2 (currently the latest). It only seems to happen when reporting a sockmaster, not a sockpuppet. I'll try to find more technical details about this... The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 06:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I got this: Syntax error, unrecognized expression: input:text[@name=sockpuppet]. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 07:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea where to look for any errors. I use Safari 5.1.7 (6534.57.2). All I know is that it fails (and failed yesterday) to do anything at all (from my perspective as a simple user. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Check the page (WP:JSERROR) that TTATO posted above for instructions on how to check for errors. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 16:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, there was a mistake in the code... a stray @ character had been left behind in the migration from XPath to jQuery. Sorry about that! A fix is on its way. — This, that, and the other (talk) 01:05, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Since I don't report socks that often I will let you know what happens next time. No errors in my java console, though. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 14:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

The bug hopefully should be fixed now. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:42, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

It most certainly works now. Many thanks. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:34, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Redirect questioned

Anybody here know why Template:On redirects to Template:New unreviewed article? The redirect was created with the editsummary "just so twinkle will still show the right one". Please reply on the discussion here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debresser (talk • contribs) 19:16, 2 February 2013(UTC)

A puzzle. LikeLakers added the template via twinkle right before he created the redirect (see contribs); Twinkle never offered that tag, and it seems his twinkle options didn't contain a custom tag either, so how did he do it?
Anyway, best I can tell the redirect can be deleted without causing problems.
Amalthea 23:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I've nominated it at RFD. --Stfg (talk) 14:15, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Requested move of Template:Cleanup-link rot

See Template talk:Cleanup-link rot#Link rot? for details.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 20:38, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

It's now at Template talk:Cleanup-link rot#Requested move. The Link rot? section is ancient, and placing it made it look as if people were responding when they weren't. --Stfg (talk) 22:03, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Potential breaking change to morebits.js QuickForm

I don't know if any scripts aside from Twinkle are actually dependent on MediaWiki:Gadget-morebits.js. I, for one, am happy to support anyone who wishes to do so... but I digress.

I plan to make a breaking change to Morebits.quickForm to support some possible new features in Twinkle's Tag module. Specifically, the DOM tree for subgroups will change slightly. If you're doing fancy things (read: hacks), please notify me and I will tell all.

This doesn't affect regular users of Twinkle; only coders who use the morebits.js library. (By the way, I'd love to hear from anyone whose code depends on morebits.js, just so I know.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 09:07, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I know Twinkle likes to have a sense of humor, so...

Could we maybe, just maybe, add {{Uw-dttr}} under "single-issue notices"? Since RCP'ers are always bumping into each other, I can think of a few ways it could come in handy. (If deleting the main page were still possible, I'd say we should include Wikipedia:Silly things/Template:Uw-delmain1 too, but, alas, it's not.) — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 10:15, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

It isn't really very funny... — This, that and the other (talk) 10:33, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

SOFIXIT. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 10:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Placement of Welcome messages

I like the preferences setting, and I use it. But, just sometimes, it makes sense to override my preferences. Please would you consider the concept of a "Welcome page position preferences override" button/box. I very much doubt this will reach the top of your list for some time unless you happen to like the idea and be fiddling with that part of the code anyway. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

You mean "Place welcomes above existing content on user talk pages"? Didn't even know we had it...

I see what you're saying: if you usually have Twinkle place welcomes above existing content, but then you want to issue a "welcome-belated" or something like that... you will want it to appear at the bottom. Is that more-or-less what you are thinking of? — This, that and the other (talk) 11:11, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Exactly! or at the top if prefs are set to the bottom. Default seems to be to the bottom. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 12:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

An extremely condescending template

Not an issue for Twinkle. Referred elsewhere.

The speedy deletion declined template says Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages.. That's hugely condescending, it's basically a "You're too stupid to know what you're doing." thing. Especially in the cases of people who actually do know what they're doing, and the person who puts the template on the page just disagrees with you concerning your speedy deletion template. RNealK (talk) 06:10, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Twinkle does not create the templates, nor is it able to do anything about people misusing them. Talk to whoever mis-tagged you, open a discussion on the template talk page, make some edits, and so forth if you want something to actually be done about this. (and by the way if you are reverring to this edit, they weren't even using Twinkle anyway, Twinkle uses {{uw-csd}} which does not contain the language you object to.)Beeblebrox (talk) 06:51, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

WP:CSDH is the script being used here, and the template seems to be User:Ale jrb/Scripts/CSDHelper; however it doesn't contain the language you refer to. This occurred because KillerChihuahua is evidently using an outdated version of CSDH. You may wish to discuss this with that user. — This, that and the other (talk) 09:50, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Deletion sorting

I have made a proposal for deletion sorting to be added to Twinkle since the now-broken tool by John Vandenberg required Twinkle. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 20:38, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

I have no clue how feasible or difficult this would be, but it sounds like a great idea to me. I tried installing the old delsort tool once and couldn't get it to work. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:29, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

It's been on our to-do list for years. It would be a lot of work to rewrite it. I'll see if I can breathe some life into the old one for now... have you tried adding importScript("User:AzaToth/morebits.js"); before your inclusion of delsort? — This, that and the other (talk) 23:12, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Localisation on Malay Wiki

I need help to create a Twinkle localisation for Malay Wiki. Hope someone could help me. — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 20:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

What exactly do you need help with? Are you JavaScript-savvy, or have you got a JS-savvy user on your wiki? — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

No, just a normal user, but we need someone who knows how to install Twinkle on Malay wiki, any answer please leave message here on Malay Wiki. — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 06:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Any answer? — иz нίpнόp ^ʜᴇʟᴘ! 06:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Have you read the page about localisation? You see, I could go over and help you install it, but it wouldn't work properly (except the diff, fluff and unlink modules). I don't have any time to do the work in order to make it work properly on mswiki; that's why you need a JavaScript-savvy community member to help you get it working as desired. I am happy to help that user with the process, but I cannot do it all by myself. — This, that and the other (talk) 06:30, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Template:An3-notice

{{An3-notice}} has a notice on it saying it's used by Twinkle but for the life of me I can't find it in Twinkle. Am I missing something? --AussieLegend (✉) 06:33, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

It's in Talkback, under "Noticeboard notification". — This, that and the other (talk) 11:24, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Well, there you go. Who'd a thunk it. Thanks. --AussieLegend (✉) 12:33, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

It's an interesting point: do you think this template is too hard to find? It isn't good if people can't find what they want in Twinkle. — This, that and the other (talk) 02:55, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Personally, I would expect a module called "Talkback", given how the eponymous template is used, to contain only templates used to notify a user that you (or someone else) have replied to that user's message. Notifications that there is a discussion somewhere about something you may have done wrong are something I would expect to be in the warn module under "Single-issue notices" (or even under a separate grouping like "Noticeboard notifications"). jcgoble3 (talk) 03:32, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

The thing is, templates like an3-notice are closer to talkbacks in function (to point the user to a discussion that needs their attention), but closer to warnings in use (warning users that they are under discussion at a noticeboard). From a technical perspective, the code makes a lot more sense in the Talkback module; that's why I put it there to begin with. The documentation should probably be updated to mention noticeboard templates, but I don't really think anyone reads it... — This, that and the other (talk) 06:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

De-linking issues

Hi everyone. :) I just used Twinkle's de-linking tool on Rico Beats as I deleted it at AfD, and I noticed that one of the links at The DeAndre Way was left in after Twinkle's edit. Here's Twinkle's edit, and here's my fix of the link that Twinkle left. Does anyone have an idea of what's going on here? As far as I can remember Twinkle has dealt with these kind of links just fine in the past, but then my memory is not infallible... — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 06:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

As far as I can see, the unlinking code only removes piped links if there are no non-piped links to the unlink target on the page. I can't understand why this would be the case. I'll see if I can repair it. — This, that, and the other (talk) 23:51, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Y Should be repaired now. — This, that and the other (talk) 06:17, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Stub tag in wrong place and with date parameter

When I pointed out to an editor that they had added a {{stub}} tag at the top of an article instead of the end, and with a date parameter it doesn't take, they said Twinkle had done it! I can't see {{stub}} in my menu on Twinkle, so perhaps they've added it as an extra option or something, but could Twinkle please be made to recognise that this template goes in a different place from general maintenance tags and doesn't need a date parameter? PamD 10:47, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Did you mention to the user that it is a blatant and uncalled-for case of tag-bombing? That aside, yes, they must have added it to Twinkle themselves. I was planning to add {{stub}} to Twinkle at one point but never got around to it, so for the moment I think the user should not use Twinkle to stub-tag articles. — This, that and the other (talk) 10:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Yup (see link above), though I called it "over-tagging" rather than "tag-bombing". 9 tags, some blatantly wrong ("All plot"? No plot.)

We did have a suggestion sometime that if an editor is adding more than n tags (4? 6?) Twinkle should pop up and remind about "less is more" and the dangers of over-tagging. Any chance of getting that implemented?

But could Twinkle perhaps recognise {{stub}} as a tag which should not be added at the top with a date parameter, even if the editor has asked for it? Twinkle shouldn't be helping editors to make incorrect edits. PamD 11:18, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Twinkle is not here to babysit users; see the warning at the top of WP:TW. — This, that and the other (talk) 02:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

{{No footnotes}}

Any chance this template could be added to TW? -Nathan Johnson (talk) 13:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Isn't it already there, under Specific content issues → Referencing technique? —Noiratsi (talk) 14:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah. I was looking for it with the other references tags. Cheers. :) -Nathan Johnson (talk) 14:31, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Erroneous detection of templates inside <nowiki>

I tried to nominate {{HowToDeleteNutshell}} for speedy deletion using Twinkle, but it erroneously detected <tt><nowiki>{{delete | [your reason] }}</nowiki></tt> in markup as a transclusion of {{delete}} and refused to proceed. Is this worth fixing? Keφr 10:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Unless a regex whiz can improve our regex, then I don't think so, unfortunately. — This, that and the other (talk) 03:28, 17 February 2013 (UTC)